The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1860-02-08

Crescent is a complete refutation of the
Abolition cant about restricting the liber-
ty Of speech in the South. There is a
pausibility about their charges against the
South on this point which may deceive the
unrefecting, and for this reason the Cres-
cents article should be attentively read:
The Liberty Of Speech and the
Abuse of it.
One of the hypocritical cants of the
Black Republican preachers anu lecturers
at the North is, that at the South men are
not allowed to exercise full .'liberty of
speech" These agitators desire to preach
their abominable doctrines in our midst,
and circulate their mischievous pamphlets
and newspapers among our slaves; and be-
cause, forsooth, we put O rather sudden
stop to such proceedings, they hold up
their hands, roll up the white of their
eyes, and cry, "what tyrannical interfer-
ence with the freedom of the press, and
the liberty of speech" Said Henry
Ward Beecher, in late lecture at New
York, while contrasting the degree of lib
erty allowed in the two sections of the
Union, the one with the other:
"Let man go South and speak those
truths which brought the MayAower from
ngland--those truths that sustained the
Pilgrim fathers in all the troubles of those
carly days-and how far South would he
go before he would be stopped? He
might get as far as Philadelphia, but fur
ther than that he could not go. When
eminent gentlemen, skilled to the last de-
gree in making the worst appear the bet
ter cause, standing up in Boston or New
York, and ploughing the Bible from Gen.
esis to Revelation strip np the very founda-
tion Of all our laws and institutions
when they preach those doctrines, which,
if they had been believed in the days of
the Puritans, there never would have been
Puritan on Yankee soil-he was proud
of the community that would let man
say what he maintained was right, even if
they did not believe him. But, said Mr..
B., with the characteristic expression of
his eye. when we come as far South as
Baltimore, Richmond and Charleston, l
should never dare to speak at all until
had sung the hymn, "When I can read my
title clear
Now the fact may be, as stated by Mr.
, Beecher that certain range of subjects
can be handled with more freedom at the
North than at the South Perhaps, fol
, the peace and tranquility of the country
it would be better if there did not exis,
3 quite so great a disparity in this respec
$ between the two sections. But we ask
if the difference in the position and ci,.
cumstances of the two extremes of the
D Union, does not explain and justify the
difference in their policy in this matter!
J, Liberty, of speech, like every other species
of liberty. must be regulated by circum
a. stances. No man can enjoy an absolute
liberty of speech; but only so much al
4 will not interfere with the rights and hap
Q piness of those who are around him.
(. solitary man on the desert may be allowed
v to talk when he pleases as loud as b.
n pleases, and as long as he pleases. H
can say also just what be pleases. Blu
# as soon as he has single companion
: his right of utterance must submit to sue
" notifications as the existence and fai
d share of comfort of that companion re
# quire. For instance, he would have n
:. moral right to sing while that companio
o was taking his requisite sleep; nor +
say such things in the hearing of his com
panion as he knew were shocking to hi
20 moral sense, or offensive to his feelings
In short, he would be compelled to restrai
q himself in the exercise of his absolute righ
" of speech.
S; In communities, the same principle or
10 crates, but of course is more extended i
l- application. A man still preserves til
IN right of speech, but he must so modify th
l. exercise of it as not to injure his neigl
IS bors or endanger the public peace an
D. safety. Circumstances have to determir
q. the proper limits that should be set upo
it the exercise of this right, and as thes
circumstances differ in different localitie
so the just limitations of the liberty
an speech must also be different in distin,
!. K, and widely separated sections. Wh'
ne ne would be. innocent if said in Boston, b.
Vi cause injurious to nobody, might be e.
n. tremely pernicious if said in Charlesto
where it would cause painful anxiety,
y not revolt and bloodshed. Shall the e,
$, ercise of the right Of speech in Boston, |
~ -. urged then as a precedent for its exerci
Us to the same degree in Charleston? Sur
SO SO ly not. The same elements do not exi
III in the two places, and therefore the san
70 rules cannot be applied strictly to each
no them.
~ The influence of circumstances in pro
of erly modifying the absolute exercise
natural rights, is constantly exempli6e
Men have an undoubted right, for instan
,is to discuss, publicly and privately, reliy
20 ioug questions. But when, a few yea
tn ago, fanatical street lecturer at the Nor
#. by persistent abuse of the Roman Chur,
|