Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1910-04-15
The Knocker.

We nave note from SuDScllDel'
asking us to please write the editorial
knock" against the "knocker." and
while we feel inclined to be accommo-
dating. we have to say, that the more
consideration we have given to the sub
ject, the more thoroughly confused
have we become as to what we should
say.
The "knocker," as that individual is
commonly understood, is very despis-
able individual, and we deSpiSc him as
heartily as anybody; but when we go
broadly into the subject, we are forced
to the conclusion that if we are TO
define the knocker as the individual
who is disposed to find fault with
things that do not suit him, we soon
find that there are knockers and
knockers. and that all of them are by
no means bad.
Ordinarily, the knocker is the fellow
who is incapable of thinking or doing
anything good for his fellows. and is
constantly. consistently and perpetual
ly picking flaws in the motives and ef-
forts of other people 70 do good for
their fellows, and if there is any Great
ure who is more despisable than this
kind of a knocker. we are unable TO
conceive of what it is: but somehow we
are doubtful as to whether this fellow
does as much harm to the public at
large as he does to himself.
We can probably make the idea more
comprehensive by going on to say that
there is doubt as to whether purely
0uerulous kicking against a thing of
merit does that thing of merit any
| harm. For instance, gold is gold. 1t
may be adulteratcd and alloyed with
out limit: but it is still rold, and with
the alloys removed it is as pure as ever
The knOcker may emit inSnuatiOnS
and lies without limit. and even mix
them with truth: but as to whether he
can accomplish any real. permanent
| harm, except to himself is more or less
doubtful. As we see it, the knocker Of
the querulous kind. is his own punish
ment. and he needs very little attention
1
at the hands of others.
The conditions of common ethics gov
erning the justification of knocking
are: |. Is it true? =. Is it necessary?
and under certain circumstances a
third. lis it kind" The third cOndi-
tion. however. is generally pretty close
| ly associated with the second. and the
prepOnderanCe of consideration as e.
kindness has t. be determined by right
and justice. For instance. il may not
be kind to a thief to put him in pris-
on: but to put the thief in prison is
kind to the people he might have stolen
from had he remained at large.
There are great many people. who
| hold that the knOcker must not knock
about things that are not his special
concern, and this is Il very good rule
It is a fact that more people hay" got
ten along in the world by attending
attending To the business of other p"o-
pie. But the man who would turn out
of his way to save the life of Il drown
| ing stranger. would also turn out of his
| way To warn that stranger against
having his pocket picked.
The fact alone that Il disgraceful thing
is true. does not warrant anybody in
Knocking that diSsraCeful thing. r" be
justified in Knocking there must be
some necessity for it, and the necessity
must nave some foundation i'm self pro-
lection or the protection of society
For one tu knock Il thing merely be-
always shows up badly for the knock