Ruled By
the Press
CHARLES. T. SPRADING
PRICE ’ 10 CENTS
Published by
w. GEORGE RISSMAN
322 STORY BUILDING
Los Angeles, Cal.
43
V w»

To
GEORGE RISSMrAN
A Friend of Freedom
-—From/the Author 4


Ruled By the Press
By CHARLES T. SPRADING
Let us look at our real rulers. The people see them every
day and usually twice. Being so completely overwhelmed
by their august presence and so occupied with the directions
they give in what to do the people have no time to study and
understand the real nature of these rulers.
Rulers are seldom understood by their subjects. They are
blindly obeyed, not studied, not questioned. The thing wor_
shipped is never understood. A good subject is one that is
Well subjected, and in the United States there are many good
subjects. '
Like most rulers these speak in the name of the people, and
the people accept their statement as their very own. These
newspaper rulers always know just what the public thinks
and what it wants, and just what it is going to do. Not that
they have consulted the public and found out these things;
they never waste time doing unnecessary things like that.
All that is necessary is to put the idea into the mouth of
the public, which recognizes the opinion as its own at once;
and each member of the public reports it to his neighbor and
the neighbor has the same opinion derived from the same
source. Thus a sublime harmony, that seems almost divine,
exists between these thinkers. That the public is not consulted
by the paper (before it tells the people what they think) never
occurs to this “enlightened public.” It assimilates these manu-
factured ideas like a sink-hole does soapsuds and congratulates
itself on its originality.

2 RULED BY THE PRESS
On matters of no financial interest to the owner of the
paper reporters are permitted to interview “leading citizens”
and thus give a semblance of truth to the pretense that the
paper is consulting the public. Such interviews are always
with “prominent people” who know nothing of the subject
discussed.
Their dull views help to make the impression on the public
mind that the editorials are brilliant productions.
The biggest fuss is made over the things of least im-
portance.
In matters that concern the newspaper interest no adverse
criticism is allowed.
After advocating a measure until it has been accepted by
some of the prominent citizens, they are interviewed; and
if the reporter should be so stupid as to bring in a critical
report the editor blue pencils it and stops its career forthwith.
I suppose the reason the editors never publish criticisms
against the press is a self-sacrificing one. They fear the in-
dignation of the public would be wreaked on the critics for
attacking one of the sacred institutions of the country.
In this way they not only save the life of the critic, but
they save the public from reading so much that would be
unpleasant.
The letters of the public published by the press are always
laudatory. When the press speaks of the crowd it is always
the “enlightened public.” When the politician speaks to a
mass of voters it is always an “intelligent-looking audience.”
The press and the office-hunter both repeatedly tell the
public that its judgment is “common sense,” and the public
thinks this is a compliment. It doesn’t know that its com-
mon sense is common ignorance. It don’t seem to under-
stand that the common thing is the mediocre thing. What
the press never compliments is the man who looms ahead,
of the crowd, the one with uncommon sense.
That the press is at all times ready to sell its services to
the highest bidder is well known to every successful. politician
and business man. There is only one proviso, viz., that the
service does not conflict with a greater interest of the pro-

RULED BY THE PRESS 3
prietor, and there are but few instances where such conflict
occurs.
Large advertisers control the policy to a great extent
locally. Big business must not be interfered with. Opinions
are sold by the inch. Dozens of pages of advertising are
worked off on the public as reading matter and the results
can be guaranteed to the investor.
The press constantly manufactures dispatches one day and
frequently admits them to be false the next. This never
shakes the people’s confidence in the least. They pay for
both issues and boast of the amount of news there is in their
city papers. They also believe themselves to be well posted.
They are posted all right, like a bill on a board, and they
remain where they are put.
What people think is what they are taught and the thing
they are taught is what the newspapers want them to be-
lieve, and what they cause the readers to believe is what
benefits the newspaper owner.
On many political issues the proprietors are indifl'erent,
because it does not affect their economic interests and they
are so magnificently independent. They are free, then, to
side with any group of people they think will win and thereby
increase the circulation and power of their newspapers in
the community.
A story too absurd to be published as true has not yet been
written and if the event is located some distance so it cannot
be investigated, its truth will be accepted by the public.
If the public ever demands verification for all that is pub-
lished, the largest dailies will dwindle to a single page.
Everybody remembers how frequently the newspapers had
Francisco Villa killed, but he bobbed up again to be killed
again and again to furnish sensational copy to the space-
filling liars. The “Ground Hog” says, “Anyone who believes
half of what he sees in a newspaper is a fool.”
There are instances also where these periodicals were well
paid for lying in the face of overwhelming evidence to the
contrary. But they knew the public would soon forget and

