New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1917-12-07
Free Speech for Traitors
If 1t Is Right to Gag Obscenity and
Vice, Why Not lreason'

To the Editor OF lut iii"NN'
Sir; Communications like that OF your CO..
resnondent. J. McKecn CatteH, prihteu =
ma morning's Tribune, appear to me- VIZ
dino rcspect to yourself, TO serve no soou
rseful purposc. Beginning with inc usu"
;nsircere and mendacious plea for the COZ
,,i,u,ional right Of free speech, and worm
;,,. ;,e Shiny way through a maze OF ms
represen,ations and half-truth5 10 inc III
famous and palpably absurd falsehood VIZ
which II concludes, such a screed can oh,-
cove 20 raise the gorge Of the thinking "o,
or % uislead or unsettlc the unthinkins Of
Immature. The last mentioned fop &c.
enterprise has been for some time, II atty.
take not his identity, Mr. CattelPs spron the
Il was hardly to be expected thai thai, would
most rampant and pernicious paelI.siy the
.. ,bis date have the temerity 70 - free
sopbistical and oft refuted PlepbIications.
sopno5@ on bebalf of treasonOps PuDn. e. 70
p pmt sirce vour correspondent has s svr word
disinter IT. will you grant nc
or two? Guaranteeing the
The Constitution .cb and Of the press,
RICH, of freedom or sP contemplate protec-
most assuredly ala IN, IL is to undermine
ton for those ""osr stitution itself and the
and destroy me r. reserves, expressed or
nation as wen, The part of the government
not, the rlght on correspondent forgets or
lwhich' as IL composed Of the duly au-
wiIIully Igho,entatives and servants OF the
thorl2ed reP such protective measures as
people, " ~ to suppress and punish the
IL ma! 80 of anything supporting Such
puDlic',N Nor did the Constitution contemplate
AIMS - or immunity for any utterances
pi eLI;cations made or conducted in oppo-
OF p' 90 or violation OF the law Of the land.
S y,'I'n vour correspondent will not, assume
TN ,nre 70 deny the right OF the authorities
- empress the publication or circulation o.
tOdsesft and obscene literature. Would he
r. yoke the right Of free speech in that be-
laifq Nor do believe that he would deny
The governmental right TO suppress or pun
sb newspaper or periodical conducted in
.be interest of a gambling hell or brothel,
,r 20 punish and restrict the activities OF al
Individual who should solicit for or tout the
merits of any such institutions. Would tha'
,e an invasion of the precious right OF Tree
peech? Nor would freedom OF speech DC
INV more the right Of such individual or
newspaper IT Its or ms acIHiIleS WIZ vs.
.ected in the interests of an association OF
burglars or pickpockets or other yiolators or
opponents Of the law.
Well, what's the difference? Since TINS
dearly is true in respect TO protection
against such offences as burglary, larceny,
rambling and prostitution, will any sane ana
,onest mar contend that it does not apply
rith equal or greater force TO the arch crime
Il treason. to acts Of sedtion or encouraging
" fostering defiance and disobedience to the
aw, or to any act of hostility directed
against the nation?
But what's the use? As said before /
.annot see any useful purpose in publishing
. thing like this Catteil letter, unless 1t be
o roll I'D and get a rise out of irascible oIf
-ools like the undersigned.
GEORGE WESTERVELT.
New York, Dec. ,, 1917.