The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-03-16
THAT LIBEL LAW.
Misrepresentation About Construction
of the Court

The decision of the supreme court
invalidating the libel law passed by
the Legislature of 1901 is causing con-
siderable comment. The decision con-
corning the law is no surprise to news
paper men. as it has been alleged by
lawyers that the law was invalid. but
not on the ground set forth by the Su-
preme court The fact that the law
excludes certain classes from its Oper-
alton was supposed to render it uncOn-
stitutiOnal, but the supreme court de-
cides that it is contrary to the bill of
rights, because it specifies certain linn
its as to the collection of damages.
The principal cause of comment
apparently declared that statement
setting forth that a man was charged
with a certain crime, is libelous. The
statement that the court holds is libel
Gus in the Krehbiel-Hanson case, in
which the opinion is delivered, was as
follows:
1T is claimed that in collecting a bill,
he threatened violence with a pistok"
It is asserted that a wrong constFuc-
ton has been put upon this by those
who first read the opinion 1t seems to
declare that the publication of
charge is hbelous. but it is asserted
that no such charge was made against
Hanson, and for that reason the state
ment was nbelous.
The libel law which is now in force
IS the old one which was operative be-
lore me passage OF the law or 1901.
That was merely to compel persons
contemplating libel suits to first give
the defendants notice of the statements
complained of. in order that reparation
might be made, after which only actual
damages could be collected. At pres
ent ii is not necessary to give notice
before beginning q suit
The law which was declared Invalid
is as follows:
Before any civil action shall be
ton of libel in any newspaper in this
state, the plaintiff shall at least three
days before filing the petition in such
action, serve notice on the publisher
or publishers of such newspaper, at the
principal Office of publication, specify
ing the statement in said article which
is alleged to be false or defamatory.
/ If it shall appear on the trial of such
action that said article was published
| in good faith. that its falsity was due
to mistake or nisa ppTehension of the
facts, and that full and fair retrac-
ton of any statement therein contain
ed alleged to be erroneous was publish
ed in the next regular issue of said
newspaper. if a weekly or monthly, or.
IN case OF a daily paper, within three
days after such mistake or misa ppre-
hension was brought to the knowledge
of such publisher or publishers, in as
conspicuous place and type in such
newspaper as was the article COMPLAIN
ed of as Hbelous, then the plaintiff in
such case shall recover only actual
damages: Provided, that the provision
of this act shall not apply to the case
of any libel against any candidate for
a public office in this state unless the
retraction is made editoriaIly, in con-
SpicuOus manner, at least ten days be-
fore election, in case such libelous ar
ticle was published in a daily paper,
and in case such libe1ous article was
published in weekly or monthly paper
at least Is days before the election:
Provided further, that nothing in this
act shall be held to apply to any libel
published of or concerning any fe-
male person.
Take Piso's Cure for CONSUMPTION for
coughs, colds and consumption.
Everybody READS the state Journal