Neue Rheinische Zeitung – The Prussian Press Bill

The Prussian Press Bill

[*Neue Rheinische Zeitung* No. 50, 20 July 1848]

Cologne, July 19. We had thought today again to amuse our readers with the conciliation debates and in particular to present them with a brilliant speech by Deputy Baumstark, but events prevent us from doing so.

Every man is nearest to himself. When the existence of the press is threatened, one lets even Deputy Baumstark go.

Herr Hansemann has submitted an interim press law to the Assembly of Conciliation. Herr Hansemann’s paternal solicitude for the press demands immediate attention.

Previously the *Code Napoléon* was embellished with the most edifying titles of the General State Law. Now, after the revolution, things have changed; now the general State Law is enriched with the most fragrant blossoms of the Code and of the September legislation. Duchâtel is, of course, no Bodelschwingh.

Several days ago we already communicated the main provisions of this draft press law. Hardly had we been given an opportunity by a libel trial <See “Gerichtliche Untersuchung gegen die ‘Neue Rheinische Zeitung’”> to prove that Articles 367 and 368 of the *Code pénal* stand in the most glaring contradiction to the freedom of the press, when Herr Hansemann proposes not only to extend them to the whole monarchy, but also to tighten them threefold. We find everything in the new draft that practical experience has already rendered so dear and precious to us:

We find the prohibition, on pain of three months’ to three years’ punishment, of accusing someone of a fact that is punishable by law or that merely “exposes him to public contempt”; we find the prohibition of proving the truth of the fact otherwise than by a “full and valid documentary proof”; in short, we find again the most classical monuments of Napoleonic press despotism.

Indeed, Herr Hansemann is keeping his promise to make the old provinces share in the advantages of the Rhenish legislation!

Section 10 of the draft law crowns these provisions: if the defamation was committed against state officials in respect of their official functions, the ordinary penalty may be increased by half.

Article 222 of the Penal Code punishes with imprisonment of one month to two years an official who has received an insult by words (*outrage par parole*) in the exercise or on the occasion (*à l’occasion*) of the exercise of his office. Despite the benevolent efforts of the *Parquets*, this article could not be applied to the press so far, and for good reasons. To remedy this evil, Herr Hansemann has transformed it into the above Section 10. Firstly, the “on the occasion” has been transformed into the more convenient “in respect of their official functions”; secondly, the irksome *par parole* <by words> has been transformed into *par écrit* <by writings>; thirdly, the penalty has been tripled.

From the day this law comes into force, Prussian officials can sleep soundly. If Herr Pfuel burns the hands and ears of the Poles with lunar caustic, and the press publishes this – four and a half months to four and a half years’ imprisonment! If citizens are thrown into prison by mistake, though it is known that they are not the right ones, and the press reports this – four and a half months to four and a half years’ imprisonment! If *Landräte* turn into reactionary *commis-voyageurs* <commercial travellers> and collectors of signatures for royalist addresses <See “Vereinbarungsdebatten” p. 170>, and the press exposes the gentlemen – four and a half months to four and a half years’ imprisonment!

From the day this law comes into force, the officials can with impunity commit any arbitrary act, any tyranny, any illegality; they can quietly thrash and have thrashed, arrest, detain without interrogation; the only effective control, the press, is rendered ineffective. On the day this law comes into force, the bureaucracy can celebrate a feast of joy: it will be more powerful, less hindered, stronger than it was before March.

Indeed, what remains of the freedom of the press, if one may no longer expose to public contempt that which deserves public contempt?

Under the laws hitherto in force, the press could at least cite facts as proof of its general assertions and charges. This will now come to an end. It will no longer report, it will only be allowed to indulge in general phrases, so that the well-meaning, from Herr Hansemann down to the small-beer citizen, have the right to say that the press merely scolds, it proves nothing! Precisely for this reason it is forbidden to prove.

We recommend, moreover, that Herr Hansemann make an addition to his benevolent draft. He should also declare it punishable to expose the gentlemen officials not only to public contempt, but also to public laughter. Otherwise this loophole might be sorely felt.

We shall not go into the obscenity paragraph, the confiscation regulations, etc., in detail. They surpass the *crème* of the press legislation of Louis-Philippe and the Restoration. Only one provision: Under Section 21 the public prosecutor can demand the seizure not only of the finished printed matter, but he can even have the manuscript just handed in for printing confiscated, if the contents constitute a crime or offence liable to prosecution *ex officio*! What a wide field for philanthropic prosecutors! What a pleasant diversion, to go at any time to newspaper offices and have the “manuscript handed in for printing” submitted for inspection, since it might after all constitute a crime or offence!

How droll, in contrast, is the solemn gravity of that paragraph of the draft constitution and of the “Fundamental Rights of the German People”, according to which it says:

Censorship can never be re-established!