4 RULED BY THE PRESS
forgive, especially after they advocated for awhile something
that was extremely popular.
These peddlers of piifle are indeed a menace. They ruin
the mind by filling it so full of stories with no truth in them,
of argument which has no logic and of conclusions without
sense that the mind has no room for a real idea or a fact.
The newspaper-reading habit is much more injurious than
that of liquor or dope. While with the latter there are times
when the mind clears, it being free from the drug for a few
days, the newspaper-paralyzing serum is present every day-
no chance to recover, the spell is never broken.
The press chatters much these days about “this great free
people.” Free from what? Certainly not from newspaper
influence; certainly not from the Billy Sunday superstition.
The only things I know of that “this great free people” are
“free” from are ideas of their own.
The editor gets his instructions from the owner of the
paper as to just what to advocate and what not to advocate.
Mr. Hearst often does this openly when he is proud of his
order and anyone can see how it works. The editor will turn
out an editorial to order with the faithfulness of a cabinet
maker filling an order for a show case.
What is done frankly by Mr. Hearst is done secretly by
the other owners of papers.
The editor has no opinion of his own, or if he has, he
never reveals it. He seldom gives reasons. All he needs is to
make assertions. As he is always speaking for the dear pub-
lic he is not supposed to be expressing an opinion of his own.
He is a sort of trumpet for the people and his arguments have
more sound than sense.
These editors are surrounded by a group of helpers, who
are the most subservient hypocritical slaves of any class of
people on earth. The outside men will bring in fake reports
to satisfy orders and the inside ones will rewrite and falsify
news for the same reason. They sell their services and opin-
ions at a very small price and never complain of their servi-
tude. No other branch of labor has sunk so low that it has
not at least protested and sometimes struck for better condi-

RULED BY THE PRESS 5
tions. But whoever heard of the newspaper writers protesting
against their conditions?
The voice of their masters is music to their ears. Don’t
look to them for help in overthrowing tyranny. They seem
to love it as much as a Libertarian loves freedom.
No one will break the bonds he reveres.
Having only the public at large to deceive, these writers
use no care in their lying. While they are a strong and united
brotherhood of liars, they are weak in deceptive abilities. The
least intelligent person can at times detect them in their
coarse work. They have such contempt for the public ’s dis-
cerning power that they spread it on too thick to be entitled
to membership in a respectable group of liars.
Sometimes these writers will over-estimate their ability and
will eulogize some politician as the cleanest man on earth
when the majority positively know him to be a crook and
they revolt for that election, but will fall for the same paper
and its stories next election. If these crude liars succeed in
deceiving the public there is no use in the paper having
talented ones at high salaries.
There are a few talented liars on the press. These can
make fiction look like fact and fact look like a fake. But
they are so few that they have been unable to raise the taste
of the general public to this higher art level.
It does seem to me that this press school for the production
of prevaricators ought to graduate a higher degree of talent.
They have such great facility for learning by association at
home and daily contact from abroad. I admit that there is
no necessity for it now, but if the teachers had some ability
and took a little pride in their art, they would turn out a.
better product.
The writers don"t seem to care for the respect of talented
liars. They break most of the rules laid down by the famous
ones of the past. They should give a small part of the public
credit for a little sense, but it being such a small body it is
ignored.
It‘ the people ever develop discernment, these writers" are
lost. They will have to develop more caution and learn to

