A CALIFORNIAN PRESS LAW.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11455, 21 June 1899, Page 6

A CALIFORNIAN PRESS LAW.

When the Hon. John M'Kenzie, on his way to the old country, landed in San Francisco, he would be able to study on the spot the working of- an act for the suppression: of the anonymity of the press, which went] rather farther than his own ideas; on the' * subject,' as expressed in his famous .bill. ..The State Legislatae of California passed last, session what is known as the Signature. Bill, the import of which is best expressed in .the following extract from its text:—" Every article, statement, or editorial, contained in any newspaper or other p'rintecf publication, printed. or published -in this State, which by writing or printing, tends to--blacken the memory of one who i's'\tlead; or "to impeach the honesty, ■ integrity, virtue, or reputation, or publish the natural'or alleged defects of one who is alive, and thereby' expose him or her to public Hatred; contempt, or ridicule, must be supplemented by the true name of the writer vi such article, 'statement, or editorial, sighed t* priMted ut the end thereof." Any one, no"t ne'cessarjly the person aggrieved [by giiy article..or paragraph, may prosecute, and on a conviction shall receive half the. fine of a thousand dollars imposed for each separate "offence." This remarkable law came into force during April, and the effect is seen, in recent issues of the Argonaut, 'which bristle with-the singular word " jahart," printed, in very small type, at the foot of almost every original, or partly original, -article and paragraph in the paper. ' The, editor, reluctantly parading his personality before the public, explains that his name- is Jerome A. Hart, and that as •he either writes or inspires or suggests or. alters every line of original matter that goes . into the paper, he has decided to append what he calls his signature--" jahart "— -to each separate item in nis journal, whether the matter for which he thus makes himself responsible is of the nature indicated in our quotation from the new law, or whether it is perfectly harmJess. •It is an ingenious way of "obeying yet breaking the law, the makers of which, intent on compelling a general exposure of the anonymous writers on the various newspapers, apparently did not contemplate such a method of evading the act. Singularly enough the one-portion of the Argonaut to which exception on the ground of its very personal nature could be taken— the New York letter by " Flaneur "—still appears above that norn de plume, without the editorial signature. American journalism has many faults in British eyes, not the least being the grossly personal" attacks •in which some writers indulge, and the oft'ivisive manner in which they disregard tVe. privacy of home life. But to restrain this sort-of thing, and to attack the liberty of the press, and with it the liberty of the people, is quite another. One is therefore prepared to hear that the leading newspapers, which are defying the law, are combining to fieht it rieht throueh to

the United States Supreme' Court, on the ground -that it is unconstitutional. They declare that it is an effort by corrupt politicians and unscrupulous corporations 'to rob the press of its power for good, in exposing the many abuses which taint the political and municipal life of America. Undoubtedly, in this respect, it forms a menace to the public" liberty, and as such the coming struggle will be watched with interest by many . outside newspaper circles.—Press.