Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1834-09-30
POs.s'EaCAL.

the public.
The of all who undertake to caer coun,els
for public guidance, is open TO examinations and especial
ly is that OF the conductor OF swspaper press
paciiy Of Editor arly liable TO tue rce criticism This
must be long the Freedom Of Speech is held TO
be as sacred as the Freedom Of tho Press. which, in fact,
Oseparably connected and into
In the Freedom OF Speech consists ceusorsl power tie
residence oil which in the People, is essential to free 90
vernmcnt But THE power produce its nded
effect, 10 wholesome and ecscious extent unless the
opuions of individuals which constitute public opinion
are declared and promulgated by the Dstrumentsiy
free press
be found 10 be applicable 10 the matters herein fully
dvuiged will merely OBSERVE that during the month OF
June last addressed commute alton TO the Editors of
the Petersburg Inellgencer, which was published by
them, and accompanied by the following Introductory
mentsries, 10 wit:
OF the following communicated. Though strongly oppos-
ed 10 the late measures OF the Executive. aud freely ex
ercsing the right OF expressing opinions in relation
the conduct OF our public funciionsrics we viii never
close columns 10 defence Of the
that u not marked by an improper personal spirit
only by Che comparison Of Mon, by tho collision Of
intellect, that truth can be made 10 obtain lust rumph
the latent OF sophisiry, OF Mistaken though no.
nest zeal OF aftfu and interested be
exposed. We seek ehmen', lear no examiua
ton Of opinions shall, therefore, never hesitate
10 inert any dccorous commune in which thew arc
reviewed. The people have right expect correet in
formation fom the public pets and so long az we are
charged with the conduct Of one shall continue 10
place within their reach all and every Of iniorms-
on.''-I,iei. June %
On The Oh instant not knowing su.peciing ,ba, those
addressed TO them note, entrusted 10 o friend suLsiap.
tally Il write from memory follows:
PErERsBURG. Sept. 9th, 1884
Gentemcn-Thoueh the enclosed unica lions have
been publ shed in the Constellation wish you 10 insert
them in your paper as original COMMUNICATIONS the In
tellgencer, by TIE particular request Of The author
l am fully swsie, that the views urged in this ERE
VIEW, arc exactly, OF nearly exactly, the reverse Of
your own; but you will CONCUR with me in ac-
credi,ng the correctness oil Jesons opinion that error
as harmless, ,chen reason is zen free 10 combat IL and
that impariaiiy is essential TO cOmmenda5le freedom Of
the Newspaper press.
Indulge INC in one other rem'rS. The challenge con.
taiued the hIst part OF the Repieo designed 10
have particular individual application. Il is general
pUBLIUs.
In reply to This note the "intcgencer' OF lie h list
contains The following address 10 core poDd-nis:
G1"To COMMUNICATIVE is II. ecilnh
iy informed that We mus, decline his request. Our
columns are snd have been open 10 original conunica
tions either in defence OF the or against
Mr. Leigh. But it never has been our rule TO copy
anonymous comnuncp tious which have appeared else.
wheresnd is trespassing rather upon that roi.
cal courtesy, which have slssys
opponents, ask u.s. as In this isa,e 10 irserl
such communications aier obey have beca circulated
through another medium"
To the rejection ofny communications. The preceding
terms tie evening OF the same day. reioneJ as tol
lows
For The Inteiigencer.
