-
Articles/Ads
Article FREEDOM OF DISCUSSION. Page 1 of 1 Article FREEDOM OF DISCUSSION. Page 1 of 1
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Freedom Of Discussion.
FREEDOM OF DISCUSSION .
IN introducing tlio First Number of our Twenty-first Volume to our readers little remains for us to say after tlie remarks with which we closed our Twentieth . There is , however , one matter to which onr attention may well he devoted . Wc allude to the course wo have
pursued in the past , of allowing * to all sections of the Craft free discussion of their views in our columns . Wc feel we are best consulting the interests of Freemasonry in England when we afford to the views of all who address
us an equal share of publicity . Of course there is a limit beyond which wo should not allow a correspondent to go , but wo have not fonnd it necessary , except in a few instances , to put our veto on any letters addressed to us .
Our conduct m this respect has called forth a word of caution from our esteemed contemporary the Evening News , which remarks that " the opening of a new year is a fitting time to caution the brethren against the
perpetration of un-Masonic acts . ' " It is a curious fact / ' says onr contemporary , " that a difference of opinion is seldom argued out inoffensively , a tendency being constantly shown by the disputants to endeavour to say something hurtful
to each other ' s feelings . " In this view we fully coincide ; indeed it has often pained us to he called upon to publish in extenso the letters we have received , on account of their occasionally containing sentences which might be looked
upon as offensive , and we have , in no few instances , suggested modifications ; but bearing in mind onr programme —our determination to afford a medium of discussion to all sides- ^ -we have fel t unable to wholly exclude them .
For this reason we cannot allow the expressions of the Evening News to pass unquestioned . "The Masouic Press , " it says , " unfortunately exercises scarcely sufficient caution over the correspondence which it admits into its pages
with respect to contentious matters , and from timo to time hard expressions are allowed to appear which a little reflection must convince the writers had better not havo been used . " Speaking for ourselves , we consider that caution is
•used , and from our standpoint sufficient caution . Wo claim for ourselves freedom of discussion on all points connected with the Craft , and we allow our correspondents the same . The views of one writer can very rarely bo the
same as those of all who read them , but it is nothing short of presumption for any one individual , because he happens to disagree with tho expressions of one side , to argue that they must of necessity be wrong , and that his ideas aro the
only correct ones . Neither can we agree with onr contemporary in saying that "however trivial the subject , if is enough that every one should not be of the same mind on it to rush into print . " " Nor do wc believe it would be
necessary in so doing to say what is supposed to bo smart in order to hold up the opponent as an example of folly . " Our contemporary must admit it is next to impossible to write on subjects of a personal character without
introducing arguments which may be taken as offensive , and the class of correspondence to which our contemporary more particularly refers cannot be described as anything bnt personal . Under these circumstances AVO argue that
what looks like " smart" writing is nothing more than the necessary emphasis of tlie writer . Onr experience has convinced us that in many of the cases where offence was taken no one was moro surprised or pained thereat than the offender himself . To prove more fully what we mean ,
Freedom Of Discussion.
