Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-10-14
The Panama Canal Libel Cases.

The refusal of the United States dis
trict court at Indianapolis to extradite
for removal to Washington the proprietors
of the indianapolis News. against whom
indictments for libel have been found
here, is in conformity with equity, COM
mon sense and with what Is vaguely term
ed, the spirit of our institutions. The
first announcement concerning the Pan
anna canal publications was that they con-
stituted libel upon the United States
government and that indictments for that
pffense would be found in the local court
land the indicted men brought here for
trial from New York and Indianapolis.
tDiscussng this suggestion The Star said
at the time:
! Neither national public sentiment nor
! The courts WILL it is believed, permit a
partisan national government to indict In
the District of Columbia even it's libelouS
partisan critics in New Orleans or San
Francisco, and to ex4radite them and
bring them for trial to a jurisdiction so
peculiarly under the control of the ma
tional government as the ten miles
square
The local indictments were finally found
not in the name of the government but
of individuals. But the effort to bring
the indicted men to Washington for trial
was not abandoned.
The application for extradition in this
case was based upon the theory that the
offense of criminal libel is committed by
q newspaper, which publishes a libel in
every jurisdiction in which any Of its
issues, however few, have circulated; that
its editors or proprietors could be in
dicted for this offense, not only in the
place of its actual publication. but in
every state of the Union where copy
of the offending issue had circulated and
that the libelers could be extradited and
possibly dragged from their homes for
trial to all the states of the Union in
succession.
The common sense view of the matter
Is that criminal libel by newspaper
is committed only in the place of the
newspapers publication: and that in
dietment and trial for such libel should
be confined to that Jurisdiction. If the
indianapolis News has criminally libeled
Mr.. Cromwell let its proprietors be in
dicted and tried in Indianapolis
The libel law. as it affects newspapers.
in respect to both indictments and dam
! age suits, is ANTICIPATED and oppressive.
; Small success SO far has resulted from
the labors of newspapers to eliminate
10y SSdtutS SOIHc OIL Tue 1nJuStlCeS which
ethe modern newspaper endures in its
role of publisher of the news, the organ
gof public opinion and the honest critic
!of public officials and public acts 1t
ssometimes seems as IL the press of the
country, fairly influential in respect to
Legislation affecting others, was i'm
potent to secure corrective legislation of
the most obvious and fragrant injus-
fices affecting ITSELF
The decision at Indianapolis is merely
q refusal to remove the indicted men to
" ashington for trial. If they came here
voluntarily they could be arrested under
the indictments. Without being con-
victed anywhere they are punished by
exclusion from the nations city. Os-
tracism from Athens was the severest
penalty that could be inflicted upon the
sensitive Athenian. Exile from the
american National Capital is cruel and
unusual punishment for the true
american.