Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1861-10-02

they may speak and act "a they please
against the government, with perfect i'm
punity. IL is time that such dangerous
misapprehensions should be corrected
and in our remarks on this occasion We
are doing what we can TO accomplish that
i purpose. There are other offences besides
treason and misprison Of treason, which
effect the government aad its claims to
allegiance, as has already been explained
The late Judge Kane, in his charge deliv-
cred in the District Court of the United
States a few years ago, in referring to the
case OF United States US. Hanway, case
which produced no little excitement, uses
the following language:
There has been, fear, an erroneous
impression on this subject among a por-
tion Of our people. lfit has been thought
safe to counsel and instigate others to acts
OF forcible oppugnation to the provision Of
a statute-to intlame the minds of the ig.
norant toy appeals to passion and denun-
Citations of the law as oppressive, unjust,
revolving to the conscience and not bind
ing on the actions of men to represent
the constitution of the land as compact
OF iniqui;y, which it were meritorious to
violate or subvert, the mistake has been a
previous one and they who have fallen
into 1t may rejoice il peradventure their
appeals and their counsels have been hith-
erto without effect. tie whose conscience,
or whose theories of political or individu
al right forbid him to support and main
tain 1T in its iulles. integrity, may relieve
himself from the duties of citizenship by
divesting himself of his rights but while
no 1aIn wi in l. =
| remember that successfully TO insti gate
treason is to commit it,"
The views that we have Just expressed,
do not, in our opinion, conflict in the
least, With the freedom of speech or OF
the press. BY the Constitution of the u,
nited States, Congress is forbidden to
make any law abridging the freedom OF
speech or of the press, and the constitu,
tion of this State provides that the print
ing presses shall be free to every person
who undertakes to examine the proceed
lngs OF the legislature or any branch OF
the goiernment and no law shal ever be
made to restrain the right thereof. The
free communication of thought and opin-
ion is one OF the invaluable rights of man:
and every citizen may fully speak, write
and print any subject, being responsible
for the abuse of that liberty. What are
we to understand trom the words "free.
dom of speech Or of the press" as used in
the Constitution The trainers of that
instrument evidently recognized it as q
well defined, pre- existing right, for they
declare they shall not be abridged. Ger
iainly men Of learning and experience,
would not in so important paper, forbid
the a ri6gment of a right which was withN
out sny certain measure or extent for it
would involve one of the most cherishe |
rights of the citizen in maze of confusion
and obscdIity. At the time of the adop-
ton of the Constitution, in 1877, when
L;he freedom of the press was spoken Of,
the people understood exactly what it
meant-its boundaries were wei! marke ed,
and have continued So to this day. Jus
tice Blackstone in his commentaries, vol.
4 p. l56, saws, Where blasphemou' i'm,
moral, reasonable. schismatical, seditious
or scandalous libels are punished, the hJer,
gof the press. properly understood, is by
no means infrnged or violated. The lib
erty of the press is indeed essential to a
free State; but this consists in laying no
preriouS restraints upon publications, and
not in freedom from censure for criminal
matter when published. Every freeman
has an undoubted right to lay what senti-
ments he pleases bosore the public; 10
| forbiG this is to destroy the freedom OF
the press but if he publish what is i'm.
proper, mischievous or illegal, he must
take the consequences Of his own temeri-
ty. To subject the press to the restrictive
power of license, as was formerly done,
is to su oject all freedom Of sentiment to
the prejudice of one man and make HIM
the arbitrary and infallible judge of all
controverted points in learning religion
and government. But to punish any dan
gerous or offensive writings, which, when
published, shall, on fair and impartial
trial he adjudged of a perniciouS tendency,
is necessary for the preservation of peace
and good order, of government and relig-
ion, the only solid foundations of civil
liberty. Thus the will of individuals is
still left free the abuse only of that free
will is the object of legal punishment
Neither is any restraint hereby laid upon
freedom of thought or inquiry liberty Of
private sentiment is still left the dissem-
mating or making public of bad senti>
ments, destructive to the ends Of society
is the crime which society corrects. A
man may be allowed to keep poisons in
his closet, but not publicly TO vend them
as cordials, and the only plausible argu,
ment heretofore used for the restraining
the just freedom of the press, that il waS
necessary 10 prevent The daily abuse Of IL, will
entirely lose its force, ween it is shown
by a seasonable execution of the laws)
that the press cannot be abused to any
bad purpose, without incurring a suitable
punishment; whereas it never can be us
ed to any good one, when under the con-
troll of an inspector. So true will it be
found that to censure the licentious, is to
maintain the liberty Of the press. :"
Judge Addison, in his charge delivered
TO the grand juries of the 5th Judicial
District OF Pennsylvania, in 1898, makes
use of the following language Freedom
Of the press consists in this, that any man
mry, without the consent Of any other,
print any book or writing whatever, being
in this. as in all other freedom Of action,
liable to punishment, if we injure an in
dividual or the plblic Such is the libeI