The times-news. [volume] (Hendersonville, N.C.) 1927-current, 1934-04-12

this code, the publishers do not waive any constl-
tutional rights or consent to the imposition OF any
requirements that might restrict or interfere with
the constitutional guaranty of the freedom OF the
press"
| The President stated that this clause is pure
surplusage" that it "has no meaning" and no
more place in the code ethan would the recitation
of the whole Constitution the Fen Command
ments" General Johnson and Mr.. Richberg have
poked mild fun at the publishers for their lnsis-
tence upon its inclusion The freedom of express
sion guaranteed by the Constitution will be scrup-
ulously respected, says the President
All this may be true and it may also be true,
as General Johnson insists, that out of molehis of
fact mountain of controversy has been made.
Yet, fundamentally, the newspapers are right ir
their insstence and for reasons deeper than those
of legal verbiage However much one may SYM
pathize with the sims of the present administra-
ton or even with the steps taken to correct abuses
in the economic system, one cannot fail to realize
that there is large threat to the essential llber-
ties of the people contained in the extensive gov
ernmental machinery set UP. This IS quite aside
from and beyond any controversy Which may have
arisen over the technical wording of a particular
code
There is no general belief that the President
and those associated with him have any intention
of abusing the great powers which they now pos
sess. There are publishers who feared that the
licensing provision of the NRA might be applied
to them Apparently, also, there are those who
fear that an enlarged and centralize1 government
tai control over communications, including tele-
graph, telephone and radio might result in press
censorship although naturally, there is very little
analogy between radio and press, since the wave
lengths must be allocated to prevent actual physl-
cal interference:
In our view the danger to freedom OF speech
and liberty does not lie so much in any one spe-
cfc measure as it does in the continual plllng up
of such powers in the central government. II
these officials continue to be given additional au-
thority at the same rate in the past year, the
time will come soon when they can stifle freedom
of speech, whether they want to or do not want
to, whether their intentions are good or bad.
Stanley Baldwin recently said that Britain is
almost the last country standing today for free
dom of speech and conscience" One is curious
to know whether he expects the United States to
leave this distinguished company before long 1t
is the duty as well the prerogative of the daily
press to guard in the most sensitive way the free
dom of expression. Whatever their faults, the
newspapers are highly indiydualistic enterprises,
expressing every shade of opinion, and, contrary
to general belief are mostly small instead of large,
financially modest instead of opulent. Despite the
statement of President Roosevelt that their reaf-
frmation of constitutional privileges has no place
in their code, the daily papers have shown wise
instanct and true sense of public duty in their
insstence upon placing it there This is, in fact,
the very time when public interest requires that
the essential principles of constitutional liberty be
stated again and again-Saturday Evening Post.