The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-10-03
The Liberty Of the Press.


The Liberty Of the Press.
We observe in the Union some dolefu COM
plants Of the conduct of the Committee of IN
vestgation of the House of Representatives, of
which Mr.. SrANLY was chairman.
''The terrors of the Inquisiton' and the ty-
rannical Legislation of the "French Republic %
seem to the Union as no worse than the inves-
tigating committees of Congress-especially
the Committee on the Printing. 1t accuses
Mssrs. EVANS and STANLY Of "endeavoring to
destroy the liberty of the press" ''instigated
by party vindictiveness and wounded vanity."..
What there is that is calculated TO wound
the vanity of these gentlemen we cannot i'm
igne-and for party vindictiveness, the Union
abused Mr.. EVANS grossly, and he dealt in
hard remarks in return; but from all we can
earn, Mr.. STANLy treated the editor of the
Union very courteously.
But how very ridiculous this outcry of the
attack on the liberty of the press, will be seen
from the following statement.
On Monday, the 22d April, Mr.. RICHARD
SON of Illinois, by unanimous consent, submitted
l series of resolutions. proposing to raise Sc
zee; committee Of nine persons, with power TO
send for persons and papers, to inquire and re-
port relative to the conduct of Mr.. EWING, then
Secretary of the Interior, in regard to certain
,ases specified in the resolutions. The fifth
N the series of Mr.. RIcHARDsoN's resolutions
was the following: The committee was to in
Juire--
whether any person persons in Office. by APP
or editors of newspapers, and what papers they
edit or write for, and what their salaries"
Was there any assault here on the liberty Of
the pressl Did the Union then say the press
vas in dangerl Nothing like il. When these
resolutions were introduced, Mr. MEADE (the
same Mr.. MEADE who made, according TO the
Union, such able remarks on the liberty of the
press) moved the previous question, thus pre-
renting all amendment. The resolutions were
ldoPted-no Democrat voting against them.
Even the cable" Mr.. MEADE, and the "vio-
et'' orator Of the West, voting for them.
The Wings who voted against this commit
Tee Immediately afterwards endeavored to OBJ
ain information from the Home Department
relative TO the charges Of Mr.. RIcHARDsoY's
resolutions, but the Locofocos voted them
Town.
After the attack Of Mr.. RIcBARDsos on the
liberty Of the press, Mr.. SrAsLY, being desir-
jus to carry the war into Africa, :" offered a
series Of resolutions on the 9th Of MAY. propos-
ng that Mr.. RTcHARDsoN's committee should
llso inquire into the conduct Of certain CORE
spondents and editors of the Polk administra-
ton. The Democrats voted Mr.. Sr.SLY down,
but said they would give him a select commit
tee. This was done. Now for the attack on
the liberty Of the press. Mr.. STASLY's resolu-
ton was. as to the press, as follows:
"Re,oirsd, That a select committee Of nine be APP.
pointed inquire and report to this House what per-
sons holding Office under the last administration
clerks in any Of the public Offices auditors, heads
Of bureaus, Commissioner Of Patents or Assistant
Pdstmnsters eneral, correspondent. Of news
papers, wrote for or edited newspapers their sal.
aries and compensation for the same and who
in particular, the author of certain party es-
says signed Bundelcund,' and what Office he
then held"
Now was this more OF an attack on the liber-
ty Of the press than Mr.. RrcHARDsoN's reso-
lutionsl Mr.. RITcHIE was asked by the com
mittee 20 state what he might know relative to
the several matters referred to in the resolution
Of May 9th. lie refused to give the names Of
his correspondents. None of the Democrats
on the committee thought the freedom Of the
press in danger; no one objected To the qucs-
ton. After this answer, no one attempted 10
compel Mr. RITcHIE to betray his correspond
ents. But az Mr.. RICHARDSON thought proper
TO make inquiry relative to Mr.. Ewrro's clerks,
Mr.. STAsLY wished 10 inquire relative TO Mr.
PoLg's clerks; and il was understood that a
friend of Mr.. RITcHI, Mr.. B. =. BRowN. was
tho author Of the lives Of Cass-the same Mr..
BRowS who left this city 50 suddenly last
winter; and Mr.. STsHLY wished TO prove he
held an Office when he was writing for the
Union. In that paper Of September IL, lS4s,
appeared an article written by the author Of the
life or lives Of Cass; and Mr.. Richie was
asked whether the author Of that communica-
ton held an office under the General Govern
ment. This could have been answered without
betraying his correspondents; and this is the
whole Of the attack on the liberty Of the press
1t is the Locofoco liberty Of the press that was
in danger: when the Wing press was attacked,
we heard no complaint from the Union