The broad ax. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1895-19??, 1909-10-16
JUDGE A. q. ANDERSON ON THE
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.
CcOncluded from page ~
Sees Basis for Suspicion.

Sees Basis for Suspicion.
$50 far as the record has been read,
Mr.. Cromwell stood upon his privilege
whenever questions were asked the
answer to which would or might re-
feet upon him or his associates; but
whenever a question was asked him
which gave him an opportunity to say
something in their behalf, he ostenta-
tiously thanked the examiner and
proceeded TO answer. To my mind
that was q Just basis for suspicion. 1
am suspicious about it now.
so we have this situation. Here is
a matter Of great public concern. I
was interested, you we're interested
we were all interested. Here was a
newspaper printing the news-or Try
ing to. Here was this matter up for
discussion, and am not willing to say
that the differences were too strongly
drawn / am not approving them; 1
am simply saying that 1 am not able
to say they were too strongly drawn.
Raises Point Of Honesty.
Now, II that is the situation, tie
question is, did these defendants IN
der the circumstances act honestly in
the discharge Of this duty which l
have spoken of, which the law recog.
Mics, and were they actuated by a
desire to injure the persons who are
affected by their act. II it were neces-
sary to decide this case upon the
question of privilege or lack OF malice
I Woud hesitate quite a while be-
fore would conclude it was my duty
to send these people to Washington
for trial. But that is not it
This indictment charges these de-
PENDANTS with commission Of a crime
in the district Of Columbia. Now,
the constitution OF the United States
In one Of the amendments, provides
that the accused shall be tried in the
state or district where the offense IL
committed.
The Indianapolis News Is owned
BY these defendants, conducted and
published by them, printed by them
IN the city Of Indianapolis, state Of
Indiana. At the time covered by this
indictment It had>a daily circulation
Of about 5000 copies.
Most Of Circulation In Indiana.
An but about 1000 were circulated
and disposed Of In the state Of In
diana, some 400 or 500 more in one or
two Of the adjoining states, and TO
the District Of Columbia there were
sent BY mail about hfty copies TO sub
scrfbers. persons who ordered them
sent The defendants have no agent
or bureau, or once, and maintain no
agent OF bureau, or once in the city
Of Washington in the District Of Co
lumbia for the circulation Of papers
within that district.
SO the question, Do the defendants
when they prepare and publish nfty
copies IN the city Of Indianapolis sud
deposit them In the United States mail
IN this building. to be transmitted By
man 10 any subscribers IN washing
ton-do they publish those hfty copies
in washington? II they do. II they
did, the court has jurisdiction OF the
oRense. win not 50 90 Tar as TO say
that It has Of the defendants. But 4
they did not, then the court has Meth
er jurisdiction Of the oRsnse or the de.
PENDANTS.
sees bus one conoIuIsiOa.
10 my mind there Is but enc con
clusion to be drawn. EEsrytAing ia
the sviasaes shows that defendants
DO or did thsy did Do and I'D b ths
stats Of Indiana. city Of Indianapolis
county q Marion 1 an not here q
s1v nat Il these defendants had z.