6 RULED BY THE PRESS
curb their imagination, or more talented men will take their
places. Recklessness in lying will not be tolerated by cultured
people.
Sometimes when I read their reckless statements I think
that these men are really doing all they can to convince this
“enlightened public” that they are lying. But it is no use.
The public will believe them in spite of all their efforts.
Once in a great while the mob spirit is aroused and it
goes contrary to newspapers, and elects some man not ap-
proved by the community press. But this spasm of inde-
pendence does not last long. If it did, it would control the
press or put it out of business. But it returns to its fleshp-ots
of deception with as much relish as before departure, and
this is owing to the suggestive power of the daily adviser.
Report day after day any absurdity or falsehood, and in
time it will be accepted as true, for the public will say, “What
everybody says must be true.” Seeing how easily the public
can be duped and controlled, is it any wonder that Vanderbilt
when told that the public would not stand for certain things
he was doing, said: “Oh, the public be damned!”'! When I
seewhat the newspapers do with the public I sometimes won-
der if I am not a little bit cracked in expecting anything
sensible from it.
The “great captains of industry” know the power of sug-
gestion on the public mind and use it to feather their nest.
It is only the very strong minds who can resist the con-
stant suggestion, and strong minds are almost as scarce as
honest newspapers.
Those who attend meetings or witness an event described‘
by a hostile paper realize what liars the writers are, but soon
forget and quote them as authority in matters they don’t
understand.
Local newspapers are compelled to be more discreet with
their lying for the reason that they can be and are exposed.
But there is one branch of the press that is free from all these
drawbacks. I mean, of course, The Associated Press. Its
stories come from afar, and the only verification the public
gets is its word on the following day that the story is true.

RULED BY THE PRESS 7
This has the double advantage of filling space and convincing
by repetition; and all the local press everywhere can put its
hand on its heart and truthfully repeat that famous saying:
“ When father lies we all lie!”
Dr. Samuel Johnson said: “An ambassador is a man who
goes abroad to lie for the good of his country. A journalist
is a man who stays at home to pursue the same vocation.”
No thinker from Thomas J eiferson to the present day has
had any respect for the metropolitan press. Our great free
press! It is free from facts. It is free from truth. It is
free from justice. It is free from ideals. It is free from
principles. It is free from all those ideas that bind and hold
honest people together. Yes, it is free from all that should
bind, and it is bound by all that it should be free from.
When a newspaper determines to injure an individual or
institution that it has no evidence against, its method of attack
is by insinuation and indirection. It must build up a case
out of nothing, and it is an adept at this. It must injure with-
out being itself harmed. It must hurt the individual or his
business without putting itself in danger of a damage suit.
Here are a few samples of its inuendoes:
“It is reported,” etc.; “They are said to be,"’ etc.; “It
has been alleged,” etc.; “He is believed by the police to
be,” etc.; “It is said,” etc.; “He is believed to be the guilty
party,” etc.
Long articles are made up out of this kind of libel against
an innocent party, and the public is convinced that it has
been reading evidence; and it is not libel in the legal sense.
No direct charge has been made. No one’s name is mentioned
as having said these things. The newspaper doesn’t say that
the charges are true. When it makes a direct assertion, as it
frequently does in its headlines if it thinks there is danger
to it, it will place a small question mark at the end of the
sentence like this: “He was bribed?”
The courts have repeatedly held that such sentences when
false are not slanderous or libelous, because of the question
mark.
Just think of a public being fed on this sort of thing every

8 RULED BY THE PRESS
day and believing itself to be acquiring knowledge. This
method of deception is a studied one. It is a part of the news-
paper business and it will continue until the public knows
enough to brand as a lie every article that has in it, “It has
been alleged,” and other similarly manufactured “news.”
That the press at times has true and valuable articles in
it is admitted, but it is not because the owners want fine and
valuable things taught for their own sake. Their purpose is
to gain the confidence of the people, so they can “put over”
their real object, just as the bunko man says a lot of nice
things to his victim before he robs him.
I could cite dozens and dozens of instances where the pub-
lic’s indignation was aroused and used by the designing press.
But those with a memory and a little knowledge will recall
numerous instances of this kind themselves. I recall one
instance where a newspaper converted a town into a howling
mob and it hanged a man who was afterward proven abso-
lutely innocent. This only injured one man and his family,
but similar things are done to large groups of people as well.
Let the press be united and the mob spirit can be raised
for any purpose whatever. A united press means a united
people. But this unity does not prove its object to be a good
thing for the people, and it seldom is.
Newspaper owners are like other business men, who look
out for their own interests first; and men who go into a public
business expect to use the public in that business. So if the
public’s interests are neglected in favor of their own, no one
should be surprised. Where the interest of a newspaper and
that of the public conflict, there are but few instances where
the first gave way to the second.
I will cite another instance that happened in my home
town that is typical of the other cities in the nation. Last
fall there was an initiative measure before the people to be
voted on. It was a land tax bill. The purpose was to tax
land more and other things less, the object being to prevent
holding large tracts out of use for speculation. Now, the
proprietors of the two leading papers of our city own millions
of acres apiece. Do I need to tell you what the attitude of

