Burlington tri-weekly hawk-eye. [volume] (Burlington [Iowa]) 1852-1855, 1855-01-27
THE IxDEpExDENr EDITORS.

There il so much good sense in the follow
ing from an editorial in the National Era,
that we are tempted to adopt its sentiments
as our own.
There Is one lesson we have not yet learn
cd; and that is to defer to popular sentiment
Tor Il popular impulse when it contravcned
our own sense Of what is right. 1t isa com
mon remark of foreign tourists, that Ameri-
cans are wanting in individuality, and indie
pendcncc of character; that Public opinion
I IS despotic among US, and few have the c0ur-
age to confront it, What they imagine is
characteristic Of Americans is vice Of all
communities where facilities exist for concen
tratng public opinion, upon the action of
individuals. Where there is no free press
no wide diffusion Of intelligence, where So
ciety ls divided into castles, isolated and
inaccessible TO each other, what we call
public opinion, hardly exists, but instead If
it, each caste has its own opinion, or esprit
de corps, which is as despotic in its require
mcnts as the public opinion of democracy.
Without dwelling however on this point,
or comparing ourselves with other nations,
it is sufficient to know that there is lament
able want of personal independence among
Us. No where is this more manifest than
among politicians, and in the political press.
How few Of our public men have been able
to maintain their independence of party, or
to defy what appeared a strong Public Sent
iment! and how many editors have the cour-
age to think their own thoughts, and speak
their own words at the hazard of losing caste
with their party, or Of alternating patronage?
Two things are necessary; first, TINT the
Press should have more faith in Truth and
the People; secondly, that the People should
be less cxactrng and intolerant. Servility
on one side, and intolerance on the other, act
and react upon each other, asravatng the
evil of both. The more timid an editor the
more intollcrant his readers; anG their in
dulged intolerance increases his timidity; so
that az last instead Of being teacher,
counsellor, an independent advocate he be-
comes the uncomplalning slave Of the public.
Now neither the public, nor a party, has d
right to exact that the Press shall be a mere
record Of its opinions and edicts. Ii has no
right to demand acquescence in all its views
or Impulses, and movements, as a condition
to the bestowment OF its patronage. The
subscribers to newspaper if they approve
lis gen raj cour on vital questions, if they
are tr ated by it with manly courtesy aid
liberality, have no right TO withdraw their
patronage because its editor, in the exercise
of his Independent judgement, differs from
them on particular question. liz they do
withdraw it for such a cause, they are prac-
tlcally enemies to the liberty of the press.
enemies to the right of individual Judgment
and show themselves bigois not lovers of the
Truth. On the other hand, IN editor who
forbears to speak on practical question,
lest he may OFT nd or ALLEVIATE his subscribers
understands neither the duty of his position,
nor the power Of truth nor the laws Of human
nature. Ii fully persuaded in his own mind
that the opinions he holds are true, let him
be assured that he stards not alola,
that many more will sympa, hse wit
with, and sustain him, than his timid
advisers predict. Besides there is a
sentiment in human nature. which responds
to a bold manly appeal to its candor. a
coward invites insult courageous man COM
mands respect. At all events no man is fit
for the responsible duties of the editorial
profession, who is not willing in the last re-
sort, to sacrifice his press, aye, and his life
rather than surrender the right to utter freely
his own opinions apon all subjects, or rather
than keep back what he believes to be vital
truth upon vital questions.