The Salt Lake herald-Republican. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1909-1918, 1910-02-03
BUT WHOSE FREE SPEECH?


Tt would seem from the following let
ter that our friends of the Unity nan
meeting, the professors against inter
ference with free speech, themselves
recognize the necessity for some sort
of regulation. The writer of the let |
Ter printed herewith wanted TO talk, |
and one may Judge from his writing |
that he had something interesting to
say. But his free speech was pre- |
vented.
Maybe that was right. Maybe he |
wouldn't have instructed his hearers. |
aIaybe he would have said something
the managers Of the meeting didn't
approve. But the point is: He wanted
10 talk. and they wouldn't let him.
Maybe the cities which prevented
lnbridled speech in the state of Wash
,ngton had something Of the same sort
Of reason. But read the letter:
Editor Herald Republican:
Your editorial in Tuesday morning
Herald Republican regarding the 'Iree
speech" affair in Unity hail Sunday
evening and the reference you make
therein To the good name OF those
who are trying in safe ana sane
manner to ameliOrate the condition OF
3ha working class. have moved me to
submit a few facts illustrative OF SO
ciaIfstic methods for the purpose OF
giving your readers a chance TO De
Termine whether or not the meeting IN
question was not what 1 claim It 10 be
"a farce and a humbug.
BY way of introduction 1 Will say
that 1 am a philosophical anarchist
and a workingman. Those who are
familiar with the teachings of the
school of economic reform which L
stand for know that il is opposed 10
violence. Still, thousands of people
are ignorant Of the fact that there Is
any school of anarchism other than
that of the communists, who advo-
cate the theory of propaganda by
deed" If one of the latter had said
what the socialist speaker of sunday
evening said about getting sun ana
learning to shoot straight the proDa-
bility is that he would have landed IN
iail. Yet the law was not enforced
against the socialist! What, then, are
the socialists protesting" about:
When I heard that there was 10 be
a protest meeting to defend the right
of free speech [ offered to say Few
words myself. At first my offer was
declined. but 1 eventually prevailed
upon the committee to give me htteeh
or twenty minutes. Shortly after l re-
Ceived a note from the committee 70
the effect that I could not speak under
the auspices of the Socialist party, but
would be allowed to express my ideas
in the discussion that would follow.
The reason given therefor was that
was not known TO the Socialist party
Now, it would appear that IN order 70
be known TO the party you Shoulu
first aSSaSsinate a governor or so, or
7g.vre- or
TOO cOwardly to do it yourself, and De
lieve that it ought TO be done, advise
somebody else To do it. As to the dis
cussiOn that would follow" that was
carefully forgotten, and the time given
over to a number of more or less
idiotic motions and resolutions.
Now the fact of the matter IS that
nobody is so much opposed TO free
speech as the Socialists themselves.
Free speech was not suppressed IN
SDokane A number of Wellmeanlng
hut misguided wOTkingmen advOcat 1g
more or less bureaucratic and tyran-
meal doctrines themselves were I'M
prisOned for violating a city ordinance
restricting the privilege of holding
public meetings on the street without
a permit To the Socialist free speech
meant merely free speech for himself
He will not tolerate free discussion IN
his meetings, and when. as q chairman
of q public protest meeting, he gets q
motion or resolution passed he never
thinks of calling for a dissenting vote
unless forced 10 do so by somebody
whose spirit of fairness is outraged
somebody who is perhaps not a Social
ist and who would never have
thought Of getting up q free speech
protest meeting, simply because Il
might never have occurred to him thai
free speech had been violated until M
had witnessed its violation i'm d fret
speech protest meeting.
OF course. I do not mean TO say tina
we have free speech today. II IS Ia
inevitable that we have so little fret
gpeech. But the reason that there &
SO little free speech is not that TIL
administration is against il. or ever
that the anti-anarchist Legislation
passed under previous administra
ton is against it. The reason is tina
the spirit of tyranny and suppression
fostered by the Socialist party il
against it. Respectfully yours,
GEORGE FRANKLIN AIORONG
And it win long be remembered o
the Unity hall meeting, while this mar
had something bubbling in his system
which he believed should nave beer
translated into speech, they permit
ted one of their censored and unre
buked speakers to advise citizens Il
"get guns, and learn to shoot, and Learn
to shoot straight"
We don't believe the Unity hal
meeting did any harm, because GU
people are far too leveI-headed to b.
menaced by that sort of demonstration
But we don't believe it did any good.