RULED BY THE PRESS 9
those papers was? There was not an argument in favor of
the measure permitted in either paper, but pages were filled
with arguments against it and vilifications of its advocates.
Now, so far as my argument is concerned it doesn’t matter
whether this measure was a benefit to the people or not. It
would have been downed just the same, for it was detrimental
to the newspaper owners and that settled its fate. But sup-
pose it would have been a benefit to the public? Then an
injustice was committed against the public by its defeat by
the press.
There are three wrongs in this, viz., one in upholding the
present condition which benefits the proprietors of the press
as against the interests of the larger public; second, deceiving
the public as to its interests; and third, preventing the argu-
ments in its favor from being presented for‘ the people ’s con-
sideration. The last is much the greatest wrong to to the
people, who look to the press for the facts concerning the
public welfare. They are convinced by the arguments pre-
sented, and as only one side is given the decision is in favor
of that side, of course. Now, how would you like to be tried
for your life on that plan ?—the evidence of your guilt pre-
sented in full, but no opportunity given or allowed to bring out
the facts concerning your innocence‘! This is the big crime
of the press. It presents its own side and suppresses the other.
Abraham Lincoln once said that “only a dishonest man will
refuse to hear both sides of a question before deciding,” and
he might have added that even an honest man could not render
a just decision without hearing both sides.
But when dishonest men own the press, what‘show has an
honest public at the facts?
WHO OWNS THE PRESS
One of our Congressmen tells us, and you will find his
statement in the Congressional Record of Feb. 9, 1917, pages
3320, 3321. Representative Galloway of Texas said:
“In March, 1915, the J. P. Morgan interests, the steel, ship-
building and powder interests and their subsidiary organiza-

10 RULED BY THE PRESS
tions, got together twelve men high up in the newspaper world
and employed them to select the most influential newspapers
in the United States and a sufficient number of them to control
generally the policy of the daily press of the United States.
“These twelve men worked the problem out by selecting
174 newspapers, and then, by an elimination process, to retain
only those necessary for the purpose of controlling the general
policy of the daily press throughout the country. They found
it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the
greatest papers.”
Congressman Galloway tells us this purchase was made
and that “This contract is in existence at the present time.”
You did not read this speech in the daily liar, did you?
Twenty-five papers gave them two papers in each city with
a population of over half a million or over, and this with those
already in favor of their policy gave them control of the public.
A million dollars apiece would be a big price to pay for these
newspapers, and at that rate it would only be twenty-five
million dollars, and any one of that group of copper, zinc, lead,
brass and nickel companies could pay for the papers out of its
annual profits and hardly miss the money.
The profits of one of this group, the United States Steel
Corporation, for three months last year (1916) was $81,000,000.
Its profits this year are about double that of last year. One
way to convince me and others who can think that this group
does not own the press is for the papers to advocate the con-
scription or appropriation of all profits made by them during
the last three years.
The papers have advocated this for some of the small fry
corporations, but not of the large ones inside of their ring.
We read of much investigation and exposures of “large
profiteers,” but so far it is only those who have made a few
hundred thousand or a million who have been mentioned. The
papers say nothing about their owners’ profits which run into
the billions.
Would it not be fine if we had just one independent paper
that had the courage to attack those powerful corporations
that are robbing our nation as it has never been robbed before.

