The Portland daily press., 1866-12-14
fIAII1Y PRESS.
PORTLAND
Friday Morning. December IA, 1866,
Free Discussion.

The Argus a few days ago asked wlat' III
the opinion of the Press, should be done IN
case Il man, by writing and publishing siou,''
to use Judge Story's language, disturb tue
public peace. or attempt to subvert the gov
ernment." We answered the question prompt
ly and fully. AS the Argus still complains
that its enquiry has been neglected, we are led
to examine the matter again. What notion
the Argus attaches to the words quoted above,
it is of course impossible to know. 1t would
seem however that written and published
words can hardly be held to disturb the put
lac peace unless there is some disturbance; !;
that they can hardly be regarded as effective
instruments for the subversion of the govern
ment, unless there is some actual attempt W
carry them into effect. An attempt W SUI
vert the government means treason. Du' ~"
der the American Constitution tnere Is no
such thing as treason without an actual levy
ino of war unon the United States. There
can therefore be no attempt 10 supVert the
government, within the meaning of our laws,
bv words alone. The fact OF war must be su-
peradded. before any words can become treas
enable.
If this is plain and undeniable, as it seems,
IL follows that the opinion of the Press was
asked on the subject of reasonable writing
and publishing, and we tried to make the re-
ply SO clear that the Argus could not misun-
derstand it. Our neighbor now declares him
self satisfied on that point, but wants to know
oIe 10 ax,,;t hot limit those
should be regarded who burned the Constitu'
ton in a public pow-wow on the Fourth OF
July, who declared that Constitution q cove
nant with death and an agreement with hell,
&C., &C. These absurd questions were APP
pended to its first enquiry. They are now re-
peated as the most important part OF that en-
quiry We replied to them before. We are
perfectly willing to try again. The confusion
of mind which the Argus exhibits touching
this matter, doubtless exists in other quarters
aad is sufficiently dihnsed to justify the at
tempt to introduce clearer views.
When these eccentric persons made a bon
fire of the Constitution and pronounced it a
covenant with death and an agreement with
hell. they probably meant to convey the inn
preston that they were dissatisfied with some
of its provisions. Now we believe they
had perfect right to entertain and to express
their dissatisfaction. The Argus opposes the
pending amendments to the Constitution. Ii
they should be adopted, the Argus would be
dissatisfied, and would have perfect right to
say so. at is and should be-" as we said be-
fore, ,every mans privilege to hold:and to ut
ter.his opinions, no matter how strange, nov
ell or unpopular, and the law should and does
protect him in the exercise of that right
The safety of our institutions lies in free
discussion of their principles. If any man sin
cerely believes, with Mr.. Seward, that mon
archy would be better for us, it is his right to
say so and to defend his opinion with all the
arguments he can muster Logic must be an
swered with logic. Ii our institutions are at
tackled by Argument, by argument must they
be defended. But violence must equally be
answered by violence. When we are contend
ing with armed treason, or with foreign en-
elnies, what really and plainly strengthens
the hands raised against us becomes itself a
part of the grand attach and -,.Aust he dealt
with accordingly. q
If the Argus is not now satisfied, the ques-
ton will perhaps be simplifed by the promul-
CATION of its own 'very decided views on the
subject We are curious to know what they
are. a