The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1889-12-11
sTArEMENTFRoM N MR.. cILcnRisr
His Sermon Had No Reference to
the Portland Papers.

The following communication appeared in
last evenings Advertiser:
To the Editor Of the Advertiser:
observed by yesterdays local dailies that
my lecture on ''Some Of the Evils of Modern
Journalism" excited good deal of adverse
criticism from the newspaper fraternity Of
the city. In your editorial of last evening
am happy to note that you are In sympathy
with tie central point in my lecture. In
this editorial you indicate that referred to
admitted erils which you as well as de-
plore. Now, it was to these evils that re-
ferred and nothing else. Certainly no right
minded person will commend them, nor will
he think that they can be too severely con-
demned. | hardly think that any Of my
critics will think otherwise.
But l notice the criticisms that did not
properly discriminate between the good and
sensational papers. In reply to this have
to say:
1. That do not consider from the aim of
the discourse that such Discrimination was
necessary; for l supposed that the title Of
my lecture furnished proper discrimina-
ton, and indicated what 1 was talking about
l was directing my thoughts to an evil no
matter where 1t appeared. l was discussing
principles, and not individual papers.
y. ! dld, however, call attention to the
dignifed and honorable journals. and made
a plea for their hearty support, which fact
my critics seem to have overlooked.
3. Any one can readily see that 1t Is the
purpose Of the pulpit to note and rebuke
evils as such, leaving the hearers TO make
their own applications. 1t would be folly,
uor instance were preacher to discourse
about dishonesty, to stop In his discourse
and point out the honest people, aud say
that he did not refer to them. 1t would be
understood at the beginning that he did not
refer to them. Such things must be left for
the hearers to make their own application.
SO OF any topic, including the one that is
before US. My. remarks did not apply to
those to whom they were not applicable.
LETT 1t for the hearers to make their own ap-
plication. Therefore, the clean journals
nave no reason to consider themselves the
objects of my denunclation.
4. Moreover, l did not desire to con yey the
impression, that newspaper reporting, in
itself, Is an evil pursuit. l number among
my pleasantest acqualntances. men of that
profession, who highly esteem. and who
aIe men of character and nobility Of spirit.
My remarks obviously did not refer to them.
The critics evidently did not observe the
qualifying terms, some and many, which
employed to make all proper Determinations.
should be one Of the last persons In the
world, to degrade In the popular estimation,
any person or institution that Is upright and
honorable; instead l emphasize the fact,
that such are worthy of emulation.
8. Again, had no idea of conveying the
idea that all journals are wholly given to
sensationalism, nor that all were given to 1t
in an any degree. merely pointed out the
fact, that 1t appeared in greater or less de-
gree at different times in many of the papers
and when 1t does so appear, 1t should be an
object OF public disapproval In which you
will doubtless c0ncnr. In the criticisms It is
evident that the severity Of my Language was
miscarried to wrong conclusion, which was
not in my mind.
g. So far as the Portland journals are
concerned, / had no special reference to
them whatever; for the lecture was original
ly prepared before came to this city; and
sOa W sbs e Iog saying taat where
has been received in way that indicated
1t excited approval, so much so, that / re-
peated 1t because Of popular request tn
that effect 1t has been a source Of pleasure
TO M me to observe that our city papers belong
to that class which | called dignified and
honorable. But did not consider that /
ought to have said so in the lecture for, as l
said above, such things are left to the hear
ers to make their own applications; and
when the coat fits they can put it on for
themselves.
Z. There were several othe- features in
the criticisms, which are not worthy of ex-
tended reference. Suffice it to say, that a
truth is truth whether uttered by a man
whose locks are tlnged with gray, or youth
as he begins his life's career. And this Is
the first time in my career that have been
criticised for intemperance Of utter
ance; for being seeker after
sensatlonalism, and fer desire to be ad
vertised. The papers Of this city know full
well that have never urged myself upCI
their notice, nor have the least desire to d.
SO, | aim to do, what in my best Judgment
whether 1t be poor or good, / think that
ought TO do in my Sunday work. And an
pleased to note that my growing congrega.
tion is satisfied with my efforts In that line
so far. am glad also that many right
minded people do not, any more than l do.
see the justice of the criticisms mentioned.
Ii has been rumOred that | am to reply to
my critics from the pulpit next Sunday. Thai
l shall not do, for l do not think it neces-
sary, nor that it would be productive Of
permanent good. With this statement or ex-
PLANTATION. which l feel ought not to have
been called forth, but which is necessitated
by the criticisms, shall leave the matter
for the public to decide, aid for all who are
interested to decide according to their own
conscience whether the coat fits and whether
they ought To put it on. Therefore, hoping
that the public thought which has thus been
awakened will be productive of good to all
parties concerned, l remain.
FL. E. GILcHRIsT.