Evening star., 1919-08-15
Has Right to Own Opinions.

liShed rule, law or custom.
+One who urges and seeks the over
throw by force of all government"
Has Right to Own Opinions.
Touching on the statements made
by Mr.. Ford in the course OF his pa
cifist propaganda, the court said:
There is no obligation on the part
Of any citizen to agree with anybody
else on any subject on earth. whether
it Is the President, Secretary OF state,
or who. Every man has right to
his own opinions and convictions ana
the right to advocate them in any rea-
sonable way: and the only purpose OF
examining into Mr.. Fords has been as
they might picture to you just exactiy
what the man is. what his views were,
and whether the Characterization OF
him as an anarchist or as an Ignorant
idealist was justihable.
"On the other hand, a newspaper
has the same right that an individual
has to comment on and critictse mat
ters of public interest or men In pub
lie life or anything else that may
or comment on. provided they injure
nobody. They have the same right an
individual has-no more and no less.
No newspaper, has the right ito uoeI
anybody for the sake Of promoting
its own opinions" fa'sfi 5,
The court stated that the question
Of military preparedness was admit
ted in testimony for only one pur-
pose. namely, as bearing upon the
good faith Of the Tribune in CRITICS.
ing Mr. Ford. On the subject Of "fair
comment he said, in part:
Will End Consideration.
Upon the question Of fair COM
ment, II you become, satisfied that
the charges or chaIactefisations con.
true In substance that will end your
consideration Of the case and your
verdict will be for the defendant, no
cause Of actfon-because the truth te
q defense. II it is true they had a
right to say 1t.
.Tf you do not become satisfied that
the characterization or charges In
the editorial are true. you may then
consider whether they constitute fair
comment or not.
Il have been all through this case
in doubt as to whether or not fair
comment had any place in the case as
a matter Of defense, but after fully
considering the opinions of our su-
preme court in the Won Lonhausen
case. and the case Of Dakhyl VS.. La
bouchere. I'd Kings Bench. page 325,
an English case there cited with ap-
proval, I have concluded to permit
What is meant by fair comment
and how you are to determine
whether or not the defense has been
sustained. will now point out to you.
you will observe that the ques-
ton is not whether you would or
ment on the same facts. The writer
had the right to judge for himself
Of the business Of the comment
which he wrote. The question is. Was
the comment the writer's real ideas,
and was 1t honest? II the comment
honestly written. then 1t was fair. as
that term is used in the law In this
connection, and you must SO treat It.
In Spirit Of Fairness.
Fair comment is that which is
conceived and used in spirit Of fair
matter and the person at which the
comment Is directed, and not for the
qualification of any personal III Will
or private malice toward the fndtvid-
uals. If it exceeds these limits the
comment is not fair, and the person
using it may render himself liable IT
the words that he uses are libelous.
under the law. as they are in this
case.
Il think that Henry Ford. by his
public acts and utterances upon the
| lating to the war. to the national de-
tense and to tho enforcement and
protection Of the rights Of American
citizens-possibly not to the war at
that time. as the Torla % war naa mot NOT
not in it; that you will treat this
question as it existed at the time
prior to our entry into the world
war, of course-rendered his views
tn f0
to comment or fair criticism.
"The right to indulge in such criti-
cism was ono which was possessed
not not only by the Tribune company
and other c1s oy yns any ~
Cubic Cubic interest and one which was
beinT discussed by Henry Ford as
such. Those who. like the Tribune
company. differed di. from Tile Henry Ford
riSht- which he claimed for himsalf
of attacking his judgment, his views.
his conduct and the result which
! would be accomplished by the theo-
ries which he advocated II success
full.
Bounds Of Fair Comment.
.Arhey might not. however. attack
his private character. but the person
attacked may form a part Of fair
comment IL IL Do WSGSAAtou Oy Inom,
or is q reasonable inference from
them, Nor should such criticism ex-
ceed the bounds Of fair comment q
| explained to you heretofore, what fair
| comment really Is. Within those
hounds they must keep, whether
newspaper or individual.
ut Is, Of course. well known that
| at the time the editorial was pub
iished the National Guard had been
| called out to be sent to the Mexican