The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-12-23
has been less offensive to the public than that


has been less offensive to the public than that
of the Tribune.
1t approves the verdic', ON the ground thai
we Ierseeuted Mr.. Fry from personal enmity
How is this shown Not from the evidence
tor the only witness who sw re to anything like
malice on our ar was MIR. Maurice Strakosch
who admitted ON his cross-examination. that be
could notremember VIA language we had used
in reference 10 Fry and that he was not at the
time familiar with the English tongue. Mr.
Strakosch's evidence mus. certainly go for no
thing in the eye o. any one practised in weigh
ing testimony. He owned to such bias
against us as went long way to disqualify
him from appear ng as witness at all. and
when closely esioned, retracted all that was
substa initial in Lis previous answers. We can
not, therefore. suppose that the senior editor O
the Tribune based his opinion on the state
menfs Of Strakosch. Nor could he have formed il
from any true extra,judicial account of the facts
which were simply these. Mr. Strakosch called
on US, ard asked us if we would like to become
acquainted with Mr.. Fry. We replied that we
were Indifferent on the matter, but had no OBJ
jeciion to see him, if he desired it. A few days
afterwards we were told that Mr.. Fry did not
wish to visit us, and we replied naturally
enough that that finished the business Feel
ing on The subject We had none and beyond o
conviction, based on experience, that Italian
opera would not succeed in this country, we
neither entertained nor expressed any opinion
respecting Mr. Fry, until Middle. Truffi came to
Us to entrea. our protection against his SIAN
ders We published her card, and then begin
ming to look into the matter, we discovered
facts which appeared to us to betoken Fry's
failure at no distant day. These facts. seem
ing to US to fall rightly within the province
of journalism, we published. and made no
more scruple to avow our differences than
we should do to-day if we thought we
saw obvious tokens Of the failure of the Broad
way or Burton's. What was there in this 80
reprehensible as to call for fine Of $40, 900?
What crime did we commit to entitle us to the
grave Teprobaton ofour brother Journalists? Is
itnot daily protested by the very Tribune which
assails us, that the truth must always be told.
regardless of consequences? Would the Iri-
6ane, if it knew of reasons obviously fore
sbadowing the failure of scheme which pos
sesses public confidence, hold its peace through
fear Of injuring private individuals? Aud, fit
were condemned ioi'its fearless devotion to the
public interest, would it expect it's cotempora-
ries to rejoice at the injury done to the liberty Of
the press in its person?
With the Times the case is different No
one expects from the Times either truth, man.
illness or justice. Started to oppose the Tri-
6une by the Seward clique, in the expectation
that sneaking disingenuousness would be more
successful than outspoken candor, it is now an
failure; and its last attempt to stave
off the withdrawal of the subsidy which sup
ports it is an endeavor to decry the character
circumstances, might be forgiven for resorting
to questionable means; the editor Of the Times
had no scruples to overcome. As manager of
the Courier and Enquirer, he had already
given the public sample of what he dared, by
foul calunny respecting the cha
racter Of two respectable hotel keepers; and
though on that occasion he was compelled to
swallow ignominiousiy his own words, the les
son. We regret to say, was entirely without
profit on his disposition. He has continued to
resort to falsehoods whenever they suited his
purpose better than truth. He has iawncd and
sneaked round cliques and political parties in
the hope Of few subscribers or stray adver-
tisement; he has alternately praised and abused
the Irish rs the chances Of patronage from the
/" Know-Nothings" Or the Hibernians' seemed
greater or less he has been democrat, wing,
an aholitionist, hard she'll. just as the adver-
tisers Of the day commanded; he would have
protested Mormonism to secure dozen adi-
tional subscribers. Eternally dreading frank
expression Of opinion, he has given to the world
paper whose course none but an Edipus
could explain--now on one side now on another,
now bemiring the Cabinet with praise. now exalt-
ing il by silly censure it has exhibited one single
stable charac teristic, and that is uniform un-
wavering meanness. On one single topic the
Times has been consistent-it has always
abused the HERALD. 1t had nothing what
ever TO gain by pursuing contrary course
Not content with exhuming all the thread
bare ISLANDERS which twenty years Of public
life have accumulated, it has gone round, nat
in hand, TO every one who might be offended
with our straightforward course, and begged
them with a lackey's humility to make the
Times the channel Of their spleen. But
neither the Bank Presidents nor the lawyers
for whom the Times filed the Office of sewer
could kill the HERALD fast enough. 1t ALSO
lutely thrivcd under the infection, white the
Times daily diminished. What was to be done?
Fresh lies, said the discounted editor. are our
only resource SO he set himself to lie with q
will. He lied Of the past, and lied Of the pre-
sent lied Of our character, Of our opinions, Of
our motives, Of our course; lied in BREWER and
lied in minion; lied in person, and suborned
others to lie. So little wit had he, poor fellow,
that he lied as glibly where detection was i'm
rnnen,. rs where he might have had chance