The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1879-10-30

In response to an editorial paragraph which
appered in the Portland Advertiser shortly
after election, the following was published IN
the issue of the Times for Sept 9th:
The Portland Advertiser challenges us to produce
any evidence we have of bribery at the recent cleo
tions in 1t says that accusations of this kind
carry weight until they appear in the court re
ports. Few newspaper publishers have the time or
means to push into court all the evidences of crime
which come into their possession; but IL the Adver-
tser is wiling to % fas + task h which nc it urges up
proof with which to wage its battle in the interests
Of morality. Even with the excellent evidence
which we can !place in its possession, the chances
that it will have its labor for its pains; but per-
haps the mere attempt to visit punishment on guilty
parties may have restraining influence upon all
Republicans who may attempt bribery at future
elections
The Advertiser made no reference to our
offer in its columns, and its editor gave us no
intimation, by letter or otherwise, that it in
tended to accept it, either Immediately or at
any future time. But as late as the morning
of the 11th of October, two full weeks having
elapsed, gentleman of rather good appear
ance entered our office and picked his teeth
White we TGdu rfIO following tett0r wirieiA iAo
handed us:
Gould, Esq, of this city, who is authorized to re-
ceive the evidence which you propose to furnish me-
of bribery at the recent election in Washington
county Please furnish him with all the document
airy evidence in your hands, with the names of wit
nesses and statement of facts to be proved by
them. and with uch other information, direct or
indirect, may lead to full exposure OF the
alleged violations oflaw. Mr.. Gould is member of
Cumberland bar and is authorized and instructed to
act for me in the premises,
Respectfully and truly yours,
III. w. RICHARDSON.
We were struck by the ingenuity Of this let
ter at its first perusal. That it was worded for
a purpose and that purpose one OF evasion
was at once apparent. We read it to Mr.. Gould
and stated that we did not propose to respond
to its peculiar requests, and then reread it for
his benefit, pointing out that the letter gave
no guarantee,-not even promise, that Mr.
Richardson desired the evidence to produce in
Court" but that the wording "full exposure OF
the alleged violations of law indicated an en-
trely different design. We had offered the
evidence that it might be ''pushed into court,
and the guilty parties punished by law it pos
sible, but here was new proposition ana 10
entertain it would be idle.
However, upon Mr.. Gould's assurance that
Mr.. Richardson was acting in good faith, united
to his protestations that it was hard to come so
long distance on vain errand, we consented
to give him the documentary evidence then IN
our possession relating to two cases OF bribery
He took notes of the first while we were pro-
curing the papers relating to the second. But
at this point casual remark which he dropped
revealed purpose to publish whatever evil
dence he received Upon being questioned he
would not deny this, and we thereupon per-
emptorily declined to give him the facts in the
second case. A lengthy general conversation
on election matters enSued, with the under
standing that nothing spoken was to be pub
liseed or reported, and Mr.. Gould departed.
The sequel has shown that our suspicious
that Mr.. Richardson was not acting i'll good
faith were well founded. In the Portland
Daily Advertiser of Oct. 18th, we find pub
lished the documentary evidence relating TO
the case of bribery which we furnished MI
Could with not the faintest intimation that 1t
is to be used in Court. That it is sufficiently
explicit the Advertiser admits; and that 1t Will
lead to the conviction of the guilty party if any
evidence of bribery can, there can be no DOUBT.
And yet Mr.. Richardson contents himself, al
ter all his lofty advice, and his swell in accept
ing our offer, with simply publishing it III his
paper. The inference is that the evidence is
stronger than he anticipated. He went out
trapping, and has got trapped.
The sequel has shown also that our treat
ment of Mr.. Gould was wise only in withhold
ing part of the evidence then in our possession:
We were unwise in trusting to that honor and
good faith that is supposed to exist between
newspaper men and their representatives
everywhere Had we imagined 1T possible
that he would publish remarks that we made
in private conversation, after a request by u.s.
and assurance by him. that it should not be so
used, we would have been justified in pointing
him to the door at the outset. fortunately all
the conversation we held with him was III
hearing of visitors and workmen in our office,
so that others know as well as we how he has
perverted facts. So much for the said George
+. Gould. The misstatements with which his
report is filled are even less worthy OF mention.
A word, finally, with Mr.. Richardson of the
Advertiser We have placed in your possess
sion documentary evidence" which cannot be
questioned in a case of bribery We are pre-
pared to hand you list of witnesses who will
provide you with an abundance of verbal tes-
timony." The case has not been presented to
Grand Jury. Now, we expect you either to
produce this evidence i'll Court, or admit that
you have been engaged in one of those ques-
tionable transactions that every brother jour
nalist will condemn Either take legal pro-
ceedings in the case furnished, or confess that
YOU never intended to. 1t strikes us that you
have squeezed yourself into box of rather
small compass, but we propose to keep you
there, until you are willing to take the only
honorable course left. We wish it fully under
stood, moreover, that we still adhere to the
letter of our offer, and are willing to go even
farther We now state that whenever you
will provide us with proper guarantees that
you will use in Court, and not in print, any
evidence of bribery in our possession, we will
| furnish you with the documents and the
| names of the witnesses in nine promising
cases. To publish them is another matter.
| The Times can do that, if it must be done,
| quite as we'll as the Advertiser.