wo may refer to past discussions in which we have devoted editorial attention . In not a few instances wc have been blamed by both sides for showing favour to the other , thus proving , to our mind , tho fairness of our arguments , and
the all but utter impossibility of pleasing everybody . If this is tho case with us , how much moro likely is ifc to be so with those who , without experience , avail themselves , perhaps for the first time , of the columns of a newspaper
to give publicity to their views . Thoy may be sincere in what they do ; they may desire to keep clear of everything likely to give pain cv offence , and may write solely in tho hope of doing good ; yet thev are mis undoes food
the meanings of their sentences arc twisted until they can hardly believe they ever wrote them , and such unworthy motives attributed to them that they feel actually ashamed of themselves . Very much of this abuse arises , we think ,
from the inability of most writers to keep their temper in tho discussions in which they take part ; if they would write in defence of the views they take , rather than in opposition to the writer on the other side , they would
keep clear of the recriminations which arc usually returned to them with interest . It should be possible to write in opposition to a man ' s views without writing in opposition to the man . Tho best of friends must occasionally differ
m their ideas on particular subjects , but that is no reason for their quarrelling with each other . Indeed , we consider that the man is to bo pitied who cannot read the fiercest onslaught of his opponent ia a discussion without
engendering feelings of personal antagonism . to tho writer . The latest circumstances out of which this objectionable writing has arisen , remarks our contemporary , is the recent nomination of threo brethren for election to the
office of Grand Treasurer , and it will doubtless strike our readers that tho letters which havo appeared in our last few numbers moro particularly account for the "caution" it
has been deemed necessary to publish . The Evening News considers the correspondence in our pages is to be deplored and deprecated . If that correspondence was Avritten simply with the object of personally attacking thoso
referred to in it , it is most certainly to be deplored and deprecated , but if , as AVC believe , it AVHS written without any personal malice , ancl with the object of drawing at ten . tion to a fair matter of discussion , it is neither io bo
deplored nor deprecated ; on the contrary , if the render can disassociate himself from all feelings of animus to individuals , and read , it calmly and dispassionately , it will
then , AVC urge , clearly show itself in its true light , —and will present features which will call for consideration by all Avho take an interest in the matter .
In faying AVO intend to fuller , * . ' , in the future , the p lan AVC have adopted in the past , AVO do not intend it io lo understood AVC ignore the opinions of others . On the contrary ,
wo attach as much importance to thoso who abiiao us as to those Avho applaud , but v . c do not yet fee ! disponed to depart one bit from our programme ; wo intend to continue to provide—as long as AVO are able—a field for f ; ec discussion .
Her Majesty the Queen liar , been graciously pleared to present to ' the ' funds of the I : cokdel ! e : s' Piovhkr . t Institntion , through nil * Mcmy Po * : ;; o' ; l > y , X . O . Ih , a dona ! inn of £ 20 . Her Majesty has been the Patron of the Society since tho year 1 SGS .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Freedom Of Discussion.
FREEDOM OF DISCUSSION .
IN introducing tlio First Number of our Twenty-first Volume to our readers little remains for us to say after tlie remarks with which we closed our Twentieth . There is , however , one matter to which onr attention may well he devoted . Wc allude to the course wo have
pursued in the past , of allowing * to all sections of the Craft free discussion of their views in our columns . Wc feel we are best consulting the interests of Freemasonry in England when we afford to the views of all who address
us an equal share of publicity . Of course there is a limit beyond which wo should not allow a correspondent to go , but wo have not fonnd it necessary , except in a few instances , to put our veto on any letters addressed to us .
Our conduct m this respect has called forth a word of caution from our esteemed contemporary the Evening News , which remarks that " the opening of a new year is a fitting time to caution the brethren against the
perpetration of un-Masonic acts . ' " It is a curious fact / ' says onr contemporary , " that a difference of opinion is seldom argued out inoffensively , a tendency being constantly shown by the disputants to endeavour to say something hurtful
to each other ' s feelings . " In this view we fully coincide ; indeed it has often pained us to he called upon to publish in extenso the letters we have received , on account of their occasionally containing sentences which might be looked
upon as offensive , and we have , in no few instances , suggested modifications ; but bearing in mind onr programme —our determination to afford a medium of discussion to all sides- ^ -we have fel t unable to wholly exclude them .