Messrs. Editors-If you had published my note in
which was enclosed the rejected communics atoms your
resdes would be able to Judge OF the OF my
application, which you distinctly gnusay. As you failed
publish hat shell expect you, in justice to me- TO
publish this
You seem entirely 10 have mssrpreicnded the ch,rac
Ter OF the application contained in that note You were
not requested to copy anonymous atoms y hcl
had appeared esewhefe:" but You were applied to- in
very plain and respectful e'ms 10 insert the enclosed
communications IN your paper, original coiumun-
cations 10 the Petersburg IhelIigencer." They were
constituted original communications for your paper by
the erasue OF the previous decuoo and The substitution
Of the direction, "For the lnelgcncer" The fact tba
they were printed did not charge their character I'm
proof OF all this will refer TO custom Smong Editors
which is Of daily occurrence. meeting Of the voters Of
the Town of Petersburg is held, bc they adopt GER
tain resolutions; the nst contains quest that the
proceedings be published in the papers Of tie Town
Que OF the Editors OF the Intelligence happens the
secretary Of the meeting aud knowing that he has ue
enough 10 get proof sheet before it , be wanted At
the other Office he puts into The hands of the com.
postors who proceed 10 get prcot, Which when cor.
recsd, lie sent 10 the other office Tor insertion that pa
per- Again; Mr. b. desires 10 address his constituents
through the medium OF tie public papers: save the Ia
Dor OF preparing duplicate, lac sends a written copy Of
his address TO the Editors Of one. h request ia il be
published IN The ofher paper Of the owD the address
censures the conduct OF the President the o. States
and yet MIR b. has respect enough Tor the paper which
Seenos he Administration and eensUfes its OPP onenis
furnish lie Editors Hif printed copy The ohe press
accompanied with the Request 10 insert 1t bad bee
originally directed TO that office
Now, Sirs would no, the proceedings, or the address
be equally an original communication each paper q
Would the Editors of the din ieepcer" nser, ei,her
copied from the "ConsellslonP Surely not Nor would
the onsteAtoD, ell the circumstances being altered
insert II as copied from the "Iniehgeucer The Editors
oil each paper would insort il original communica
ton, knowing that its having boen transformed from a
sTifen into printed copy does exert the magic in
nuebce 10 cDsnbe us cbarDcler
Ut will be in vain 10 urge that the analogy not com.
plee, which these Illustrations afford, because am an
anonymous Uriter. My "Regiew" OF the speecbes IL
Impartial and respeelfuss impartial aud respectful ss il
would be my own proper signed 10 il, Softer
terms than those used, would have been diciae v m
uDussblc deicacy, and challenge combustion Of II.
tmpafiiality Besides you know who au aud su, not
unwilling, in the face Of tho world, TO unan1e my i'm.
personality.
But, Sire, you 10 have me 10 auo-
ther refpeet My application a mere request; il
naa peep you might With some pfoprsy JeDoDinate IL
respdss on yOur courtesy IL was placed on higher
grounds. appeal 10 the freedom Of tie press and ic
voked freedom If discussion Oily noto contains tLis
lsDgusge ~ sn July that tho views urged in is
'hsyeTt are exactly, Or nearly exscuy the ievefe Of
those you entertain; but sure YOU will concnr itb
me IN sccfeGihng The correctness Of dtfeTsOns opoion
fhdt error IS harnsless, Chen reason is I'm free 0bof
a. (tohther you or be or0HgJ and that impariaitv
Is essential 10 e0mmendGbe freedom Of tie uewspsue,
press"
With these explanations submit TO tho cspsorshjp Of
public opinion 10 determine whether have HesDossed
rather too Jar upon That political courtesy which YOU
ought ocoys TO endeop0r 10 erfend 10 y0T OppOnsuis
10 prevent further msconcepdon, let me assure YOU
ma 90 not desiro this 10 DO construed into rtqusf re.
neWed TO nseI! 10 your paper the bssuly skeche Gre
view OF Mr. Leigb's sPeeebesiu the Senate. will ne. |
Nera as a favor What have bean refused right
~, PUBLtUS. |
bFesk the orce Of NY usraons intended 10 sbov that
according TO The tndenied custom among Editors me-
communications had been legiim9tcly consued oyigi1
communications for their pspef: and must be ps,Gonsd
the decafauon OF ny belief that the dculty Ia bresL
she oec OF Hose 0stfa IONS exhibited 10 bold relief on
stubborn lgcls, vos tho d their silence which am