Source: Prescott Morning Courier
Source type: newspaper
Document type: letter to the editor
Document title: none
Author(s): Leach, J. A.
City of publication: Prescott, Arizona Territory
Date of publication: 12 September 1901
Volume number: 38
Issue number: 72
|Leach, J. A. [untitled]. Prescott Morning Courier 12 Sept. 1901 v38n72: p. 1.|
|McKinley assassination (news coverage: criticism); socialism; freedom of speech.|
|J. A. Leach; Thomas Paine.|
P, Ariz., Sept. 11.
To the Editor of the Courier:
Dear sir—As a libelous, malicious attack has been made on the socialists and socialism by the Jour[n]al-Miner, commonly known as t[h]e Journal-Murphy, of the 10th inst., I req[u]est the liberty to reply to his (editor Journal-Murphy) senile article through the columns of the Courier, which I believe you, as an American and believing in American institutions, will not refuse me. The life of the president having been attacked by a madman; in other wor[d]s, an anarchist, this addle-brained editor vents his spleen npon [sic] the socialists, and would, if possible, place them in the category of criminal assassi[n]s. The history of socialism and socialists has proven to the contrary; they have always followed the rational way of appealing to the individual and collective understanding of the human race. They believe that an [e]nlightened and civilized person will not commit overt acts, neither will they condone the crime of criminals. As the United States has a constitutional government there is no necessity of appealing to physical force, neither individually nor collectively, for redress of political grievances, and the party or individual that advises physical force is un-American, no matter whether he is a native born or a naturalized foreigner. The soci[a]list labor party of this country, of which I am a member, strictly adheres to the constitutional line of action. But the Russian-American editor of the Journal-Murphy would take away our constitutional rights. I [s]hould judge his muddled brain has got greatly Russianized. Why, his [a]rticle is really amusing to me, for this would-be editor would change the whole phase of American institutions with one swoop of his pen, for [h]e says he would have legislation passed making it treasonable for any association of men to get together for any purpose to attach themselves to any other organization except for industrial purposes. Thus he would, with one swoop of his pen, swipe the political machinery from the country. I don’t think he will get many Americans to consent to his Russian syst[e]m of government.
In referring to my speech on Saturday evening, in his senility he calls me a blasphemer. I suppose he considers [a] laboring man has no right to criticize the government. If there is anything we, as a duty, should honor the revolutionary fathers for, this has the precedence, the right to criticize and the right to freedom of speech; this is not of foreign import[a]tion and is stric[t]l[y] socialistic, yet the J.-M. editor is opposed to socialism because it is [f]oreign. Yet it is neither foreign nor America[n], but a discovery by the people of the worl[d] of an eco[n]omic condition in society, crying out to the people of the world, “socialize, socialize, socialize.” Eve[n] the J.-M. editor ca[n] not close his eyes to it or shut it out from his insignificant bra[i]n; [n]o, it is not the pin-headed, addle-brained anarchist that the plutocrats of the world fear, but the ever growing economic conditions that cry out against individ[u]al monopoly of the means of production and distribution, detrimental to the interests of a large majority of the people.
Socialism is like unto the s[a]ying of Thomas Paine: “The world is my country, to do good is my religion.” It is useless to comment on the last paragraph of his article; it savors too much of anarchy. While h[e] condemns the attempted assassinatio[n] of the president, he encourages i[t] against the laboring class who would dare assert their rights.
J. A. L [ ] .