Carson daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1873-1877, 1876-01-22
THE WILCOX CASH
FAIRLY STATED.

liz commenting on tho Pununs.lpg of
! SOmers by Wilcox in thu Sacramento
Senate Hall the other day. We said in
| effect that 4 newspaper correspondent
was guilty OF quite az great an outrage
( as THAI pablo man would perpetrate
were he 10 revenge his abuses ty cudgel-
/ ing his defsmer- The Sacramento Rec
ord seems To- nave arrived a; Lot dis
similar conclusion. IN Thursday : issue
81 that paper ~s fipi the following:
The attack made by Asso;nhivman
Wilcox upon the correspondent IF the
San fraucI.co Chronicle las evoke! much
CONNIE ni. bat from the veTy nature Of
tie case great deal OF tits has been
partial aDJ uarroW- When n Journalist
IS assaulted lycauss Of something lie has
ss.d there IL always, or at l..St usually,
"a tendency among other journalists 10
rush 70 his defense. and to make COM
mon cause aSaiust the a-sailant. We
10 Lot intend t. follow this custom. hut
to inquire c..!tll.y Into the merits ni the
case. The affair naturally divides into
two principal heads: the first is the Ques-
ton of the proVoeAiion: the second ie
Tire mode Of retaliation. IL will clear
away much confusing matter II at the
ousse, We lay down the proposition that
journalist cannot possess. in his pour
naIstIc capacity. any right If criticism
IN excess ui iaai which Is permissible 10
him A. "a simple citizen. Fearing this
truth In mIai W have L. .,sA ourselves
wle;L-: this CORES ponjsnt did or not,
III crlticlslBc Wilcox. ovsIe'ep the limit
Of permissible language M-E.Ds: fur
Their keep before Us the fact thu; tbIS Vas
not case 'f deliberate ami fortified
accusation; tk-t No. specific ans: sUs-
;aine! charges were pIeflTFsl against
the legislator: tat that he ~ss assaulted
IN general say, su far s. ,h- public
could sse WILTON; any Justification, and
IN u raauIIs. Suggesting be- desire 10 sub-
serve public emf N-1t 80 are In H.
qUise whether th- lau.uaee used va.
such "a one man may U.s. II the fac" Of
another, without provoking a tr-.ch y.
the peace. We 10 not hesitate t. assert
that II was hot tins moderate kind Of
language, bat That it va. abusive, per
son.!iy insulting. e1a.peI fting and in
tn. prsS-Ec-. -: another unless he Has
deliberately seeking an alteration. The
manner Of tue provocstion then vas |
such as TO remove 1t altogether from the |
category % those attacks upon public /
n1en which Ii is The duty Of the pres.
and public alike TO defend, because they I
are founded in Il recce-,! fer the general !
welfare. Briefly, TIE correspondent. I
abused his opportunities. and made an .
unwSrrautable and causeiess attack upon .
a member Of the Legislature. As 10 the |,
method Of the retaliation. We are very |
eInph stiealIy o. the opinion that 1t was
cowaraly, brutal and foolish. 1t was
cowardiy. because the assa.!ed was taken /
unawares and at disadvantage. 4: Was !
brutal, because all recourse 10 violence .
Is SO. IL WAS foolish. because the salts. ,
faction required could by 10 possibility /
be obtained through such means. On n
candid review Of the facts. therefore, We (
must conclude that there i. hare Eo oeca-
sion for a dispute concerning the rights .
OF the press. since the assault was pro- ,
vokeI hy Il fragrant transgressI0u Of |
journalistic pIopriety. lnRsmuch. more
over. as the revenge taken VA. as repug /
nant to civilized views as the prOyoca- :
ton. ~ think the disposition of the case
uay with general appropriateness he re-
mandei TO the Courts which are charged
with jurisdiction in breaches of the
criminal law. And perhaps, on the
whole, the Senate would do well to re-
frain from eBtaBghng itself IL what is
anything but a credisahle business, from
eli her side of II.