Nevada County picayune., 1889-04-17
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.

lutely essential to the maintenance of free institutions. Whatever tends to abridge or curtail this freedom ought to be condemned and discoun- tenanced by all who value the libcr- ties for which our forefathers fought. One of the most potent agencies Ill moulding public opinion and enlIght- eninp the masses of the people, Is the daily. weekly and periodical Press of country. The Press is fully as pow erful as the Pulpit-in fact, as a dis seminator of general knowledge, 1t
 is the mightiest factor of modern civilization. While the Pulpit en- lightcns and uplifts men morally, the Press scattcrs broadcast all kinds or intelligence, and like an encyclopedia, traverses the whole field of science, and puts the world under contribution to supply it's vast and varied stores. The acts and doinga of our own country, as well as the important events of other lands, are daily un- rolled before our eyes the progress of the arts and sciences, new lnven- tions and discoveries the various accidents and disasters which befall our race. aud the numerous crimes which mar their records the fidelity, or faithessness of public officials, the honesty or fraud of men in high places. are alike chronicled, and com mendcd or denounced as the ease demands; and thus a true picture of the times in which we live, of the good and the bad, is continually reproduced ana presented to our minds for consideration and action.
 Of course there is q limit to all freedom; the limit is reached when 1t borders the line beyond which the rights of others are assailed. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of person, can not transcend this line. In order to enjoy absolute and perfect freedom in all respects, it would be necessary to be isolated from mankind, like Robinson Crusoe; but. in the midst of society, and under organized governments, cer- tain portion of our personal liberty must be surrendered in order to enjoy the benefits and protection of the government in which we have cast our lot.
 Among the rights which belong to the newspapers of our country, none are more sacred or important than the right to critieise men and meas ures. A public office is a public trust and the methods employed to secure public office, as well as the principles and practices of incumb- ents after induction into office, are legitimate subjects of criticism. Hence, to punish the editor for the exercise of this right, is a gross yio- lation of the freedom of the Press, and merits the condemnation of all right-minded people,
 The recent refusal of the Senate of the United States to confirm the nomination of Murat Ialstead, editor Commercial-Gazette, as Minister to Germany, presents a fragrant viola ton of the freedom of the Press, at least so far as the six senators of his party, by whose votes his appoint ment was defeated; for, in the case of the Democratic senators, all of whom except two voted against his appointment, they had a right to vote for his rejection on account of the marked difference in their politi cal principles; whereas, his agree ment and party alignment with the six Republican senators, furnished ample reasons for their endorsement, unless untitncss and incompetency could clearly be shown, in which case their whole course in the matter would have been justiliable. But, 1t is evident that personal revenge was their motive, tor it turns out that he had severely criticised and denounced the methods and fraudulent means by which some of them had secured iutlk SIdtS ll NpiI9 9iNoS. biit liNIiNN they seized the first opportunity which occurred for wreaking their ven geance upon him. We have here an illustration of how petty spite and contemptible malice may defeat wise appointments, and at the same time put muzZle on the freedom of the Press. It is remarkable with what unanimity the papers of all parties condemn the course of these six re- calcitrant senators in this affair and no wonder, for they instinctiyely recognize the fact, that malignant and unmerited blow has been struck at the freedow of the Press, and, hence, with few exceptions, they resent this unwarrantable interfer- ence with the sacred rights of cdito- rial criticism. Let Payne and Ingalls, and Plumb, and the others, whose hands are stained with fraud and corruption in securing their elections, beware how they provoke the righteous indignation of the Press, by their attempts to throttle freedom of discussion.
 Next week we will discuss tms inn portant subject further, especially with regard to the libel laws as touching it. ."