Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1897-11-16
UNRELIABLE ADVICE,
The Anonymous Correspond.
ent Busy With the
Bridge Subject
CONCENTRATIONS ARE PLENTIFUL.


In Print Under snu.bedy Elsss Re-
spossib,lisy- Massraal FOR the waste
Pspsr Bs.kes n the majority Of
Cases.
Because he has not been heard
from, il does not follow that the
snony nous correspondent has failed
to impress his views on somebody
relative to the bridge and terminal
project. THE ARGUS, ct least, has
been favored with a diversity of
opinions on the subject, with the
idea tn the part OF the writers
doubtless that they would ali have
the satisfaction Of seeing their views
in print above fictitious signature.
Ut the varied documents which have
come to TIE ARGUS of late on this
particular topic not one has borne
tie actual name Of the author, either
for the satisfaction Of the public or
Of the paper. which it has been as.
srmed is TO accep. the resp cnsibility
for the opinion expressed. The con-
sequences has been that the commu.
oicsiieus without exception have
found their way into the waste paper
basket. They could not be returned
10 the authors, as they were I'm.
known.
The ARGUS has not infrsquently ex-
pressed itself on::the subjecs Of anony-
nous correspondents. 1t hes al
ways declined to permit the use Of
its columns for any communication
Of personal nature or involving an
attack upon an individual where the
writer was not courageous enough to
append his own signature. To do
otherwise would be to shield o COW.
ard, even il his name were known to
.he editor. There are times, how
ever. when matters of general mo.
ment are being discussed, especially
shose where they affect public i'm.
prOvsments when an Interchange OF
views is productive CT the highest
good. and ut such times the
newspapers may very pro perly
become tire forum for such dis
cussion. 1t is not essential
either shat those who participate
10 such discussion iced be known to
tie public by their correct names.
But somebody must know as some.
body is TO be held responsible, and
that somebody, in the case where q
newspaper is used, should be the
editor thereof. A citizen who thinks
enough Of his views to have them
published ard expects others to re.
spect them. should not have any hes
isancy in entrusting his name to the
paper whose use he eeeks. Would
al individual expect an alder
man at the present time to
he influenced by an auony-
NOUS communication addressed to
himP Yet he might en- the other hand
&C greatly influenced by a commune
cation from someone he knew-eveo
II the letter were written in conf
tence. ard good faith. So with those
who influence the public from the
rostrum. The effect of public ad-
dress would be Of listle effect beyond
the novelty of it,if transmitted to the
audience through q phonogrAph
without knowledge Of the identity Of
Tie speaker.
Correspondents should BE Known.
So it is with the newspaper CORE.
spopdent. He should be known at
least to the paper which presents his
views. IL the Communications which
have come to The ARGUS there have
been personal attacks, imputations,
and suggestions. And there has
osen some wisdom. but The ARGUS
has been compelled to adhere to its
established rule OF Withholding the
publication of anonymous communi-
cations, and this article may serve as
en- explanation Of the non-sppearance
Of communications which may be
clearly regarded as OF irresponsible
sources.