Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-05-10
A Free Press,

n 100 Il AOSo'
It would not do TO put a FARLEY the porter
In charge of the doors Of the castle wherein
are stationed the defenders and protectors
of the freedom Of the press. Eternal
vigilance is the price of that freedom.
Withstand the beginnings-obstap rfnciDits
should be the watchword of all true
friends of free speech. We are glad to find
that we are not alone In regarding the
Louisiana lottery cases as possessing an
Importance which cannot well be over
estimated. Before the Supreme Court OF
the United States meets next fall, the eyes
of the press Of the entire country ought
to be turned towards this subject.
One of our Virginia exchanges-the DAN
vile Regis,e-says il agrees with the RICH
SoSD DIsPAToH that the questions involved
in the aforesaid lottery cases ARE of great
Importance" The Register quotes the first
article of amendments to the Federal
Constitution. as we had done, and then
proceeds to comment upon it. We copy
$50 far as the lottery question Is concerned we
wish the law might stand, for, even II II be en-
sabridgment Of the freedom Of the press TO ex-
tory advertisements, the REGISTER Is very willing
70 surrender that much OF it's freedom Just az
Il Il willing for tho good OF morality TO surrender
r. right 20 buy and sell whiskey or TO publish
whiskey advertisements.
"f3ut II II be decided by the Supreme Court Of
the United States that Congress has a right "a
pass law excluding from the mails newspapers
which publish lottery advertisements, may not
al "a no xphf ,n1
lish liquor advertisements and theatrical adver-
tlsements--in short, all Advertisements OF what
Congress may deem TO be an immoral thing1
"Again win this sort Of prescription stop az ad.
vertisementsg May no. Republican Congress
sxciade from the mails newspapers that contain
soffensivo' Democratic articles9
ave confess that an extreme case OF this
character Is hardly within the range Of proba-
bilty, ba, 10 Is at least possible case, and as an
illustration Il serves TO show that Il were dan.
eerous thing for Congress to have the power
even by indirect legislation 10 muzzle the press.
For that reason We have never believed that the
antIotsery act, 40 far as II relates 10 the news
papers Of the country, win stand the test before
tho United States Supreme Court"
II will hardly be possible for the Su-
prene Court TO hold that there 10 no ques-
ton as to tho freedom of the press in
volyed in the Louisiana lottery cases. The
right 10 use the mails must belong equally
70 al citizens Of the United States. IL is
right that must always be kept in view.
That court cannot shut It's eyes 20 the
merits OF the cases because the lottery
owners are engaged in a disreputabls or
rather unpopular business. 1t cannot
wish the law might standn If II finds
sha' law 70 threaten the liberty Of the
press. The Register gives such cogent
reasons on this point that We suppose it
c'd not mean to say all that IS implied in
the first paragraph quoted above from its
columns. We confess that we have alwavs
favored the law excluding papers contain
ing lottery advertisements from tho mails.
- We have also always refused 10 allow
such advertisements TO appear IN the DIS.
pAsczL We shall await with interest he
lsoasiou at the great questions involved u