Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1857-09-30
TILE MERCURY AND ITS GNEyT FRIEND

the power OF the press, inconsistent with tht
freedom Of the citizen and the right of free dis
cussion.
The charge was based,
l. On the fact that the Mercury, political
journal, claiming to be the exponent of certain
political principles, and to speak for a party
holding these principles, undertook to classify
the voters in the recent election in such a way
as to exclude from this party very large nun
Der of voters holding the principles of which
that paper claimed to be the exponent, and who
had, in the last definite party issue IN this city,
belonged to the same organization with the
Mercury.
I'd On the further fact, that afterthis statement,
the columns of the Mercuy were closed to a
discussion of the correctness Of the classiGca.
ton Oh the part of its own political associates,
subscribers and supporters, whose position had,
as they conceived, been misrcpresented by pa
per protesting to speak for the party to which
they belonged.
have purposely avoided definitions and ab-
stract propositions. In the case stated, the Mer-
cury, have asserted, abused the power incident
to its position as a public journal; and, now
repeat, that such abuse, if tolerated, is unjust
towards individuals; abridges the freedom Of
the citizen, and becomes "a hateful tyranny"
This charge tho Mercury mcetsb bya " mastery"
silence, favorite policy with that paper when
doubtful of The effect of discussion upon the
opinion of its readers in regard to its own infal-
liblity. The result is, that the major part Of
the readers of the Mercury are not in any way
made aware that the charge has been made.
/" 4uai alte,um partem" has no part in the luer-
cWy's conception of fair play. The Mercury
Is {lot ;tc El.o
ginia Justice of the Peace, might be bothered
by hearing both sides" Better, therefore, to play
"Sir Oracle" and Scream and mantle like a
standing poo" in the selfcomplaeent, yet cal.
culating dignity of contemptuous silence.
But to outside barbarians, who sometimes
look into other papers than the Mercury, the
Mercury speaks by its "nert friend" and the
"type and labor" of the Standard are taxed for
the Mercury's defence.
How near the Mercury this nert friend may
be, l shall not undertake to say; but one near
enough it seems, to consider himself justified in
using personalities towards a writer who had
dealt only with the ampersoneIof apublic journal.
What are the personalities suppressed or modi-
fed by the Editor of the Standard, / shall never
inquire; still less shall question his right to
suppress and modify personalities. Epithets, ad-
dressed to an anonymous writer, are very much
q matter of taste; and though an editor may
not be as exact in regard to correspondent, as
when the language emanates from himself, ne is
right to refuse to be made the vehicle of what
is vulgar or impertinent.
The IMeyrurys neat friend, however, has been
allowed the use Of epithets sufficient to indicate
the temper Of him who speaks for the Mercury,
to the outsiders. "Cant and hypocrisy ill
tempered and Aippant," chicanery and dema.
goghsrn,2. g fusion Of Ignorance, preten-
tions ignorance" malignant" "siIIy," "inso-
lence |" These are so re Of the polite epithets
applied to one Of tic Mercuys supporters, sub.
scribcrs and late political associates, who dares
question its classification Of voters in al cleo
ton where there was conlessedly no party nomi-
nation, no party meetings, no aro'cel party ac-
ton, and no distinct issue presented. Is this
cllastc language meant to prove that the -NrrcH-
ry is no tyrant, and that the late election is the
subject OF free discussion, provided that "type
and labor are found elsewhere? Or is it meant
10 intimate that though the !lle'rny answers
not, as q Press, there is power behind the
Press, greater than the Press, which is deter
mined Lo force other ard more formidable issues
than those of mere newspaper controversy?
will inform the lHcrciuy anu its ntrt Jricaa
that The question raised is, in my opinion, one
of pnLlic right, and, SO far rs my action is con-
ccrned, intend that it shall DC settled by the
reason and the common sentiment OF trcemen,
and nal lly any personal issue between ndividu.
ais. 1t may suit the purposes Of others to d.
rcH the public mind to the consideration OF sub
iects more exciting and absorbing. have no
such object Whether have exhibited I" cant
und hyDocrisy,' sill tcmpcr' and ".fppancy,"
" "chicaieyy and demagoguism;" whether have
been q" maligaaM and sHly," and have uttered
only 'cifl,sions of ignorance; = whether to ques-
tion the positions of the Mercury be "insolence,"
or whether one and all of these pretty epithets
might not be as well applied to the Mercury and
its "ncrt .fri7l9," leave it to the public to
determine. Neither "paperpellets of the brain,"
nor that something AFTER Of which such
dread cpthets may be considered the dark fore.
shalowings, shall !" fright metrom my propriety.
styled cliusions of ignorance" they have pro-
yokcl reply. Have they been answered? "a
calm and argumcntative reply it is said, was
"madc by States Rights Democrat, presenting
the facts of the case in q plain statement" This
statement was coutrovertcd, and statement
submitted, of facts supposed to be notorious,
which has not been controverted, and which, 1t
is fair to say, cannot be successfully attacked,
A new issue, however, had been raised, and
ttat, it seems. avoiding the old one, is the sub
icct of animadyersion by the Mcrctuys friend.
When the Nrcuy declared that the "result"
of the election WAS looked to in the State as
determining the feelings and opinions of the
people of Charleston, with respect to parties i'll
the State and the policy of the General Govern,
meut"-that the majority Of GIG votes given
Mr.. Whaley settled this question that Mr..
Whaley was rotoriously the candidate OF the
State Right Democratic party when friends
of the Mercury throughout the State were con-
graduated" on the rc:ult:'-wllat did all this
mean? Surely this proelaims q triumph of
"the State Rights Democratic party Over
whom? Over those who were not Of the State
Rights Democratic party. Over those who voted
for Mr.. Barker.
If this is not "reading" the friends Of Mr..
Barker "out Of the State Rights Democratic
party so far as the Mercury had power to do
so, then do not understand the force of LAM
guagc.
The abuse of the power of the press on the
part of the Mercu1y, was the subject of my first
article published in the Courier. Upon the
second point, that is the refusal to allow its er-
rors to be corrected in its own columns, l beg
leave to revert to my former communications,
and ask whether have not avoided everything
like dogmatism whether l have not ayoidted
any attempt to lay down general rgIcs for the
government of the Press? Whethsg. abstrac.
tons have not been studously eschewed Was
the Mercury right in the case stated9 That was
the question discussed. Now differ as We may
in the abstract can any rule justify the course
of that print. 1t is in the concrete, as the logi
clans express it, that desired to have the mat
a.. nnnniInrn1