New-York tribune., 1921-03-09
Clergy, Public
Press sDenOunce
New Libel Bill
Rayher Measure Is Called
an Assault Upon Free
Speech at Hearing Be-
fore Codes Committee
Has Only One Defender
Introducer Says People
Demand 1t. but Fails
TO Produce Supporters
rron. a STAFF Coyrcsponde~.


ct the clergy. the press and the gen
eral public attacked the Rayher Grim
inal libel bill as an assault upon free
speech and the freedom of the press
2 at a hearing before the Assembly
Codes Committee to-day
The bill would make il prison
o;Yense for any one 20 print, paint.
carve, hew. mark stamp or stain any
thing in derogation OF any religious
denomination. sect or order, or any
iace or member 'nof, in whole or
in part
Only one person appeared in favor
o. the bill. He WAS the ntroducer,
Assemblyman Edward r. Rayher, Of
New York
Where is the demand for this lesis-
lation - inquired Assemblyman Ernest
F.. Cole. 4 member OF the committee
and one of the leading members of the
bar ii the southern tier
The citizens Of the state" answered
Mr.. Rayher.
If the people want this law" re-
,or,ed Mr.. Cole. why haven't we heard
rom them? This bill of yours would
make criminals OF almost every writer
living, not to mention the publishers
Of books OF writers long dead. Nearly
tion Of the Criminal Code ii your bill
was law
Assemblyman William Duke. chair
man of the Codes Committee. first
asked the opposition to present its
case. The first speaker against the
aayher bill was Assemblyman Louis
Il. Martin, chairman OF the Committee
on Judiciary.
This is an especially dangerous piece
! =, \
tin. ut should not be reported out Of
the committee. This bill extends the
provisions OF the criminal libel law ii
such a manner as 20 work hardship on
l-putable newspapers. The rewspap-
crS have duties as we have ours. Some
times some Of us would like to gag
tbem-when they function TOO we'll.
But seriously. this is especially danger
ois legislation and we must remenl ber
TIA, newspapers as q class are edited b.
men who have the interests Of the
ate at heart. II would be a great
mistake 10 extend tbs provisions OF the
criminal libel law any further. There
Is no reason for such legislation It Is
strange deviation from anything I
:fs.ve ever heard.
EN Senator Martin Saxe. who ap-
psared on behalf OF all the newspapers
ci New York City. declared that the bill
rs ii wise To extend the penal law;
0 as TO gag the newspapers. especially
IN cases where they should be unmuz-
zed ," asked Mr.. SaXe
''lt may be That repre- sertatives o.
ices may come to these shores advo-
esfsng practices which Americans alb
nor Why would 90. gag the press i,
such I. circumstance and say j. should
rot attack these races. There are s
.les,t number of organizations which
siyle themselves as religious cult
i'here is nothing religious about them
they are composed OF the i;centousis i
scl'ned We mad several such organ
1stions i'll New York City in the las
few years This bill would make al
;.ttack on such organizations by news
paper crime
Canon William Sneafe Chase, o,
posed the Rayher bill.
the standpoint OF preacher and a re
former said Canon Chase. ''I ca.
veil understand myself OF man,
preachers OF my acquaintance in tn
course of our work arousing the an
tagonism Of other religious denomina
tions and people u other races. l. tni
bill were law, under such circum
tances would be pat TO the cxpens
OF defending myself, wn;cA | could no
afford. And the same is true OF otho
preachers. This bill would stop In
mouths OF the clergy
Representatives OF upstate newspa
pens. including Lynn J. Arnold. of III
Albany knickcrhocker Press. an
Charles +. Wiiloughby, Of The Alban
journal, also spoke against the bill.