Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1872-10-19

THE WORLD" ON PERSONALITIES IN
AMERICAN JOURNALISM,
The World says:

AMERICAN JOURNALISM.
The World says:
False statements, sophistry, deceitful
CLOSES in arguing political issues, ore
as reprehensible as falsehood and cal
umny in the personal structures on pub
lie men which are inseparnble from the
politics of a free country. Personalities
are not Objectionable, but only unjust
personalities, in the same manner that
the free canvassinS of principles and
measures is not improper, though mis-
statement of facts or unfairness in ar-
gument is always to be condemned.
Personal discussions of the character of
public men never deserve censure mere
ly because they are personal, but only
when they violate candor or transgress
Justice. Within the limits of truth they
are as allowable as ony other species of
political controversy. In other words,
facts are justifiable, but not improved
aspersions.
*
Personalities always have made, and
always will make, great figure in the
politics of free countries. The infam-
GUS Tammany Ring could Dever have
been overthrown without vehement per-
sonal attacks on it's individual members.
Barnard Cardoza and McCunn were
driven from the seats of justice they dis
graced, only by personal exposures.
Who sympathises with the notorious
Whittcmore because he fell the victim
of personal attack? Benedict Arnold
and Aaron Burr were ruined by person.
al assaults, and impartial history endor-
ses the justice of their condemnation.
1t is absurd and childish to raise an out
cry against personalities, without stop
ping to inquire whether they are found
ed by justice and supported by facts.
Our extolled Declaration of Indepen-
dence is, in the main, n long personal
attack on George III. If we may dis
cuss the personal character of Tweed,
Connoly and Barnard, why not also of
Hartranft, Cameron, Butler, Lee, Stock
ings, Cakes, Amcs and Grant?
Every American citizen rccollects the
famous three que stions by which Jcffer-
son professed to be guided in his ap-
pointments: Is he honest?--is he
capable ?-is he faithful to the Constitu-
tion?" They are all personal questions;
honesty, capacity and fidelity, being
strictly personal qualifications. An en-
quiry into the character of men for
whom they are asked to vote is the duty
of every citizen; and as they look to
the public press to guide their Judgment,
the press cannot discharge its proper
functions with ,ut giving much space to
kind of discussion which may be de-
nounced as personalities" Eulogies
of candidates, or recognitions of their
good qualities, are as much personal as
their opposites, and these kinds of per-
sonalities are never objected to. But
it is quite as important to the public
welfare that bad candidates should be
exposed a. that good ones should be
commended. If a public candidate or
an officer is dishonored or incapable,
it is the clear duty of political journal
knowing this to be the case, to set forth
in pungent manner the facts by which
the unfitncss is demonstrated. There
is no good reason to denounce or de-
precate personalities i'll politics, SO long
as damaging facts are not stated with
out evidence, and wanton aspersions
are not substituted for fair inference.