RULED BY THE PRESS 11
If they could be compelled to accept the price for their
steel, copper, etc., that they got three years ago, this nation
would save half of its present expense.
These profiteers are making two and three hundred per
cent on their investment while they urge others to invest their
money at four per cent to pay for their goods.
The newspapers pay no War taxes, they are a specially priv-
ileged group.
The people must control the press or be controlled by it.
We have reached that point in our political development
where issues are not presented by parties and platforms as
formerly. Parties play but a small part now in public ques-
tions except to nominate men for office.
The political questions are presented by the initiative and
referendum, and this means that the questions are handled by
the press and not by a party as formerly. Political power has
passed from the party to the press almost completely. This
the people do not realize, and, of course, they do not see how
complete is the power of the press because of this condition.
Instead of attending caucus, district, city and county meet-
ings to discuss issues as in the past they stay at home and read
the issues as they are dished up to them in the paper, and the
only political meetings the general public attends are those
that have candidates for high oflice as speakers.
The initiative and referendum has very nearly disposed of
the function of parties, and when it is generally adopted it
will do away with parties altogether.
But all this only increases the power of the press as the
sole presenter of issues and the controller of public opinion.
A democracy is an arrangement of society in which the
people do the legislating for themselves. They pass judgment
on the measures before enactment. But if they do not have
the arguments and facts presented to them it is not possible
for them to pass a just or intelligent verdict, and that is just
the situation today. We have no democracy and the hypocrisy
is in the pretense that we have, and there will be no democracy
until the people solve the newspaper problem.

12 RULED BY THE PRESS
“But do.the people want a real democracy?” and “Will
they solve the newspaper problem?” I have been asked.
I don ’t know whether the people want a democracy or not.‘
Many say they do. No one in my presence has defended this
one-sided attitude of the press. All have said that both sides
of all questions should be presented for the people ’s considera-
tion. Now, whether this attitude is a general one I have no
way of knowing, for it has not been manifested; and so far
there has been no opportunity for such an idea to manifest
itself.
But I propose to test this matter and see whether we are
a nation believing in democracy or not.
Now as to the second question, “Will the people solve the
newspaper problem?” I don’t know whether they will or
not, but I do know that they could if they would.
There are at least three ways in reach of the people if they
wish to solve this problem.
One is the common ownership of the press, or a portion of
it. Just as many cities own the waterworks, lighting system,
gas plants, etc., so could they own at least one paper in every
city, and if that one paper should honestly present both sides
of all public questions all other papers would have to do the
same or go out ofv business. If the people really believe in fair-
ness and democracy, they would give their support to the
press that stood for that thing, and all that survived would be
of that kind.
That the people have the resources to buy a part of the press
or at least start a paper of their own will never be questioned
by-anyone who is convinced that a majority of this nation
believe in democracy.
These could buy all the press and not miss the money.
But supposing that there is not a majority in this country
who believe in democracy and justice. Still it is possible for a
small minority to own one paper co-operatively in every city,
if united for that purpose; and it will prove a profitable in-
vestment to the holders of stock in the enterprise. For when a
paper plays fair with the people, it will soon have a majority

RULED BY THE PRESS 13
support that will put its dishonest rivals out of business, or
change their character.
The third method which would solve this problem is one
where no investment in the press is needed, and it is without
the necessity of having even a majority of the people in favor
of it. Briefly stated here is the plan:
Let a few thousand people in any city who believe in fair-
ness to all organize to patronize only the paper in their city
that will honestly present both sides of public questions, and
i let the questions to be discussed have a sufficient following to
initiate the question if it is of a state character, or. a reasonable
number to petition if it is a city question.
Then let this organized group select any paper that is
somewhat independent and request it to present both sides of
public questions ,and if it will do so it will get the support of
this group, but not otherwise. Let them solicit support for
their kind of a newspaper and be empowered to withdraw
that support at any time the paper failed to make good. This
will do the trick, only a few thousand determined people desir-
ing the right can obtain it from some newspaper, because it will
pay the paper in the very beginning; and as time goes on its
benefits will increase. After a fair trial no paper will be able
to stand for the old dishonest method of one-sidedness.
Just a word in closing about the contributors of articles
upon the various subjects.
The different movements have their leaders, their writers,
who are able and willing to present and uphold their side of
the question. They should be given equal space to those in
opposition. Writers for and against any question would soon
appear if given a chance to express themselves. So this plan
solves a knotty problem for the newspapers, viz., of securing
writers who understand the issue discussed.
Now if the reader thinks any of these suggestions are good
and wants to help to free his nation from a newspaper bondage,
he is invited to join with others to this end. This is as great a
cause as any man ever worked for in the past and its benefits
will be as extensive as its cause is just. Honest men are called
for, and I am sure honest men will respond.

