The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1864-04-14
HOW are we Governed

i How are we Governed!
The papers within few days have con
tanned two curious announcements fer :
free country. One stated that the Gov.
ernmcnt officers in an Eastern city had
seized all the locomotive engines in ma.
chine shops 70 Government use The
other, that a General in peaceful Western
city had prohibited in his department the
circulation of a newspaper which he did
not like, and which is published in New
York city
1t the Government cannot procure en-
gines for services on its railways it must of
course seize them by force and pay for
them at leisure. But have we reached that
point? 1t would surely better comport
with the principles Of free Government
like ours to pay any price for the manufac-
ture or purchase Of an article from citi-
zen, rather than to seize it by an arbitrary
force. There are machine shops in the
country where the Government could have
plenty of engines built, and if the time is
pressing, then the fault lies in not havin =
previously provided for the emergency.
The other case presents darker aspect
The suspension Of newspaper is the ex-
ercisc Of the highest power of sovereignty
Ii Is the absolute will of the government
opposed to the freedom of popular discus
sion. That freedom may be exercised to a
criminal degree and the editor may have
thus become a criminal. If SO, he is per-
sonally amcnable to the laws If he has
not committed criminal offence, for which
he can bo arrested, tried and punished
then he is not to be punished In any
event newspaper is entitled to free circu-
lation, unless it contains matter properly
Objectionable. The suspension of tie cir
culatlon of a newspaper is proceeding un-
known to our laws. The punishment of
libel or sedition, or even conspiracy. is not
against the newspaper but against the
person of the editor This distinction
ought to be kept constantly in view. The
seizure and destruction of the copies of a
paper containing q seditious article may be
proper under certain circumstances. This !
may be the duty Of military officer at the
seat of war. But the issue ola prospective |
order against newspaper, by name, pro-
Tossing to see what it will contain. is vio- !
lation Of law and an offence against free !
principles. If this is to be allowed, the !
changes of administration in state and
country would result in successive orders |
all newspapers, first of one and
then of another party 1t would result in
making the law Of newspaper editing en-
tirely a subject of official whims.-Whe
an officer does not like what he has seen
in a newspaper, he takes it for granted that
the future issues of the paper will equally |
displease him, and he orders its discentin-
uance. This is the end Of free discussion.
The denial of the use Of the mails to oppo-
sition newspapers has cost our country
millions of dollars and thous auds of lives.
The first step in tyranny was to crush free
discussion; and, as consequence, the Ad-
ministration went at gallop on the road
to ruin. 1t is time to stop. Those seiz-
ures of engines and suspension of newspa-
pers SAVIOR of despotism. They do not look
wellin free America They disgrace u.s.
n. Y. journal of Commerce.