The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1857-09-10

ciety," the first meeting of which is to be held
next May in New York.
COURTESY TO POLITICAL OPPONENTS.
The American political press has no envia-
bic reputation abroad, and in some parts of this
country it does not hold a very dignifed posi-
ton in the public estimation. 1t is not that
journalism in this country is lacking in talent,
in graphic force, or in influence. Nowhere are
newspapers more readable, nowhere, we think,
with perhaps one or two exceptions, is more tai
ent displayed in journalism than upon some of
our frst-class papers. But there is a lack of
courtesy among the newspapers of this country.
This is more especially true of the political
journals, which are often made the vehicles of a
coarse personality, not only disgusting to oppo-
nents, but to friends, and injurious to the cause
identified with the journal deficient in polite
ness. 1t is well known fact, that many jour-
nalists in their columns deny the claim of
political opponent to the courtesy which would
readily be accorded him in the street, in the
parlor, or-even at the political meeting. We
think this is a mistake. Truth is to be told
must be told-but it must be done with courte-
sy, and with constant endeavor not to impugn
motives, where it is consistent with Justice. The
utmost charity, it seems to US, should be exer-
cised, when an opponents motioes are canvass
ed, if they are ever to be made the subject of a
discussion. But this rule is violated by a large
class of journals, with more or less frequency.
We were led to these remarks by noticing
the general tone of nearly all the Southern
journals, and some of the more ultra Pro Slave
~ Northern journals, when discussing Slavery
or the Anti-Slavery men of the North. These
journals never allow for a moment that their
opponents are gentlemen, that they may be
honest or that they deserve a particle of
courtesy. The journals to which we allude are
not unknown, uninfuential, and published in
corner. They are the leaders of the great
South; they are rich, powerful, and can afford
to be generous. They are edited often by men
of fine talents, and who are able to appreciate
an argument, and to know gentleman when
they meet him. These journals are, some of
them, published in the great cities of the South,
Jas well as North, and in the capital of the
nation.
What is the treatment these journals bestow
upon their political opponents-the Republi-
cans and the Anti-Slavery people of the North?
The former are always Black Republicans, are
dishonest, having the nations ruin at heart, or
they are mad. The latter, the old fashioned An
ti-Slavery people, are lunatics and knaves are
unfit to associate with decent men and women
in good society; and, if caught in the slave
States, worthy of the gallows, or the milder pun.
ishment of tar and feathers. We appeal to any
nails, if this is not fair idea of their general
tone, when discussing the Republicans, or the
AntiSlavery population of the North.
The Republican party i0 great party in
this country. 1t holds in its ranks many of the
finest scholars, the noblest orators, the most
devout divines, the most popular poets and
authors of the land. 1t reckons among its
hosts, judges, (of the Supreme and of the State
Courts distinguished lawyers, and men of po-
sition and wealth. So that, judging it after
the manner of men of the world, it is not a con-
temptible party. Why, then. should not its
members be treated as If they were possibly
gentlemen, however mists en- in their opinions
Is anything to be gained by stigmatizing the
members of such a party-the only living OPP
position party to the Administration-as knaves
and disunionists? Cannot the leading journals
of the Administration afford to set an excel
lent example to its followers, by treating its po-
litical opponents with courtesy?
1t is by no means because there are talented
or distinguished men in the Republican party,
or among the Anti-Slavery people of the North,
that we claim this courtesy; it is simply because
they are men. Were they without position,
without talent, with nothing but honesty of mo-
tive, no political party could, with any degree
of decency, refuse to acknowledge them as up
right, though mistaken, men. Acts may be
characterized, if of certain nature, with sever
ity. A man unquestionably guilty of certain
acts is justi6ably condemned but a political
journal advocating one set of views has GER
tainly no right to characterize the members of
another great party as dishonest and vile. This
is the essence of blackguardism. And it is
this habit, into which certain journals have fall
en-, which has sunk the reputation of Amer.
i