What the Press Says
L. A. Examiner: “Liberty and the Great Libertarians" is an interesting
sociological book by Charles T. Sprading, of Los Angeles. By “Libertarians"
the author, as he states, means those leaders of thought who believe in and
preach the doctrine: "That every man may claim the fullest liberty to
exercise his faculties compatible with the possession of like liberty by
every other man.” If that evangel were accepted everywhere in practice
as in theory what a happy family human society would be.
Boston Evening Transcript: “Liberty and the Great Libertarians” is an
attempt to present “quickly and succinctly the best utterances of the greatest
thinkers on every phase of human freedom.” His effort has been especially
to enlist as many famous men as possible in the cause of liberty, and as we
turn his pages we encounter extracts from a varied assortment of writings
upon many phases of the subject.
Los Angeles Tribune: That such a book should have been the compila-
tion of a local enthusiast is reasonable grounds for pride, for truly such
an anthology is unique, and represents the compression of much thought
into little space. The editor explains his purpose in a foreword, although
the subject matter makes the purpose evident enough. Nevertheless, the
foreword is well phrased, thoughtful, and ample excuse for itself.
St. Louis Post Dispatch: Charles T. Sprading of Los Angeles, Cal., has
worked long and lovingly on a Handbook of Freedom which he dedicates to
“all lovers of liberty.” Its title is “Liberty and the Great Libertarians."
Among libertarians it includes Edmund Burke, Thomas Jefferson, Wilhelm
von Humboldt, John Stuart Mill, Herbert Spencer, Emerson, Tolstoy and
other thinkers who loved truth for its own sake. Mr. Sprading makes selec-
tions enough from their writings to illuminate an entire library.
New York Mail: Mr. Sprading has had the sagacity to see that these
authorities are really all partisans of the same idea, which is to leave the
fullest possible liberty to the individual Mr. Sprading's own conclusions
are in the highest degree unfavorable to any authoritarian determination of
opinion or conduct. There is an immense amount of food for thought in
this book, and there is probably no thinker on poliitcs and sociology who
cannot learn something worth while from it.
San Francisco Chronicle: Under the title, “Liberty and the Great
Libertarians," Charles T. Sprading has prepared an anthology on liberty and
equal rights which will be of great value to all who are interested in the
subject. After a vigorous introduction on justice, law, equal liberty and the
triumph of the industrial over the militant type, he gives characteristic
selections from Edmund Burke, Thomas Paine, Jefferson, Godwin, Mill,
Emerson, Garrison, Wendell Phillips, Thoreau, Lincoln, Ingersoll, Henry
George, Tolstoy, Herbert Spencer and others. With a good index, one may
turn in a minute to any subject which he desires to look up.
San Francisco Bulletin: An exceptionally useful and instructive volume
is this by Charles T. Sprading. It is described by the author as An Anthology
on Liberty, and contains numerous selections from the writings and speeches
of the master minds of the world on human liberty and freedom. The
libertarians included have been chosen from different political parties and
economic schools. The volume is noteworthy, as it is one of the few, if not
the only anthology of its kind that has been published, and as liberty, per-
sonal, industrial and otherwise has always been a popular topic, the volume
fills a. long-felt want, as it furnishes the worker for liberty, or the lover
of liberty, a handbook containing many important contributions on that
subject. The book is one that should be in every library, both public and
private.
This book contains 544 pages neatly and durably cloth bound. Price
postpald $1.50. Trade supplied and single orders filled by George Rlssman,
322 Story Building, Los Angeles, Cal.

