Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1909-10-13
Judge Anderson Decides That
Smith and Williams Can't be
Taken to Washington.
LAYS DOWN SOUND DOCTRINE
Newspapers Have Certain Duties to
Perform and should Per-
form Them.

against Delavan Smith and Charles r..
Williams. proprietors of The Indians
polls News. who were resisting removal
20 the District OF Columbia for trial
under a grand Jury indictment charg-
ing them with criminal libel in pub
fishing articles alleging there was a
corrupt profit Of s2SOOo,OOo in the sale
of the Panama canal to the United
states
That man has read the history OF
our institutions to little purpose" said
Judge Anderson. "who does not view
with apprehension the success Of such
a proceeding as this TO the end that
citizens could be dragged from their
homes TO the District OF Columbia. the
seat OF government, for trial under the
circumstances, OF Ibis case. The de-
PENDANTS are discharged
Il believe the fact that certain per-
sons We're called thieves and swim
dlers' does not constitute libel per Sc.
a newspaper has a certain duty TO
perform. As a former president has
said, IT is the duty OF a newspaper To
print the news and to tell the truth
about it, 1t Is the duty OF a news
paper to draw differences for the
people.
PECULIAR CIRCUMSTANCES.
Now. there were many peculiar cir
cumstances about the whole Panama
canal business. The revolution i'm Pam
anna. the circumstances concerning IL
were unusual II was a matter of great
public concern, "A large portion of the
people favored the Nicaraguan route,
another portion. those who were inter-
ested i'm Il, officially and personally
Just Interested preferred the Panama
route. A committee was appointed to
Investigate and report the relative
merits Of the two routes They inves-
tigated and reported in favor of the
Nicaraguan. Shortly afterward they
changed TO Panama.
up 20 the time Of that change as I
gather from the evidence. the lowest
offer which had been suggested as the
one at which the Panama property
the property OF the Panama canal
company-could be procured. was
something over one hundred million.
Then rather suddenly IL became known
that it could be procured for forty
millions.
Now. there were a number OF peo-
pie who thought there was something
wrong; a committee of the United
States senate was appointed to inves-
tigate The committee met. as stated in
the articles. the men who knew all
about IL William Nelson Cromwell,
upon having certain questions put to
him stood upon his privilege as an at
torney and refused to answer. To my
mind that was just grounds for sus-
picion. ] am suspicious about it now.
Here was a newspaper printing the
news or trying to- Here was this mat
tor up for discussion, and 1 am not
willing 10 say that the differences were
too strongly drawn.
gnr.srr rstrAnrsr~r,
'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 pro
vides that the accused shall be tried
I'm the state or district whore the offense
Is committed.
The indianapolis News Is owned by
the defendants, conducted and pub
lished by them, printed by them in In
dianapols. At the time covered by this
Indictment IL had "A daily circulation
of about 5000 copies All but about
1000 were circulated and disposed OF
IN the state Of Indiana; some 900 or 500
more IN one or two of the adjoining
states and TO the District Of Columbia
there We're sent by mail about 50 copies
10 subscribers. persons who ordered
them sent. The defndants have nc
agent or bureau or office and maintain
no agent or bureau or office in Wash
ingt0n
$50 the question Is. DO the defendants
when they prepare and publish %
copies IN the city Of indianapolis and
deposit them IN the United States mail
to be transmitted by mail 10 SO sub
scrlhers In Washington-do they pub
fish those 50 copies IN Washington? II
they do. N they did. court has jurisdlc-
q 4 he ~ AZ Il .af
then the court has neither Jurisdiction
OF the offense nor over tho defendants.
Everything that the evidence shows
that the defendants do or did they DO
and did In the state Of Indiana. city Of
Indianapolis have thought about
this thing q good deal and II
seems 10 me / am compclled 10 take
one Of two views and there Is nothing
between them. Either when news
paper owner or proprietor does what
the evidence IN this case shows those
defendants did composed. printed and
deposited In the mails for circulation
these papers containing them for the
purposes Of this statement libeious arr
ticles, either they are guilty here and
I'm every county district or jurisdiction
into which these papers go. OF they
are only guilty here. There Is no mid
de ground 10 take.
WHEN COMMITTED
when the defendants put these pa
pers containing these hbelous article
Into the postOnice here in indianapolis
and they went through the mails
throughout the country into the Narl-
Gus states. counties and districts OF the
United states. either il became "A crime.
Il separate ana INDEPENDENT crime IN
every one Of the counties. districts ur
state into which the papers went, or
there was but one crime ana that was
here
"The counsel for the government sup
posed a case where "a paper ls deposit
"a in Indianapolis and circulated
throughout tho % counties Of Indiana
asked whether they could De prosecui-
"a in every county and the council
thought they could, ana FOB The phsenoo
of this statute they could Then sup
pose there was am indictment in PosCy
county Would they have the trial and
prosecution in Marion county, The
counsel for the government thought
thcv would DO not think SO az an
am so certain OF Il I feel like say~