DON'T FORGET THE PAULA JONES CASE

When a federal judge in Arkansas dismissed Paula Jones' lawsuit against President Clinton last April, White House lawyers crowed about victory and justice. Most Americans thought that the president had, indeed, won and that the allegations made by Jones could not be substantiated.

The judge, in dismissing the case, said she found Clinton's alleged treatment of Jones "boorish" but not up to the standard of "outrage" required by the law.

Jones' lawyers have appealed the dismissal. Meanwhile, much of the nation has been genuinely outraged by revelations from Monica Lewinsky made public by Kenneth Starr. The activities described by Lewinsky mirror those alleged by Jones.

Now there is renewed talk of a settlement between Clinton and Jones, who is steadfastly asking for $1 million but has dropped her demand for an apology. Clinton's lawyers, by the way, have offered as much as $750,000 to settle the case.

Again, White House lawyers are putting their own spin on this turn of events. Lawsuits are settled out of court all the time, they say, and such settlements are no admission of guilt.

Right. But there is another incentive for settlement. Jones' lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright in Little Rock to hold the president in contempt for lying during his deposition in the Jones case last January. By settling, Clinton might avoid a contempt hearing.

So goes one of the most bizarre cases in the annals of American history.