The Birmingham age-herald., 1922-05-15
Burden on Newspapers
From the Montgomery Advertiser.

From the Montgomery Advertiser.
 In taking up the revision of the libel laws of Alabama on the initiative of MT. E. W. Barrett of Birmingham, the State Press association is doing what should have been done years ago. The Alabama laws are the most drastic of all state laws on this subject. A provision in the constitution That in all prosecutions for libel or for the publication of papers Investigating lie capacity, or when the matter published is proper for public information, the truth there of may be given in evidence; and that in all indictments for libel, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts under the direction of the court" while apparently fair to the newspapers is generally interpreted as throwing the whole onus on them in libel cases. In every other prosecution the state must prove the defendant guilty beyond req sonable doubt; in libel prosecutions defendants are compelled to prove their own innocence. That is to say, all that the state has to prove is the fact of publication. On that proof
 
 founded and in the interest of public morals or public policy the publication may be- He can plead the truth of publication, not justiica- tion, but in extenuation-an absurd reduction of the law not found in other states.
 The civil code contains the clause "In all actions of slander or libel, the truth of the words spoken or written, or the circumstances under which they were spoken or written, may be given in evidence under the general issue in mitigation of the damages" Here Is the same objection The truth may be pleaded in "miti- gation,' not in justification. In both civil and criminal proceedings the publisher is subject to the whim or caprice, the local sentiment, or the political or other prejudice of jury-and juries are notoriousy swerved by sentiment in many instances. That sentiment has been to the advantage of publishers in verdicts of &C., quittal where truth and public information have been shown in criminal cases, but under the present law an editor could be punished for telling the truth in his paper about an abscond- ing official if the jury sympathized with the absconder.
 In civil suits for libel, where the matter conn., plained of is justified as public information and the jury recognizes it as such, the plaintiff is awarded 1 cent damages. Under the law that is the best the jury can do, but it frequently imposes heavy costs upon the publisher in de- lending suit for libel and while such ver- dict is really verdict for the publisher, it leaves stigma against which the newspapers have right to complain.
 No rightly conducted newspaper wants to shirk it's responsibilities under the law and as a public journal, but the law should not impose upon the newspaper greater responsibili- ties than upon any other public service or in- stitution. The duty of the newspaper to the public is to publish matter proper for public information" accepting the wording of the clause in the constitution. When it exposes wrongdoing crime, graft or malfeasance in public office, it should not be technically guilty of libel by the fact of publication; nor should it be forced to defend :. libel suit when the matter published is true and proper for public As the law stands the newspapers of Alabama are subject to pettifogging law suits which could not be brought in any other state. That the law needs changing, many of the best lawyers in the state admit
 well-known attorney who was member of the constitutional convention of 1901 which put the section of the constitution quoted into the document, was asked some time a1tefWarc what was the intention of the convention in retaining the clause from the constitution of 1875. He replied that it was 'to keep down fights and bloodshed." The idea appeared to be that the harder the law made it for the newspaper to expose malfeasance or wrongdoing in public office, the less chance there would be for an officeholder to shoot it out with the editor. Viewed as an adjunct to the peace and dignity of the state of Alabama, the legal relic might have been commendable to the old school. But what suited conditions in 1875 was