The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-06-16
py CHARLES FERGUSON.


| III newspaper men were subject TO
governmental prosecution and posi-
Bile imprisonment for every honest
mistake they might make In their crit
I icism of an administration the govern
ment would soon cease TO be demo-
cratic.
/ Few journalists would be found to
I take the Inevitable chances or error
and OF the failure of their witnesses
/ The lure OF the financial and social
rewards of the newspaper business
would lie altogether on th~ side OF n
studied sycophapcy In the praise and
promotion OF the political paving as
they exist. and the money pawns that
stand back OF them
| There would be but short run ha elk
! 10 that political absolutem~--that wor-
ship of power In spite every defect
! OF t:ti~- from which modern society
sssmsd too academic.
Shall NO say then that the thing
to do 10 TO declare for absolute free
dom OF speech and print. and to so
up 10 flaming Indignation against every
restriction OF tongue or pen?
/ heard brilliant man make a.
speech TO this effect at a club dinner
Of literary men in New York the other
day.
| The speaker called himself an an
archist' indeed. but his doctrine was
not SO very different from thar ex.
pounded SO classically by John Milton
/ in his famous essay, "On the Liberty
of Unlicensed Printing
And it was hardly 10 re distinguish
ed from notion entertained by many
scholastic people concerning what they
call the. rights of academic freedom.
! is said By these theorists that
teachers In coileKes-if they will but
| Invoke the sacred names OF art and
science--ought to be permitted with
out hindrance or accountability 10
say anything they please.
Now this freedom to say anything
ona pleases--in a well-endowed moral
vacuum-may be an academic ideal,
But to practical men 1t has always
seed too academic,
And modern society Ia likely, in ac,
cordance with Its own genius. to be-
come not less but more insistent in
holding people respensihls-tof what
they say,
A society that passes the title to a
million dollars by a single word ut
great enterprises afoOt by the faith in
a signature. 10 likely to acquire q
new and vivid sense of a mans re-
sponsibility for his uttered word, And
| in general, as human relations be.
come more delicate and intricate IN
/ their adjustment, words acquire a
prodigious power to hurt or help.
| 1t might be safe to set down tho
rule. Professionally, that II should be
lawful for man to propose and rec
ommend by speech and print the doing
OF anything that it Ia lawful 10 DO.
Thus ii should of course be q crime to
advise the commission OF a crime.
| And 1t should be unlawful to use
words In such manner aS tends to
subvert the meaning and purpose Of
the law.
| But such precapts need to pc pressed
closer home before they can amount
to much as working principles.
! We need TO clear our minds az to
what is the genius and spirit of mod
ern law before we can judge what
kind of speech should be condemned
as libellous or against public policy.
| Now the actual social order IN Amer
lea is industrial, and is based on
property rights.
| This Is working society and its
| master aim is to put the people IN
possession of the materials of exist
sRee This aim In not 10 be thought
OF as necessarily sordid, for the pro-
| cess of earth subdual and material
production IL seen to iRvolve the fine
goods OF art and all the spiritual is
sues. Therefore il is not and should
not be lawful in America for u man
to use his tongue or pen to destroy
rights o, property 30 faF ~ they ara
genuine and legitimate rights.
St~seA eH4 tAe MN eeAAst n ~