New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1909-01-21
LIBEL CASE BASED
ON OLD STATUTE
4CTS As WEDGE FOR USE
OF STATE LAWS.
Defendants Counsel Thinks 1t Is
Basis for GOCerRmeHt's ActloR
.1gainst THE World.


regarding the purchase of the Panama Canal
believed Yesterday that he had found the
statute under which the government might use
state laws to prosecute for criminal libel and III
was believed that it was about this that District
Attorney jerome in consultation Win
United States Attorney Stimson on Tuesday
Another new feature in the mysterious case
was the announcement that Charles p Iaft'
brother of the President-elect. would be Wit
ness before the special grand jury. of which X
Fulton Cutting is foreman. considering the mat
ter of an Indictment against THE World DIS
trict Attorney Jerome was in consultation with
Justice Dowling. Of the Supreme Court. about
the Panama Canal charges. IL was said and the
bearing of the state laws upon the federal prose-
cution Mr.. Jerome went before the grand jury
after the consultation. Mr. Taft did not appear
but II is expected that he will testify to-day
The statute which Mr.. NlcoIl found and con-
sfderation of which occupied him and his asso-
ciate John NJ. Bowers and his clients the greater
part of the day, is Section 5391 OF the Revised
Statutes of the United States This discovery
was the result Of days Of the most persistent
search engaged in by Mr. NicOlrs whole once
force and many others interested directly in
the case The statute is prefaced certain or
fences committed in places ceded 10 the United
States how punished and provides that the
laws Of the state which the place ceded Is SIT
uated shall apply to the ceded territory II pun
ishment for the offence is not already espe-
ciany provided for by any law Of the United
States
STATE LAWS MAY APPLY
It was pointed out that the fact that sub
pcnnas had been served on employees Of the mall
ing department in The World" and that an
officer at West Point had also been subpoenaed.
presumably to testify before the grand jury
now sitting in the Federal Building regarding
the circulation Of THE World" at that place,
which was ceded to the government by the STATE
of New York. meant that under this statute tns
government would apply the states libel laws
i'm the penal code to the present case The
statute which is of March g. 1925, follows
If any offence be committed in any place
" hich has been. may hereafter be. ceded 10
and under the jurisdiction of the United states
which offence is not prohibited. or the punish
/ Iuent thereof is not specially provided for, Oy
any law of the United States. such offence shall
be liable 40. and receive the same punishment
the laws of the state in which sucn place =
situated nov =, force. provided for the Ike or
fence when committed within the jurisdiction %
/ such state: and no subsequent repeal or any
such state law shah affect any proseeutioh 'o1
such offence in any court of the United states
Reference is made to subsequent acts which
provide for the application of the state laws :"
far as other offences concerned not relating
tn acts covered in the Penal code In a volume
of Notes on the Revised Statutes of the United
States" Gould and Tucker. the section given is
commented upon as follows;
This section st March 2 1925. section - is
10 he limited to the laws Of the several states
which in force at the time OF It's enact
7,ar+ T-ni+ed states vs. Paul Pet 14D. In
view of the foregoing decision. the act must be
restricted to places which had been Ceded 70 the
government Of the United States at the time or
its enactment. UNITED states vs.. Barney
Batch- 294D In those cases Where I Ihe s[dIe ss
laws have been adopted. I'm this section. they
( stand a If the act Of Congress had defined the
offences in the words of the state law Omitted
States COppersmith, 4 F. R 19s; 10 Rep ol'-g
BY this section an act not speclhcaily mace an
offence by the statutes Of the United states out
which Is an offence under the laws OF the state
wherein performed. is, by this general provision;
also offence under the laws OF the Uniteo
states. and punishable by the same penalties
as inflicted under the laws Of the state
(SharOn Hill, "A F. r. 1861
LIBEL LAW SAME AS IN 1925
As there is special reference in the statute to
the effect that the state laws in force when the
statute was enacted applied only. 4Ir- NicoIl was
asked whether the libel law in 1926 differed from
that in force to-day. He said he had made an
investigation and it was still about the same
So far ne had found that the libel law Of 1905
had been re-enacted in 1926. and again in 1874.
but whether changes were made later he could
not tell II any had been made they would not
make radical difference The section under
which the government, according to the lawyers
of the Press Publishing Company, may be pro-
ceeding 5,391. lawyers yesterday generally said
could be applied in prosecution for libel. the
state law furnishing the power. and that these
proceedings could be brought in federal court.
lust the same as II under statute OF the United
States against libel The 1906 state libel law
has the following addendum:
Whereas doubts exist whether the trial OF
an Indictment OF information for libel the jury
have a right to give their verdict on the Whote
matter in Issue.
Ffrst-That on every such Indictment or in
( formation, the jury shall try the sames shall
rio tO he
under the direction Of the court in like manner
as in other criminal cases and shall not be di-
verted or required by the court or judge. before
/ whom such indictment information shall bs
tried. to find the defendant guilty. merely the
Droof Of the publication by the defendant of the
matter charged to be libelous and of the sense
ascribed thereto. in such indictment or informa-
contained shall be held taken impair
destroy the right and privilege Of the defendant
to apply to the court 70 have the Judgment
rested hath heretofore been Dract1sed-
Secondhand be IL further declared and
acted that IN every prosecution for writing
publishing any libel il shall be lawful for ths
defendant upon the trial of the cause. to give in
evidence in his defence the truth of the matter
contained in the publication charged libeiOus.
Prodided always that such evidence shall not
be q Justification unless the trial il be further
made satisfactory to appear. that the matter
charged as HbellOus published with good
motives and for justifiable ends
Third-And be il further enacted. that any
person or persons who shall. after the passing OF
this act be convicted Of writing publishing a
libel such person or persons shall not be sen
+ tenced TO Imprisonment exceeding the term
of eighteen months. or to pay a fine exceeding
the sum of $1,000.
Fourth-That from and after the passage ot
this -c. it shall be lawful to prosecute any
person or persons by information for writing
publishing any libel
VIEWS OF FEDERAL LAWYERS.