the content of some of the letters to the Editor which are openly printed on this page. It has been the policy of this newspaper to print the letters it receives as long as they are properly identified to the Editor, within the law as it applies to such things as libel and contempt of court, and are not obscene. That is still the policy although we have increasing sympathy with those people who complain about the letters which contain what they consider to be destructive intent, divisive and strident racism and downright lies.

Freedom of expression is one thing, but abuse is something else and too often these days some writers stoop to levels which give offence to sensible people, not touchy people but sensible people, and which may well be designed more to offend than to achieve any constructive purpose.

There is a difference between freedom and licence. Thinker and activist Dr.

Kenneth Clark once pointed out to this newspaper that freedom of speech stops at the point where someone cries "FIRE'' in a crowded theatre.

Some readers also object to what they think is a vindictive streak in some of the letters. These are letters which appear to be written only to "get back at'' someone else.... "I'll get you, I'll write to the paper.'' There are even people who use the threat of writing to the paper as a weapon.

Ideally letters to the Editor should not be personal weapons. They should address ideas of all sorts and seek to right wrongs against Bermuda and her people but they should not be used in a personal cause. They are used in personal causes and personal causes are really not a public concern.

There are a number of letter writers who are bitter and feel that in any number of ways Bermuda and Bermudians have cheated them. They are angry at Bermuda and angry at "the system'' and never fail to seek retribution, even revenge, through the pen.

Some writers are bitter because they have failed themselves and seek to blame that failure on someone, anyone but themselves. Blame the system, that's the easiest way. But the public is seldom fooled when it reads these letters, it simply becomes dismissive of the letters and the letter writers and moves on, without further consideration. Like the Editor, the public says, "Not that old stuff again.'' The letters columns, of course, should not be used to bore the public, and the Editor has to remember that.

Just about everyone objects to personal attacks in letters and while this newspaper has tried to hold them down in unsigned letters, it has let people go on a bit when they were writing about public figures, especially public figures in a position to retaliate. Perhaps the newspaper is wrong, but we would rather err on the side of freedom of expression, short of libel.

Basically letter writers need to remember that this newspaper honours their right to expression and opinion and exposure to the great majority of the people of the Country. When they exercise that right, they should be sensitive enough not to seek to offend fellow Bermudians of whatever colour or political stripe.