New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-02-02
NIP FJETD,C dNCUPR

Mr.. David Dudley Fields answer TO our re-
marks of Tuesday last on the management OF
the Erie suits is published in another part Of
this paper and we regret that the late hour
at which it was received prevented its appear
anco yesterday. We dissent entirely from the
views of journalism which Mr.. Field chooses
to advance. He believes that an editor
has no business TO express opinions,
and ought to cOnCne himself TO a
record of facts He complains that when
his professional conduct is editorially discussed
in TIE TRIBUNE he is the subject of anony-
nous criticism! Mr.. Field will excuse us. The
TRIBUNE is nearly as well known in the COM
munity which supports it and him as he is, and
it is quite as responsible. If he is slandered in
THE TRIBUNE ne has his remedy, of whichno man
in New-Yorls better knows how to take adyant
age; and if we do him injustice through mis-
take, he knows that he has only to call our
attention to it TO secure the amplcst repara-
ton in our power We cheerfuly give space
to his letter this morning, although we think
it proceeds upon false view o. his own posi-
ton, and of ours. He has received no s. hal-
"lenge"-he has simply seen in orr columns he
expression of a careful Judgment on accredited
facts We DO not hold him Irresponsible for
"al the suits of the Erie Office We have
explicitly dsclaimed any purpose to do that.
The "HistOry of a Years Law-suits,"t0 which
his letter is a reply, was in type in our Office
before the appearance of his controversy with
Mr. BOwles, and Mr.. Field is not once men
toned in it. We referred to it editorially
as an illustration of the discFeditablc prac-
tees by which the Erie Company had brought
deep and abiding reproach upon the admin
"istration of JUSTICE" we quoted Judge Rose
krans's pointed denunciatiOn Of the "npro-
"fessional" evasive," and "tricky" conduct
of Messrs. Field and Sherman in one of those
suits, and the reported attempt of Mr..
Dudley Field 0he SOM to influence Judge
Barnard at an earlier period of the
history of Erie, in order to show how
well founded was the popular conviction that
the use which the Erie Company makes of the
| Courts is a scandaous perverson of law and
justice; and We remarked that "when Mr..
Field appears even occasionally as the agent
"Of these practices it is natural that many of
" his old admirers should look on in sorrow
and surprise" Our purpose was to show Mr..
Field what it is that people charge him with
his moral accountability III the matter we ex-
pressly refused to judge.
We repeat to-uay what we sad yesterday
there are some things which journalist is
justified in taking for granted, even without
such proof as might be sufficient in court of
Justice. The misdeeds of tho Erie Directory,
for instance, We hold to be open and notorious.
The Courts ought to afford the shareholders a
remedy for the outraSeS of their trustees;
but either through the chicanery of
lawyers, or the corruption of the bench,
or both combined, the rules of practice
and evidence have been 80 perverted that
there is no protection whatever against Messrs.
Fisk and Gould, and an Erie suit has become
a more hideOus mockery of justice than even
the English chaucery suits which were satir-
lied by Dickens. These are notorious facts
but it soems to DO Mr. Fields opinion-he
will pardon us if we misunderstood him
that wo may not repeat them unless We have
loyal proof W SUPPORT them with. Proof thai