Evening star., 1919-09-06

drafted, would force all newspapers
carrying live stock market news 10
obtain licenses from the government
Ward A. Nenf Of Chicago. vice presi-
dent Of the Corn Belt Farm Dailies,
urged that the bill be not enacted INTO
law, at a hearing before the Senate
agriculture committee yesterday.
I'VE are opposed to licensing OF
newspapers" said Mr.. Nen, ana pro-
test against the enactment or the hen-
yon bill into law because 1t contains
the following:
Section Protested.
Sec. 4. That no person shall en-.
gage in or carry on the business Oh
(c) collecting in connection with
stock yard and distributing IN com
merce live stock market quotations or
live stock market news: unless he shall
secure and hold license which shall
be issued by the Secretary OF Agr1cul-
ture upon application, in accordance
with regulations prescribed under this
act
THE language of this clause is very
broad and inclusive, and tnererore'
somewhat difficult of exact tnterpreta-
ton. We have no doubt that the
courts might take the broad view that
it applies to all newspapers carrying
live stock market reports. The adop-
tion of this principle would be at least
step toward the licensing Of all news
papers. This we consider most OBJ
jectionable.
IN the first place, such licensing IS
unnecessary and would accomplish no
benefit either to the reader of market
reports or to the publisher OF them.
We believe that in general live stock
market reports emanating through the
press from the chief market centers
are as accurate as it is humanity pos
sible to make them. The argument
has been advanced that federal IL
Censing would put the stamp of gov
ernment approval on such news. Let
me point out that such approval would
add not one iota to the reliability OK
the market report, because it must
stand or fall on truth and accuracy
and timeliness alone. How long DO
you suppose publisher could repre-
sent the buyers side. or rather mis-
represent the market in the buyer S
favor, without having his work
branded as false by the sellers?
Confidence at Stake.
How many times could he misquote
a producers sale without losing not
only the producers confidence, but
also that of his neighbors? How many
times would readers place their con-
fidence in and transact business on
the basis of newspaper market re-
ports, as they do now. after they had
found them just once to be false?
How long would a reader continue to
subscribe for a paper which breaks
faith with him? The answer to these
questions is evident. The publishers
of market reports which fail in truth.
accuracy and timeliness would soon
close up shop. No government license
is needed to keep market reports ac-
curate and no government license
would keep a publisher in business
who printed untruthful reports.
'The youngest of the publications
represent has been in business thirty
years, the oldest forty-seven ,ears.
They have established a record for
authenticity that license would not
improve. We resent the imputation
that federal control is necessary to
make US keep faith with our readers.
Other Objections Made.
'In the second place, any newspaper
affected by this clause would come un-
der the other main provisions of the
proposed law. This would mean that
they would be subject to the rules.
regulations and orders Of the Secretary
of Agriculture, his administrative Of
and such persons or bureaus as might
be delegated supervisory authority
AS we interpret the bill, 1t vests in
the Secretary of Agriculture all of the
powers known to our form of govern
ment-legislative, executive or admin
istrative and judicial. We object to
giving any single man power to make
the laws for newspapers to obey. We
object to giving him power to revoke
or suspend licenses for violation of
the laws he makes. The measures of
redress provided by the bill. the ap-
peal to the circuit court, we consider
of doubtful adequacy. We object to
the principle of considering a man
guilty until he proves himself inno-
cent, which we think would be estab.
lished by this enactment. All of these
provisions are autocratic and unamer-
lean.
Furthermore, licensing daily news
papers and putting them under control
of political appointee would open the
door to possible restrictions on the
freedom of the press, if in itself the
passing of such law did not consti-
tute such restriction. Who can say
to what extent and in what manner
any one man would use the power over
the press given him by the Kenyon
bill? A publisher confronted with the
possibility of having his license re-
voked and of being summoned before
a tribunal empowered to make rules as
well as enforce them would be abso-
lutely helpless in the hands of this
political appointee. The idea is surely
repugnant to all of us who have en-
joyed the right to speak, think and act
according to the dictates of our con-
science under the laws and Constitu-
ton OF our nation"