, 1880-11-07
IHE following vague paragraph anna,.
a. the mead of the editorial columns Iu9,ea ~ te
Chlcago. Times Yesterday. y 0e

TIE following vague paraeranb
al the head Of the editorial columns Iua.eo ~ go
Chicago Times yesterday: ' " taa
The report having been tnada tho.
f flsuu. 10 speech ut Muskcli Hall rHEH1s daF-
ttua IT. ..l VT Iona Faruelt, and proposInr cue
Hepubcan snrrv;sed nsG: sad substantially. Il tSs
IFS, Judges. challenSers, or any ona ataa aher.
the oultdozFng business on them or fba;s 9esan
dha a,ss%ptea BY intimidation oerwseed
doors, tear down the building. taTa ~ Io"n Tho
oox, put In their ballots and r11n rhe MI oao1-
his Honor the Mayor ohisds. hbds
seem to P1ncc him, with Christian sr"toa,wo would
slrous OF tearing things to pieces. Thot sa DE-
80 reported arose fruln the fact that thc ae sas
nP WI Psseq s 1h lsom mouth to mouth xrownr ~
Wnne nke tne story OF the crows ul,d whs 20
says, as ne does In d commuuicatIon sa +n .t ao.
PApcr, tnat ne made no such speech ana ,n.ua ua
m ns ,sxa wncn &c eoma xss color to it. his word ta
to cover much ground In elec ton times M G.ea M
not always safe In accepting the statemaata atp 3.
DINERS as TO utterances and Occurrences
1t does not seem to be clear what sneach :.
referred to, or where the report ttereof ~
peared, or what became Of Carter uarrf.on,.
communication " denying that lie made 49,
such speech. We can only infer that car,a.
Harrison has at some time and IN co.,
obscure way written denial of having mad F.,
certain speech that was reported in son.
newspaper; but careful search has fai,ed{o
discover the denial, and we know ot no
newspaper except the Times which ha.
made any report OF any Of Carter Uarrfson,a
speeches that annoyed that gent!eman,.
sensitive nature. There WAS report of =
speech made by Mr.. Harrison in an issue of
the Times little over week ago contain
Ing some such language as is quoted aboye.
THE TRIBUNE accepted that report as cor-
rect, and commented thereon. The Times
had acted as Mr.. Harrlson's orsan
during the campaign, and it was nat
ural to suppose that 1t reported his
speeches fairly. It did not occur to TIE
TRIBUNE: that the Times was in the habit Of
making up its reports Of speeches from mera
hearsay, nor that it would betray ylr. Har-
rison. to whom 1T professed to be friendly.
by manufacturing speeches for him and nut
ting words in his mouth which were calcu-
lated to injure him. II the Times has been
dong this sort Of thing, it ought long since
to have frankly acknowledged the fraud, and
thus have relieved Mr.. Harrison Of the I'M
putation it had pat upon his character, his
Judgment; and his purposes II Nr. Harri-
son himself was aware at the start that he
had been misrepresented and maiigned BY
the Times in this matter, he ought to have
denounced the report OF his remarks prompt
ly. He should have demanded an Immediate
retraction from the Times, or, failing to
secure justice in that way, he might have
brought suit against. the Times for libel as
a proper means Of vindicating himself
and exposing a reckless newspaper.
We do not understand that any of these
things was done: but, at this late day.
the above mysterious paragraph is printed.
which fails to trace the alleged misrepre-
sentation to the original sonrce-viz.: the
Times. It is usual for newspapers to accept
the substantial accuracy Of other papers.
when reporting the speeches Of the orators
Of their own party whom they are indors~
ing and supporting. Hence THE TRIBUNE
has no right to infer that the Times has
a speech for Harrison which ha'
never delivered, when he has, as yet, pub.
ished no card in his organ denying the ae-
,uracy thereof.