Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Editorial
January 27, 1913
Ashland Tidings
Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon
What is this article about?
The Eugene Register criticizes a bill introduced by Senator Smith of Coos and Curry counties, which would criminalize newspapers publishing unverified negative information about political candidates, imposing fines and imprisonment, with a cumbersome defense process favoring candidates.
OCR Quality
98%
Excellent
Full Text
Vicious Bill
Eugene Register:
The candidate for office who has some shady spots in his record that he objects to having flaunted before the public has found a champion in the person of Senator Smith of Coos and Curry counties. This solon from the coast country has introduced in the senate a bill that if enacted into law—if that is—would make the politician with a mouldy past as safe as the cautious hen that always roosts in the top of the tallest tree in the barnyard.
Senator Smith's bill fairly bristles with "shalls" and "shall nots" that apply principally to the newspaper that is intent on telling the people what kind of men are asking their votes, but in order to gain an understanding of it, it is probably not necessary to quote more than one or two that show the general trend. A part of Section 7 reads as follows:
"If any letter, circular, poster, bill, publication or placard shall contain any false statement, or charges reflecting on any candidate's character, morality or integrity, the author thereof, and every person printing or knowingly assisting in the circulation thereof, shall be guilty of political criminal libel, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not less than $250 nor more than $2,500, or by imprisonment in the penitentiary for not more than three years, or by both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court."
To be sure, the offending scribe has some recourse. If he can prove on his trial that he had reasonable ground to believe that the charge was true and did believe that it was true, and that he was not actuated by malice, his proof will be a sufficient defense. The method by which he can make this proof is specified, and it is amusing. He must show that 15 days before he published the offending statement he personally served upon the candidate affected a copy of it, and that he subsequently received from him no written denial! Of course, if the candidate chooses to deny the story, that is all there is to it, and the publisher who prints it is guilty.
There are two reasons that might explain Senator Smith's desire to see such a bill become law. It may be that he innocently believes that all politicians and office seekers are as pure and blameless as new-born babes, or it is barely possible that the papers said some naughty things about him during his own campaign, and he is anxious to prevent such an embarrassing thing from happening again.
Eugene Register:
The candidate for office who has some shady spots in his record that he objects to having flaunted before the public has found a champion in the person of Senator Smith of Coos and Curry counties. This solon from the coast country has introduced in the senate a bill that if enacted into law—if that is—would make the politician with a mouldy past as safe as the cautious hen that always roosts in the top of the tallest tree in the barnyard.
Senator Smith's bill fairly bristles with "shalls" and "shall nots" that apply principally to the newspaper that is intent on telling the people what kind of men are asking their votes, but in order to gain an understanding of it, it is probably not necessary to quote more than one or two that show the general trend. A part of Section 7 reads as follows:
"If any letter, circular, poster, bill, publication or placard shall contain any false statement, or charges reflecting on any candidate's character, morality or integrity, the author thereof, and every person printing or knowingly assisting in the circulation thereof, shall be guilty of political criminal libel, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not less than $250 nor more than $2,500, or by imprisonment in the penitentiary for not more than three years, or by both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court."
To be sure, the offending scribe has some recourse. If he can prove on his trial that he had reasonable ground to believe that the charge was true and did believe that it was true, and that he was not actuated by malice, his proof will be a sufficient defense. The method by which he can make this proof is specified, and it is amusing. He must show that 15 days before he published the offending statement he personally served upon the candidate affected a copy of it, and that he subsequently received from him no written denial! Of course, if the candidate chooses to deny the story, that is all there is to it, and the publisher who prints it is guilty.
There are two reasons that might explain Senator Smith's desire to see such a bill become law. It may be that he innocently believes that all politicians and office seekers are as pure and blameless as new-born babes, or it is barely possible that the papers said some naughty things about him during his own campaign, and he is anxious to prevent such an embarrassing thing from happening again.
What sub-type of article is it?
Press Freedom
Legal Reform
What keywords are associated?
Political Libel
Senator Smith Bill
Press Restrictions
Candidate Scrutiny
Election Integrity
What entities or persons were involved?
Senator Smith
Eugene Register
Coos And Curry Counties
Editorial Details
Primary Topic
Criticism Of Senator Smith's Bill Restricting Newspaper Criticism Of Candidates
Stance / Tone
Critical And Satirical
Key Figures
Senator Smith
Eugene Register
Coos And Curry Counties
Key Arguments
The Bill Would Protect Politicians With Shady Pasts From Public Scrutiny By Newspapers
It Imposes Severe Penalties For Publishing False Statements About Candidates' Character
The Defense Requires Proving Reasonable Belief In Truth And Serving Notice 15 Days Prior Without Denial
The Bill Favors Candidates By Allowing Easy Denial To Block Publication
Senator Smith's Motive May Be To Shield Himself From Past Campaign Criticism