NEWSPAPER CORRESPONDENCE

Evening Star, Issue 19633, 12 August 1927, Page 8

NEWSPAPER CORRESPONDENCE

TO TUB EDITOE. Sir, —As one of the principal offenders will you allow mo a brief word in reply to the condemnation of the Rev. Tulloch Yuille of newspaper correspondence on education and evolutionary subjects? it would seem as though this gentleman has become so used to holding the lloor completely and reply so rare an occurrence on the part of his hearers that the calm reasoning and reply to arguments presented in the paper fills him with pious horror, and causes him to overstep badly the limits of courtesy and reason. It is hard to think it, but the Rev. Tulloch Yuillo’s sweeping comment includes, as “ the lowest form of human life,” those defenders of superstition and Bible in schools whom Mr Yuille should bo in perfect agreement with. Also, although we were unaware of it before, we now learn that Sir Robert Stout, Rev. Fraser, M.A. the Yen. Archdeacon Williams, Bishop Richards, and others are, despite the acclaim and elevation of the social world, not to be allowed the position they havo attained. They are also part and parcel of that “ lowest form of human life,” newspaper correspondents. It is difficult to write in any measured terms of a gentleman who deliberately goes out of his way to insult a number of men who, whatever their view, are honestly endeavoring to remove some of the ignorance and darkness around ns still. The description seems, on the face of it, so uncharitable, insulting, and—-need I say it?— silly that one is inclined to_ think the reverend gentleman meant it in some qualifying or joking manner, although your report does not give that inn pression. Personally, I am of opinion that thrashing a question out through the medium of the columns of the

daily paper is one of the best and highest ’forms of debate, an improvement on the spoken controversy, inasmuch as the newspaper reaches thousands win) would not hear anything of the matter otherwise, and because the written word allows of attentive and reasoned reply. This is, of course, a fallacy, since Mr Ynille thinks it the “lowest form of life.” To my humble mind the pulpit oratory to which thousands are treated every Sunday, and which docs not allow the hearer any question or denial, is a much lower and more reprehensible form of education than that com pained of. By the pulpit orator statement upon statement can be piled one on the other without an atom of qualifying proof or reason. It is the home and joy of the dogmatic, intolerant believer. ‘ In the Press the same course ho followed, and the participant besides has a right to enter the discussion'if ho wishes, is allowed to dispute his opponent’s statements, and force him to supply reasonable proof nr argument lo back them up. But do I need at this day to write a long letter setting out the benefits of newspaper correspondence? 1 fee! sure that outside the ranks of the intolerant and uncharitable the condemnation of the Rev. Tulloch Ynille and his description of such as the “ lowest form of life” will be hotly resented or passed over with pity. I am not sure which course it deserves. —1 am, etc., August 11. E.W.P.