Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1874-09-11
paEPAR1EG FOR MORE OUTRAGEs.

la last Tuesdays issue of the
CHRoEICLE, commenting upon the
letter Of Senator Brownl0w. we took
occasion to say IS distinctly a. we knew
how, that we agreed with the Senator
in opposing any legislation OF Con-
gTess looking TO the co-edUcation of the
races. We believe, where they are
accorded good schools as nearly as
possible equal in efficiency with the
white schools, that there is no question
Of principle at issue upon which any
legislation can be based. When citi-
zens of any class are denied equal
privileges, then, d subject for legisla-
ton is afforded, but laws that seek to
compel miICd schools. where c0aI0L
school facilities are afforded, are not
based upon principLc, and hence are
always iIl-timed and perniciOus. Our
position on this question we believe is
and has been understood from the be-
ginning If we were in Con-
gress we should oppose all
such legislation, because we look
upon il as unjust and unnecessary.
Bus we did not expect our contempor
a-y to correctly represent our views on
this question. They have deliberately
lied as to cur views on this Civil
Rights Bill for months, and we expect
them to do it again. Some months
ago, when, by Misrepresentation and
mean appeals to prejudice, they had
worked up public feeling against the
blacks and white Republicans, such as
in Gibson county and SOmerville re-
suited in the massacre of sixteen color
cd prisoners, and in the latter place the
murder Of the Reeves brothers-it de
Hberately sent out what its editors
knew at the time was false,
4 statement that one Of the edi-
tors Of the CHRONICLE had
been educated with niggers, and there
fOTeOH principle favored mixed schools.
This in substance was a charge which
its editors knew was false, hut which
they pat forth for the express purpose
Of turning against US the prejudices it
had aroused. This is but a specimen
of its course towards the CHRONICLE
on this subject.
In its issue of yesterday it makes a
garbled extract from our editorial on
Senator BTOwnloW's letter, which was
explicit enough to draw from him an
endorsement Of its spirit and
representations Of his views,
and attempts to show that we oppose
the bill upon other and different
grounds from those we so plainly
stated. We suffered such misrepre-
sentation to pass during the last can
yass, but we do not propose to do so in
this. Editors, who deliberately mis-
represent their contemporaries and
then refuse to give them the benefit of
their corrections, are unworthy of re-
spectacle treatments. The editors of
the CHRONICLE, from the first, opposed
the Civil Rights Bill, but they never
proposed to stir up such a bitterness
over it as has resulted in wholesale
mGssacres in other sections of the
South, and thereby disgraced Tennes-
see everywhere over the civilized
world. If the Press and Herald had
been published any where else in the
South than in East Tennessee, its in
cendiary articles would have provoked |
just such massacres as took place at
Trenton. It's editors would at any
time provoke just such violence 20 gain |
an election or make a few dollars in
money. It's spirit has been to engen-
der bitterness and strife, and it is at
the same work again in the present
canvass. In the face of the outrages
that have taken place elsewhere, we
think sensible people will not again
be led off by its incendiary appeals.
IT was bad that those calls on Hen j