Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1867-06-05
LETTERS

considerably and without thought Of
the serious consequences that may re-
suit. In such cases there is perhaps
less guilt, especially in young and
thoughtless persons, than when the
offense is committed BY older persons.
But is it euer right? 1t is occasionally
done playfully as a practical joke; some
times even in friendship, to warn an in
nocent person Of impending danger;
sometimes to prevent the preparation
of a wrong; but most frequently the
whole thing is the offspring of malice,
revenge, envy, jealousy, or some equally
evil passion.
Sometimes this is, as has been said,
begun simply from the love Of fun and
mischief. But in that case, though it
may seem fun to the writer, it may not
be so to the receiver; and it is impossi-
BILE to calculate the injury to sensitive
feelings and the other evils it may and
does occasion. In such cases what is
written is generally untrue, or, worse
still, a perversion Of some partial truth.
It was a good caution to his son by a
wise old man, who was himself very
fond Of fun, nerer to write a joke, as it
might so easily get into the wrong
hands, or come at a wrong time, when
the eve of the joker could not see the
mischief done nor his tongue repair it.
But to write a perrersion Of facts, even
for fun, often produces results that no
gentleman would willingingly be guilty
Of. More quarrels and duels have
eveutuated from the poison thus insinu-
ated into the mind than can be we'll
conceived.
One of the best anecdotes recorded OF
George w., when Prince Of Wales, was
his kind manner Of defeating o trick Of
the kind referred to. A very vain man
received a card of invitation to dine
with him. 1t was SO regularly drawn
up though q hoax, that it secured him
admission. But when the Prince came
to see his guests, he discovered that
a. there was one mistake :" and on pro-
ducing his card this was still more
clear. But the Prince insisted on his
remaining, on the ground that every
gentleman WAS welcome to his house,
and so the trick was defeated. Even in
cases OF this kind there is more or less
envy, jealousy or malice, and frequently
no. 8 little cowardice. But, the Post
remarks, when an anonymous communi-
cation assumes the character, not Of a
Joke, but OF seriousness, it is a much
more reprehensible matter. Even if
what is said is all strictly true, q ques-
ton at once suggests itself as to the
mo,iye-why be ashamed TO avow au-
thorship, unless il is something tho
writer has no right to communicate
Perhaps it istold only to woundin a most
dastardly, cruel manner But they who
will do this seldom conine themselves
to the truth. They cannotif they would.
Their jaundiced eyes will discolor every
thing, and the person written to has no
means of proving or disproving for him
self what is said. If the recipient is q
wise man, therefore, he takes no notice
Of it in action, although it may and
must torment him with suspicious Of
many Of his friends.
Sooner or later tho author is almost
certain to be detected. No man can SO
disguise even their own handwriting
but that the crossing Of at or the dot
Of an i. or some such trivial peculiari-
ties may afford a clue. Much less can a
person disguise circumstances. When
Professor Webster was tried for the
musder of DR.. Parkman, a considerable
portion Of the evidence that brought
home the crime to him, was the various
anonymous attempts he had made to d.
vert the search into wrong directions.
The only plausible case Of justifabls
anonymous communication is whore the
party writing acts from deep friendship,
to pu. some innocent person on his
guard and further justice, having no
malignity against any one. But this
will rarely be believed, aud then why
not avo authorship? Nothing but
some great personal danger to the au-
thor could justify o c%oncealment BY an
honorable man. The wantof an author
ity ought generally to prevent such a
communication receiving the attention
the truths it contains would naturally
demand. Even in var friendly infor-
nation so conveyed ought to be Of facts,
all easily and clearly a~scertainable,
their ocn vouchers-not differences or
r~easonings or surmises, without name or
proof. There is one evil in almost all
cases of really anonymous communica-
ton that cannot be avertcd-i. e., that
the wrong person is for a time SO often
suspected. He who receives it knowIthat
some one did it, and may suspect twenty
of his best friends; become estranged
from my Of them, or revenge himself on
wrong man. In fact, the community is
h~arrassed, insulted, divided, and justice
defeated, perhaps all by a little want Of
candor and courage on the part Of n
person.
But there is one description Of evils
that should always be borne in mind by
the person who sits down deliberately to
write an anonymous letter intended to
make trouble. It may destroy tho love
and confidence existing between parent
and child or husband and wife. It may
utterly destroy the happiness of whole
families, and break up homes that were
peaceful and joyful until the pernicious