Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1880-08-25
Free Speech North and South

The NatChez (MlsS.) democrat gives
quite little essay upon the right OF free
speech as exercised, not In the South
alone, but at the North and in England
1t finds fault with a "new kink,'' which il
says "the JOHN LYNCH radicals have de-
vsed, which Is "to get up political meet,
ings under the name of colored picnics
and then turn them into political meet.
ings." "The plan," it says, "is to attach
to them simply the idea OF social assem-.
blages, and thus ensure the absence of any
but radical white men," and goes on
to describe one of these meetings, gotten
up ostensibly as picnic, but really for
the dangerous purpose of disseminating
radical doctrines. Mr.. LYNCH and a
party named HARRIS were present at the
meeting, and made radical speeches, but
it seemed that they were not to be left to
the enjoyment of their own meeting, but
one Cox, colored Democrat, a warm
friend of General CHALMERS, had snug.
gled himself in and insisted upon reply
ing to the radical speeches. He was told
by "the LYNCH strikers" that they did not
want to hear any Democrat, and the &C.
count says, "Cox would doubtless have
been hooted down had it not
been for the efforts of white
men on the ground" who seemed to be
conveniently on hand. "If the majority
of the audience had been Democrats"
says this Bourbon organ, "and had inter-
rupted LYNCH's speech, we have no doubt
that letters would have gone to his friends
in the Northern States giving the most
exaggerated accounts of the outrage
and bowling about free speech being de-
MED him in the South. Nothing gratifies
radicals like JOHN LYNCH more than con.
veying to his Northern friends the idea
that the Democracy of his own State, the
intelligent people from whom his own
race must naturally expect elevation and
education, are a set of ruffians and bull
dozers, and far inferior people to his
Northern friends. LYNCH and his friends
could not expect that they would be al
lowed to utter these or any other false and
injurious statements before all audience
when the abused class are present, with
out interruption" This then is the
Southern idea of political campaign;
that Republicans at least are not to 0e
permitted to make speeches in exposition
of theis own and their opponents politi-
cal views, without having some of their
opponents present to answer their argu.
ments on the spot, whether they desire to
hear or pot. But this partisan philoso-
pher, the 9 itor of the Democrat, goes on
and Celebrates his ideas of free speech in
a way that will strike the Northern read.
er as somewhat peculiar. He says:
And In this connection we will say, in reply to
the charge that free speech is not allowed in the
south, that free speech is not tolerated to an
furious extent In any country. The right OF ex-
pressing an opinion belongs equally as much to
ments are uttered which do not meet tho approval
Of an audience, they have the same right TO ex
press their disspproval as the speaker has TO
utter the obnoxious sentiments. This is done
far more in the north than in the south, and
more in England than t Is In America. Let an
actor say somt thing which is disagreeabe to his
sudel ce and he Is Kissed off the stage, or IL a
public speaker does not r>fect the views OF his
hearers he is hooted down and sometimes even
chance Of being listened TO respectfully, and he
may rest assured, in any couu airy, that II ne an
tagonizes the views o: his sudienca he will hear
expressions Of their d:sappyoval II j. L. Lynch's
crowd on Ship Island had been strong enough,
Mr.. Cox would never have had an opportunity to
speak. If the opposition to Democracy had been
as strong as Lynch wold have II, no Democratic
speaker would have 8 hearing. Bat for una ely
Lynch does no. have the Influence once welded
by Dave Young In Concordla parish, CT he, as
Dave did on one memorable occasion, would have
called on his votares TO follow Hammer" and
would have left his opponent to talk to vacant
space. These old time tricks must be watched
by the Democracy and steruly rebuked,
The idea ,h.t free speech is not tolerat-
ed to AN injurious extent" in any coun
try, is a nice distinction. Who are to be
the judges as to whether the free speech
is injurious, and what remedies are to be
applied? Plainly it is to be left to the
Southern Democracy t. decide what shall
be tolerated in the way Of free speech in
that section of the country, and the RENE.
dies are to be the raising of an uproar,
the playing of bands, etc, to drown out
the free speech, as was done in Alabama.
or the forced presence OF some one 10
insist upon answering the arguments con.
tanned in free speeches. 1t would not do
to let the poison go out unaccompanied
by the antidote. The givngs out of this
Bourbon organ are only confrmatory of
what The Republican press has all along
claimed, that there is really NO freedom
of opinion in very many portions OF the
South, and that the whole policy is to
suppress the utterance of any political
doctrines which do not square with
Democratic ideas. Political intolerance
is the reigning idea, and it crops out in
every movement from mob violence and
murder, down to social ostracism and
neighborhood persecution. There is no
freedom there such as is enjoyed in the
North. Whoever opposes the dominant
- L