The Alaska daily empire., 1919-08-27
FREE SPEECH" AND FREE PRESS

Senator King of Utah recently introduced plll in the United States Senate that would make crim- ina 'any language intended to lnclte proVohe oi encourage resistance to the United States or de fance and disregard of the Constitution or laws. Forthwith campaign was started to delea' .ile measure on the ground that it would interfere with the of speech and the freedom or the press
 No principle of government is more nearly un- versay popular than that involved m gree speech and Free Press yet there is probably no principle less understood. Strictly speaking there is no Such thing in organized government as Free Speech or Free Press" There has been, and probably never will be. There ought not to be. No man ls free to say in public everything that might come into his mind, is any newspaper free to print everything No man or paper can utter Of print obscene words, say print anything that leads to violence against constituted authority ana not break the law of the land or the unwritten laws ol right and justice, in this any other country NO man or newspaper is permitted to islander, libel ol scandalize anyone Free Speech" and "Free Press therefore are relative terms The question for the public, through legislatures. to determine IS where the line should be drawn.
 Without attempting to pass upon the merits or demerits the King bill, we have no hesitation Tn declaring that person or newspaper should pe relieved of complete responsibility for what he it says prints. No man has natural rlgh' lie, either in speech print, about another, nor has anyone natural right to say or print anything for the purpose of creating violence. No one has natural right to put anyone, though that one be an official or active in public affairs, in a false or scandaous light before the public, no mat ter whether it be by plain lying or by nuendo or insinuation. A.
 Laws for the spunishing of offenders in this re spect should be crutirzed very carefully of course for they may lead to injustice. Usually public opin ion adequately punishes the offender The liar usu ally lives see the public repudiate his lies and destroy him.
 However there has been so much malicious and irresponsible talking and vicious and ire sponsibe newspapers in this country that the line must be clearly drawn place beyond which the speaker and the writer cannot without direct punishment, and serving an example fol others who have neither honesty the good of society in their hearts.
 Anything printed said that actually incites provokes or encourages resistance to the United States defiance and disregard of the Con stitution laws is unlawful now and the author may be punished The King bill would make it a crime to attempt to do any these things, whether successful not, and leave the peace of the country to the good sense, patience and tolerance or cowardice, timdity. of citizens. There is nc doubt but that, in far the speaker paper is concerned, there is difference in right whether crime follows when speaker or news paper says prints anything with the intention that crime should result No person who uses lam guage intended to incte. provoke encourage, resistance to the United States or defiance and disregard of the Constitution or laws" is entitled to any consideration at all whether the resistance defiance" disregard follows or not. The only danger that could possibly result from the King bill would be if found guilty who did not intend that his remarks should produce resistance etc.. and where the resistance etc. actually did follow
 The whole matter is strictly one as to where the line should be drawn. It is a matter of public policy and not one of principle.
 Arnho Eslatch