Liberty and the Great
Libertarians
I wish men to be free, as much from mobs as kings,—from
you as me.—Byr0n.
The liberty of the individual is a necessary postulate of
human progress.—Ernest Renan.
Men in earnest have no time to Waste in patching fig leaves
for the naked truth-Lowell.
Liberty of thought is a mockery if liberty of speech and
action is denied.—Rev. Sidney Holmes.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself
the highest political end.—L0rd Acton.
Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely
according to conscience, above all liberties.—Mt'lt0n.
God grants liberty only to those who live it, and are always
ready to guard and defend it.—Daniel Webster.
Man has a right to think all things, speak all things, write
all things, but not to impose his opinions.-—Machliavelli.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.—Benjamt'n
Franklin.
To argue against any breach of liberty from the ill use that
may be made of it, is to argue against liberty itself, since all
is capable of being abused.—L0rd Lyttleton.
All truth is safe, and nothing else is safe; and he who keeps
back the truth or withhold it from men, from motives of ex-
pediency, is either a coward, or a criminal, or both.-—Ma-a:
Muller.
Rayformers, Hinnissy, is in favor iv suppressin’ iverything,
but rale pollyticians believes in suppressin’ nawthin’ but
ividence.——Mr. Dooley.
(This is a page from “Liberty and the Great Libertarians.”
See next page.)

Liberty and the Great Libertarians
By Charles T. Spradlng
_...__..
WHAT GREAT MEN SAY OF THIS HANDBOOK OF FREEDOM OR
ANTHOLOGY OF LIBERTY
Prof. David Starr Jordan: I have gone over your anthology on Liberty
pretty carefully, and I find it tremendously useful, for the same old issues
come up all the time.
Jack London: There is no anthology like it that I know of in all the
world of libraries. It is a splendid and unique anthology-a text book
and a reference book to be put on the shelves of all students and libraries.
Prof. Charles Zueblin: You have gathered together such an interesting
lot of personalities and such unusual quotations that the book seems to
promise to fill a real function and a needed one. I shall read it and quote
it with satisfaction.
Horace Traubel in the Conservator: I read all these eloquent pages.
They contain wonderful things said by wonderful men and women. I am
exalted. I am inspired. I am stirred to terrific reactions. I am made bigger
than my quantity and better than my quality by the overflow of this stream
of noble scripture-stuff. So I acknowledge the profit the book brings me.
My body realizes it in new tendencies of the flesh. My soul realizes it is
new vistas of the spirit.
Dr. John Clifford, M. A.“ B. 8., F. G. 8., London: "Liberty and the
Great Libertarians” is a great achievement. A finer treasure-house of the
sayings of the sages on liberty does not exist. The wealth of the repertory
is inexhaustible. All settings of the subject are presented with a rare im-
partiality. The book is sure of a splendid mission and an abiding influence
in the interests of freedom. Please give my heartiest thanks and congratula-
tions to the gifted and painstaking author. I will call attention to his work.
Out West Magazine: The library of no student of modern questions is
complete without Charles T. Sprading’s admirable anthology on liberty, and
since it is not only a very careful and thorough work, but also the only book
of its kind in existence, there is not a. public library in the land whose loan-
ing and reference shelves should not be enriched by several volumes.
“Liberty and the Great Libertarians” is as fascinating to the general readers
as it is necessary to the student, the writer, speaker, and sociologist.
Walter Hurt, Editor The Paladin: I am greatly pleased to have this
book, in fact, it is one that should be deemed indispensable to every Liber-
tarian. It seems to me that there cannot possibly be any adequate compu-
tation of the value to the cause of human freedom of your work in com-
piling of this splendid volume. Not the least important part of the book in
my opinion, however, is the matter contained in your admirable introduction.
It is certain that I shall find this book an invaluable aid in my editorial work.
Dr. E. Elmer Keeler, Editor The Good Health Clinic: Here has been
gathered the treasures of the past; sparks given out from the dynamos of
men and women who lived and felt and suffered for the cause of Liberty.
It makes the pulse beat more rapidly to read what more than 200 of the
world's greatest thinkers have had to say about freedom of thought, speech,
inquiry, press, mails, assembly, education, art, medicine, religion, literature
and science. . . . It is the only book of its kind-a library in one volume.
It vitalizes and inspires. It makes the best that is in you swell and grow
like the buds of early spring.
The book contains 544 pages neatly and durably cloth bound. Price post-
paid $1.50. George Rissman, 32 Story Building, Los Angeles, Cal.


, ‘\u‘§!:~7{‘\f"\.“