The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1910-06-22
UNsEEMLY CRITICISM.

II j Us
Ordinarily the r .viaw does not
concern itself about cri icisms Of pub.
lie officials or private citizens il
other newspapers and as long as such
criticisms are Legitimate. il should be
Of no concern Of this paper, but when.
Z as in last week g issue Of the Bulle.
] tin, the editor seems to have lost all
control of himself and INDUCED in
criticism and used language about the
President. which descended to the
level of ind scency. it's time to pro-
test. The intemperate attack of the
editor upon President Taft approaches
a climax in ccurseness. One does not
have to be q Taft Republican, or re-
i publican at al ITO resent the gross re-
ference to the President Of the United
States. It is safe to assert that no
self respecting democrat in the COM
munity can feel otherwise than dis
gusted with the language employed
The criticism was an assault upon re-
finement and q libel upon our civili-
cation. II the editor was seeking
notoriety, he can flatter himself that
he has secured it. but it is notoriety
without honor. It is limited that he
was encouraged in making the attack
by certain republicans. We deny the
insinuation. No one who enjoys the
distinction of belonging to any poll
ticsl party, inspired it. We challenge
the mention Of the name Of a single
gentleman who has had the temerity
to congratulate the editor upon his
effort. It is not a question as to
what provoked this libel upon the
President, the question is. shall this
kind Of journalism be continued with
out q protest? The innocent cause
Of the attack upon the President was
the fact that q neighbor of the editor
was on Tuesday Of last week APP
pointed. by the President, postmaster
of Denison. for the third time. Under
ordinary circumstances, this would
have been cause for congratulstion
rather than vitriolic assault upon
both the postmaster and the President
appointing him. just why the an
nouncenent Of the action Of the Pres-
ident induced the editor Of the Bulle-
til to lose his head cannot be ac-
counted for upon any other theory
than that he il still . little jealous
u ahs postmaster. and is not able to
regulate his conduct in q becoming
manner. We can understand why,
during the time that Mr.. Meyers was
in competition with the editor Of
the Bulletin in newspaper work. that
NJ. Caswell felt unkindly toward
him. knoWi ing as We do that compe-
1tition 10 source Of annoyance with
him. but 40 long % Mr.. Meyers il no
longer editor Of the paper, and has
practically retired from newspaper
work, this feeling Of evaporation on
the part Of the editor Of the Bulletin
should subside. We are sorry FOR Mr.
Csswell and regret that his temper got
the better Of him and led him into
doing this vindictive thing. II is
true that Mr.. Meyers was honored
BY receiving the appointment to the
Office Of postmaster BY President Nc
Kinley. and after service of four
years was appointed for another term
BY President Roosevelt. and upon
his record being satisfactory. he has
now been reappointed by President
Taft in accordance with practice
which obtains to favor the retention
in Office Of public officials who are
,dischasigng their duties in sails.
factory manner. This endorsement
by the three distinguished Presidents
might we'll have induced word Of
commentator from the Bulletin.
rather than an exhibition Of brutal
hostility. The en- iorsement Of the
three Presidents is sufficient to over
come the charge Of dishonesty made
by the Bulletin Of last week. Wheth-
ert the appointment is confirmed or
not. it must be something Of COM
fort to the postmaster to realize that
his candidates. have passed must.
er with the three great Presi-
dents. But the question for consider
stion IL not whether q confirmation d
the appointment shall be made. neither
ia it question who shall finally BIZ
determined upon for postmaster at
Dsnison. The question is. can news,
paper indulge in criticism of the
President Of the United States and
use language concerning him which il
used in the description of domestic
animal, would be Disgrace. The
Review entertaines nothing but 9
kindly feeling toward the editor Of
the Bulletin, and under no circum.
stances could be led into controversy
Of personal character respecting
anyone connected with the manage.
ment Of the paper. but it does not
i propose, that without pro.