For this reason we cannot allow the expressions of the Evening News to pass unquestioned . "The Masouic Press , " it says , " unfortunately exercises scarcely sufficient caution over the correspondence which it admits into its pages
with respect to contentious matters , and from timo to time hard expressions are allowed to appear which a little reflection must convince the writers had better not havo been used . " Speaking for ourselves , we consider that caution is
•used , and from our standpoint sufficient caution . Wo claim for ourselves freedom of discussion on all points connected with the Craft , and we allow our correspondents the same . The views of one writer can very rarely bo the
same as those of all who read them , but it is nothing short of presumption for any one individual , because he happens to disagree with tho expressions of one side , to argue that they must of necessity be wrong , and that his ideas aro the
only correct ones . Neither can we agree with onr contemporary in saying that "however trivial the subject , if is enough that every one should not be of the same mind on it to rush into print . " " Nor do wc believe it would be
necessary in so doing to say what is supposed to bo smart in order to hold up the opponent as an example of folly . " Our contemporary must admit it is next to impossible to write on subjects of a personal character without
introducing arguments which may be taken as offensive , and the class of correspondence to which our contemporary more particularly refers cannot be described as anything bnt personal . Under these circumstances AVO argue that
what looks like " smart" writing is nothing more than the necessary emphasis of tlie writer . Onr experience has convinced us that in many of the cases where offence was taken no one was moro surprised or pained thereat than the offender himself . To prove more fully what we mean ,
Freedom Of Discussion.
wo may refer to past discussions in which we have devoted editorial attention . In not a few instances wc have been blamed by both sides for showing favour to the other , thus proving , to our mind , tho fairness of our arguments , and
the all but utter impossibility of pleasing everybody . If this is tho case with us , how much moro likely is ifc to be so with those who , without experience , avail themselves , perhaps for the first time , of the columns of a newspaper
to give publicity to their views . Thoy may be sincere in what they do ; they may desire to keep clear of everything likely to give pain cv offence , and may write solely in tho hope of doing good ; yet thev are mis undoes food
the meanings of their sentences arc twisted until they can hardly believe they ever wrote them , and such unworthy motives attributed to them that they feel actually ashamed of themselves . Very much of this abuse arises , we think ,
from the inability of most writers to keep their temper in tho discussions in which they take part ; if they would write in defence of the views they take , rather than in opposition to the writer on the other side , they would
keep clear of the recriminations which arc usually returned to them with interest . It should be possible to write in opposition to a man ' s views without writing in opposition to the man . Tho best of friends must occasionally differ
m their ideas on particular subjects , but that is no reason for their quarrelling with each other . Indeed , we consider that the man is to bo pitied who cannot read the fiercest onslaught of his opponent ia a discussion without
engendering feelings of personal antagonism . to tho writer . The latest circumstances out of which this objectionable writing has arisen , remarks our contemporary , is the recent nomination of threo brethren for election to the
office of Grand Treasurer , and it will doubtless strike our readers that tho letters which havo appeared in our last few numbers moro particularly account for the "caution" it
has been deemed necessary to publish . The Evening News considers the correspondence in our pages is to be deplored and deprecated . If that correspondence was Avritten simply with the object of personally attacking thoso
referred to in it , it is most certainly to be deplored and deprecated , but if , as AVC believe , it AVHS written without any personal malice , ancl with the object of drawing at ten . tion to a fair matter of discussion , it is neither io bo
deplored nor deprecated ; on the contrary , if the render can disassociate himself from all feelings of animus to individuals , and read , it calmly and dispassionately , it will
then , AVC urge , clearly show itself in its true light , —and will present features which will call for consideration by all Avho take an interest in the matter .
In faying AVO intend to fuller , * . ' , in the future , the p lan AVC have adopted in the past , AVO do not intend it io lo understood AVC ignore the opinions of others . On the contrary ,
wo attach as much importance to thoso who abiiao us as to those Avho applaud , but v . c do not yet fee ! disponed to depart one bit from our programme ; wo intend to continue to provide—as long as AVO are able—a field for f ; ec discussion .
Her Majesty the Queen liar , been graciously pleared to present to ' the ' funds of the I : cokdel ! e : s' Piovhkr . t Institntion , through nil * Mcmy Po * : ;; o' ; l > y , X . O . Ih , a dona ! inn of £ 20 . Her Majesty has been the Patron of the Society since tho year 1 SGS .