The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1913-06-11
Law also Requires Publica-
tions to give the Names
of Editors, Managers,
Stockholders and Bond
holders Publication of
These Statements is Re-
quired Under Penalty of
! Being Denied the Mails.
BIZ ASSOCIATED PRESS.

Washington, June 10.-Chief Justice
White today announced the decision OF
the supreme court upholding the valid
ity Of the newspaper publicity" law OF
1912, enacted as a provision of the
postal appropriation act. The law re-
quires all publications to file a sworn
statement of the names of editors,
managers. owners, stockholders and
hondholders of daily newspapers and
also The average circulation.
The publication of these statements
IS required under penalty of being de-
MED the mails. The second paragraph
provides that all paid matter shall be
marked advertising under penalty of
a fine and Imprisonment. Nearly nine
ty per cent of the newspapers COM
piled with the laws but many under
protest
The particular section attacked was
to bar every newspaper and periodical
from the mails unless the editors or
owners filed with the postal authorities
semi-annual sworn statements giving
the names of the editors. owners, stock
holders and bondholders and the aver
age daily circulation and thereafter
immediately published the statement
Tt also forbade publication of paid for
articles without marking them "adver-
tisement
The Journal of Commerce and Com
merciaI Bulletin of New York sought
to have the United States district court
for southern New York enjoin the
postmaster general from enforcing the
act on the ground that it was uncon-.
stitutiona1. The objection then raised
sa5 that the law abridged the free
dom of the press The government
defended the law as a re gulation of the
use of the second class mail privileges
AFFECTS 25,ooo NEWSPAPERS.
The New York court sustained the
validity OF the law in this case as it
did in that brought by the Lewis Pub
fishing Company of New York. 1t is
said the law affects more than $4,000
publications in the United States.
Chief Justice White interpreted the
regulation objected to rs being not
but merely as affixing additional
changes for admission of newspa pers
to the mails
In the course Of his opinion he said:
Was the provision intended simply
to supplement the existing legislation
relative TO second class mail matter, or
was II enacted as an exertion of legis-
1ative power to regulate the press, to
curtaii its freedom. and under the as
sumption that there was a right to
compel obedience to the command of
legislation having that object in view
to deprive one who refused to obey, of
all right to use the mail service.
when the question IS thus defined.
It's solution Is free from d1T1lCulCV, since
by it's terms the provision only regu-
Iates second class mail and the exciu
sion from the mails for which IL pro-
v.des is not an exclusion from the
mails generally. but only from the right
to participate in and enjoy the privi
leges accorded by the second class
classification"
DISCLOSE TRUE OWNERS.
The court declared further that the
requirement that newspapers shall dis
close their true owners was in line
with the great public purpose which
induced congress to continue in favor
ot the publishers of newspapers, at
vast public expense. the low postal rate
as we'll as other privileges accorded by
the second class mail classif cation. To |
emphasize this, the court quoted from
the report of the senate committee |
stating that the intent of the legisla- |
ton was ito secure to the public in |,
the disseminat ton of knowledge Of cur |
rent events by means Of newspapers |
The names not only of the apparent /
but of what might prove to be the |
real and substantial owners of the pub |
Iications. and to enable the public to /
know whether matter which was pub
lished was what it purported to be. or