Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1933-11-19
PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO FACTS
. AT STAKE In PRESS CODE
Freedom to Print Criticisms as Well as
Praise Vital to Citizenry, Point at
Issue in N. r. A. Dispute.
BY MARK SULLIVAN.

ME tnlng 10 bear IN mind about
the controversy between N. r.
A. and the newspapers about
freedom of the press is that it
is not a private quarrei. 1t Is not like
a controversy between N. r. A. and
the steel industry; for example, or the
automobile industry, or any other in
dustry.
The beneficiary of the freedom of
the press is the public. The news
papers s9e not Just demanding the
right to print statements in the inter-
est Of themselves as an industry.
What they are demanding is to be free
to print any kind of criticism what
ever, Of N. r. A., or of whatever Ad-
ministration happens to be in power
What they are trying to safeguard is
the right to print any criticism that
any one may utter about N. r. A.
any one, that Is, Of such standing that
his criticism about any subject de-
serves to be printed, and would be
printed as a matter Of course in the
ordinary conduct of newspaper. The
newspapers are insisting that they be
just as free to print statements about
N. r. A. as to print statements about
Democrats or Republicans, or about
prohibitionlSts or about vets, or about
imitation, or about any other topic Of
current interest.
Seek TO Avoid Economic Death"
Suppose any one Of the following
men: Senator Carter Glass, or ex-Gov.
"Al" Smith, or Herbert Hoover, or
Benito MuSsolini, or Maxim Litvinoff-
suppose any of these should express
the opinion that N. r. A. is somewhat
short of perfection; or suppose any of
the Americans named, or any other
American of similar prominence, should
denounce N. r. A. and call on the
public to oppose it. In that event,
the newspapers wish to be Just as free
to print such statement as they
have been, for example, to print ex-
Gov. Smiths denunciations of prohibit
ton.
The newspapers are fighting for the
right Of each newspaper to have COM
plete freedom to print statements
about N. r. A, and to exercise this
freedom without fear that N. R. A. VIII,
in the language Gen. johnson used
about Henry Ford, "crack down on" the
paper. To use another of Gen. John
sons phrases, the newspapers are try
ing to keep N. r. A. from having the
opportunity to sentence any Of them
to "ecoomic death"
Specifically, Of course, the fight is
about the right of the newspaper to
exist without fear of suppression or
intimidation by the Government. To
that extent, If you please, the news
papers are interested in a commercial
sense. But the beneficiary Of freedom
Of the press is the public; essentially
this is the public's fight.
What the Newspapers Demand.
The issue between N. r, A. Admins
traitor Gen. johnson and the news
papers Gas represented by the Ameri-
can Newspaper Publishers Associa-
tion) turns on the following language,
which the newspapers wish to insert
in the newspaper code:
I'm submitting this code, or in
subscribing or asserting thereto, the
daily newspaper publishers do not
thereby waive any constitu-
tional rights or consent to the impo-
sition Of any requirements that might
restrict or interfere with the constitu-
tional guarantee of the freedom of the
press"
The newspaper publishers say they
will sign no code unless 1t contains
that passage. Inasmuch as an i'm
mense majority Of the newspaper
indeed the whole press almost without
EXCEPTIONS standing together on this
point, 1t follows that there can be no
voluntary code for newspapers, except
one that contains this language, Since
tho will - I'D
voluntary code unless 1t contains this
language, the only way for a news
paper code to come about Is for the
President to write one and compel the
newspapers to accept It. An attempt
by the President to write and impose
code not containing this language
would lead to good deal Of commo-
ton.
Whether, later on, after the con-
troversy has gone further-whether at
that time the President would attempt
to force q code on the newspapers, Is
a question for the future. The issue in
the immediate present is that the
newspapers say they viii not submit
any code unless 1t contains the passage
quoted. On the other side, Gen.
johnson says he win not accept any
code from the newspapers II it con-
tains that passage.
Governments Side.
Let US consider first the Govern
ment's side Of the controversy, the
side Of N. r. A. and Gen. johnson.
They say, in effect, to the newspapers
you are guaranteed freedom Of the
press by the Constitution and there
fore it is not necessary for you to in
sert this clause in your code" 1t is
true the Constitution says Congress
shall make no law abridging
the freedom of speech or Of the press"
Gen. johnson says in effect that ''if
N. r. A. operates to abridge the free
dom Of the press, then you newspapers
can go into court and have the law
declared invalid"
To this the newspapers reply, in
effect:
"Ah, yes; but If we sign q code not
containing our reservation, and If
thereafter we go into court to assert
our rights to freedom Of the press as
guaranteed by the Constitution, then
we know what will happen. The Gov
eminent lawyer-it may be the rather
violent-minded Mr.. Donald Richberg or
even Gen. Johnson himself who,
among his versatile and numerous tai |
entS Is lawyer-will come into court !
and say that the newspapers volun-
tarily signed this code and thereby |
waived their rights under the freedom |
Of the press clause Of the Constitu-
ton"
It is precisely against that, per-
cisely to preserve all their rights, and |
to avoid ever being accused Of having |
estopped themselves by voluntary sig
nature to a code not containing their |
reservation-it is precisely for this rea-
son that the newspapers insist upon /