The Semi-weekly leader. (Brookhaven, Miss.) 1905-1941, 1909-01-30
LIBERTY OF THE PRESS.
Comments Of Leading Journals on ROOse-
veIt's Attempt to MuzzIe L.

yeIt's Attempt to MuzzIe It.
If the President carries out his
foolish threat of suing the New
York World for libel his attorneys
will have to make some precedents,
for there are none known that
would enable him to win.- Buffalo
Times.
We trust there is no basis of fact
in the persistent reports that the
government intends to bring a libel
suit against the editor of the New
York World, either through the
Federal District Attorney here or
through the District Attorney of
this county. New York Evening
Mail.
We believe that any attempt to
re-estabilsh practically and to en-
ploy for personal vengeance the
odious principles and provisions of
the old Sedltion law of 1898, either
by mere executive assertion or by
executive construction or perver-
sion of existing statutes, would
meet with the united and most
cheerful opposition of the free
American press, fully conscious as
that great power unquestionably is
of its privileges under the law and
its just responsibilities to the law.
New York Sun.
Few people could have believed
such development possible in free
America as government prosecu-
tion of a newspaper for libel upon
the government, but here. are the
plain indications of it. Anything,
however, seems to be possible under
Mr.. Roosevelt's administration.
We have TO go back to the days of
the Alien and Sedition laws to find
any sort of parallel to this contem-
plated action of the Federal gov
ernment. Springfield Republican.
The people of the United States
do not believe that the Federal gov
ernment should have power to
bring action for libel against the
press. The old principle was that
the press should be under the law
of the states, and should be held
responsible and required to make
answer through the courts on
complaint of individuals who con-
sidered themselves wronged. .-Bos-
ton Herald.
Just what is the nature of the
government proceedings against the
World we do not yet know. The
Attorney General promises to en-
Tighten us tomorrow. But it is
safe to say in advance that if the
prosecution be anything but a suit
for libel by aggrieved individuals,
if it be an attempt to establish the
right of the government, as such,
to punish even unjust or malicious
attacks, it will be an enormous
blunder. New York Post.
There Will be time enough to do
all necessary trembling for free
speech and a free press when Mr..
Roosevelt has convicted Mr.. Pulit-
zer of criminal libel. But the
public aspects of this strange pro-
ceeding are open to comment, and
it is our impression that the very
great majority of Mr.. Theodore
Roosevelt's fellow citizens look
upon this libel suit as the weakest
and most foolish action of his pub
lie career. New York Times.
Assuming that libel has been
committed in the sense that the
crime could be proved in a State
court against an individual, what
to do about it in apparent default
of statutory provision becomes an
engaging quiz for the students of
legal distractions. There are no
precedents. Providence journal.
Mr.. Roosevelt in instituting this
prosecution it has been ordered
by him-is seeking to establish a
principle which, if allowed to go
unchalIenged, would be fatal to
free government, fatal to popular
liberty. The country has not yet
reached the stage at which it will
tolerate czar or even an imitation
one. Baltimore Sun.