The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1857-01-27
THE TINES EDITOR AND CORRESPONDENT.

The editor of the New York Times has given bis Wash
ingon correspondent The unkindest cut he has yet
ceved Ii will be recoectsd that it was on the authority
of his correspondent that the editor made the specific
charge of corruption which induced member of the
House for committee Of investigation The gist
of the charge as made by the editor was az follows;
awe know that corrupt Organization of members Of
Congress and certain lobby agents Washington has existed
since early in tie essn Of last year We veil satisfied
that org holds balance of power hands
sufficient in kill carry any pending
in the House Representatives and that M power has been
exerted of where its price Isl per
generally, its squvaen agreed to and that it
been used prevent favorable action equally merto-
rous which unable unwilling to submit TO
the pirstcal tribute"
Since the proceedings Of The committee and tie House.
which have resulted in placing the Times correspondent in
cusiody and in the enactment Of law for The punish
mehi of uontumacous witnesses the correspondent has
written letter to the Times in which he states his posi-
ton as follows
any position briefly this have denied that have
personal knowledge OF corruption bat have pointed the
evidence which they have obtained and which
vindicaies my opinion that it exits. claim it to be the
right and duty Of the to utter warnings moral
viction. have charged any individual member with
corruption but have warned the House against it, in view
of notorious facts and their convictions.
the confidential committee admitted that th.
corrupt disposition individuals had become known to
and that legal evidence but vndcaor
of my moral convictions and with the distinct understanding
that not being legal evidence it not to be Published Sc
did publish injurious imputations making further dis
closures from necessary. An answer to the question
would legal proof because it would be NO evidence
the crime having contaminated and while
would therefore, be useless it would involve d
AonoroJs breach Of condolences hada right bad ys ID
such confidence, because eristing lao forbade ~"
In the same number of the Times January 81, in which
the foregoing from its correspondent appears the editor
makes the following remarks
Our Washington correspondent it win be seem has beer
placed In custody the Sergeant by the House
for declining give the of certain
members Congress who have requested him to obtain o
them pecuLary in certain bills which pending
before that body thus declining 1t is scarcely
for us TO saw Mr. Simonton has acted entirely upon his
responsibility and upon his convictions OF duty and
priety The which he is reported to have assigned
h that the request made to him in confidence and thai
be will not betray confidence by revealing the
the parties who made IT, this the whole ground Of biz
refusal we frankly confess doubts wheth er II car
be iustfed We admit and would respect the fullest
tent the honor obligations implied in the receipt OF
fdenal communication, If made in good faith and with
audabe purpose We hoad refuse to beay such confidence
under any circumstances and at every hazard But dc
not adsf e rsk Of airy psrson wake has cosfdan
disionorae and criminal enterprise recogRis
any obqasion ressg pon honorable prop
osiion Of is knd confidential On ths contrary s
sasnt make himself party such raue
by screening FROM sblic knosdgs and legal We
these remarks general terms not designing by them Il
condemn the which correspondent, has Ct
pursue, and for which, presume he has other and
satisfactory grounds
The condemnation of his correspondent by the editor
the Times is so explicit and just that surprised Al
the concluding sentence in The foregoing extract