The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1905-08-30

where we print the letter Of the Rev.
Melton Clark complaining that tie
Times was renaiss in its duty because
it failed to emblazon in it's columns
the names of prominent citizens who
were arrested and punished in Flor
ence for Sitting in quiet little
game
why did you not in publishing the
records of the police court give all
the facts in connection with this law
lessness?' inquiries Mr.. Clark, and he
proceeds to dress down the Times in
merciless fashion The Times makes
meek reply. 1t tells of the pressure
brought to bear by other prominent
citizens and intimates that in sheer
good nature it violated its rules and
shirked it's duty. Shrewdly the Times
pleads guilty and promises no more
9'to leave undone those things that it
ought to have done"
This settles the matter as to the
newspaper, but what about the
preacher? While the newspaper is
equipped to give publicity in a larger
way than the pulpit and has response
bilities in the same measure, does it
follow that the pulpit may unload the
whole task of reforming by means Of
publicity upon a newspaper.
! In Martin Luther's day there were
no newspaper organs and the little
monk nailed his -neses on the cathe-
dral door. Is there no cathedral door
in Florence? Suppose Mr.. Clark, a
minister of the highest standing in
his community, had discovered the
names of these gentlemen gamblers
and had sent them in communica-
| ton over his own signature to the
! Florence Times and the Times had
refused to print it, would he have
been justified in concluding that all
malefactors were immune from ex-
posure in Florence? Admitting the
would it have been for him to fold
his hands? Would he not have
seized the opportunity to discipline
both the gamblers and the news
paper at the same time by holding
them up to public condemnation?
While the "police duty" of the
courageous newspaper is not to be
avoided, we deny that the clergy, or
even the private citizen, can shift the
whole burden upon its shoulders. #
the protection Of good morals in
Florence demanded publicity as an
additional penalty for these evil
doors, the preachers and private citi-
zens Of the town are not excused be-
cause Of the faithlessness of a news
paper. 1t frequently happens that the
newspaper has far more to lose by
| becoming public prosecutor than
has an individual, and the popular
| impression that it is the exclusive and
particular duty Of the press to make
these sacrifices is wholly groundless.
The Florence Times is a newspaper
Of character and of more boldness
than the average, but the people of
Florence cannot expect it alone to do
all Of the unpleasant things that
should be shared by good citizens
generally. We suspect that if the
Rev. Mr.. Clark had sent the commun-
ication that we have suggested, there
by contributing his own personality
to the performance of a public duty
and holding up his own end Of the
log" he would have shamed the
Times into coming to his assistance.
But Mr.. Clark, along with the, editor
Of the Times, seems willing to loll in
the luxury Of silence.
What we have said is not on ac-
count of any special Importance Of
the incident, but because it offered
an opportunity to point out what is
frequent inconsistency on the part of
the man who is running the news
paper.
l
| Senator Mannino of Snmtar hoe