Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1872-01-10
WORCESTER
WEDNESDAY,. JANUARY 10. 1s4.


The Investigation now going on in New York
relative to frauds in the custom house gives the
leading papers OF that city an opportunity to
show their quality. Some of them desire to
End frauds and connect the president with them.
Others evidestly wish 10 have everything con-
nected with the custom house appear as white
and stainless as possible. of course the World
docs its best to invent perversions andfllse con-
struciions of the evidence, in order to assal the
administration. The Tribune shows desire to
hit the president; and, moved by this influence,
j. has perverted some of the evidence. For in-
stance, it eonstrues a passage in the testimony
of Mr.. Lindsay so as TO make him say this: 81
had rather not say what know about this mat
ter. want to be understood as not wishing to
say anything against the president of the United
States" And yet MIR. Lindsay did not say this.
The reporters of the Tribune and the World
agree in stating that he spoke as follows: at
would take me, Mr.. Chairman, a long while to
give you all the points, and should rather not
attempt TO 90 into the whole detail of the case;
| wish ii understood that what have said re-
heets IN no form, shape or manner on the presi-
dent of the United States" The difference is so
obvious and so great tina we can not understand
why the Tribune allowed such perversion of
The testimony TO appear in its editorial columns.
The Times is quite as bad, on the other side,
aud evidently regards the investigation as dam
gcrous continuance against its own faction of the
republican party IN New York. 1t attempts 20
belittle and whistle away from attention the
very damaging testimony of A. 7. Stewart rea-
tive to the general order business. Mr.. Stewart
showed that this business has become a mOnop-
oily in the hands of Leet & Co., who have
doubled the CHARGES on it, aud that the change
which established tins monopoly subjects the
importing merchants to great inconvenience and
ANNOYANCE, as well as TO frequent loss by delay
ia getting their goods from Leet & Co.'s ware
houses. He certainly made it plain that the
general order business, as az present conducted,
needs thorough reformation. Leet & Co.'s
monopoly is an outrage TO the merchants who
import goods Mr. Lindsay's testimony had
made this very clear; but Mr.. Stewart is an i'm
porter and knows what it is BY experience.
And docs the Times demand an abolition of this
monopoly in order that the commerce of New |
Yok may be relieved from such oppression? |
Not at all. On the contrary, it upholds the
Mr.. Stewart did say, speaks of his testimony
thas: "rhe outrages he had alleged had never,
he confessed, pat him to extraordinary iucon.
yeuience and expense, although he receives one
tenth of the Imports at New York" He con-
fessed nothing of the kind, but affi med just the
contrary; and he does not receive one-tenth the
imports at New York, although be may receive
one-tenth of the import of dry goods.
The Times claims that nothing has been
proved; and unless there shall be a radical
change in its method of treating the subject, it
will probably persist in saving that nothing has
been proved, and use lis influence TO defend in
this way any rascality of The custom house that
may be brought to light If Leet & Co.'s mo-
nopoly-with its yillainous charges and proceed
sin9s were bucanneering continuance Of Tweed
& Co, the just rage Of the Times against it
would be irrepressible, and tie vocabulary ofthe
English language would be insufficient to give
its feelings full expression. Now it is true that
there are frauds and bucanneering practices in
the New York custom house. This has been
proved already by witnesses examined before
the present investigating committee Some OF
these frauds have existed Tor wears; others are
due to agencies tolerated by the present man.
agement OF the custom house. How are these
TO be exposed effectually, if papers like the
Times and Tribune persist in working in this
way for their scandalous factions rather than foI
the public welfare?