The daily gazette., 1883-01-10
al Cni-Thrnnl Contract

The best and plainest answer tothe morn
ing organs statement with reference to one
Of It's euU-thToat advertising contracts wlich
came into our hands through the voluntary
act Of one Of its customers Is that It Is ss
false and hypOcridcal As Is ils pretense Of
deVotioh 70 q protective tarin while it
cherishes free trade principles. The con
tract Of DR.. Tomlinson was shown
to representative Of the GAZETTE about
a week ago and used by him as an argument
against the higher advertising rate Of this
paper. The date of the contract was not
noticed, in fact but little attention was paid
to II st all, aud the matter would probably
have drilled into oblivion as dozens Of other
exposures Of similar kind have done had
It not been for the double-dyed efirontery dis
played by the morning organ few days ago
ia its dishonorabie attempt TO build itself
up at the expense of its neighbors by trying
TO show that il was the only paper in VIII
mingsou whose success had been such that
it could demand good prices for advertising
and stick 10 It's rates; when the truth Is, If
lis patrons are to be believed, It has, more
than any paper that was ever published here,
excepting possibly the Third street news-
thief, sought TO debase the business Of news
paper advertising, BY the underhand prac-
tice of cutting rates. Its game, which IL
has not been prudent enough to conceal,
has been to come here, backed, 80 It's bust
ness manager says, By heavy capital, and
do advertising at losing prices, in
the hope Of finally driving the
other papers out Of the field, when
It would have fine opportunity to step In
and reap its reward by putting its adyer-
dsing rate up at whatever figure it might
choose. 1t was very silly game, but that
| Is no argument against the fact that It really
sas hatehed in the business department Of
the morning organ.
Now as TO the statement Of the AepS that
we have been going around among its bust
| ness friends with It's cut-throat contract In
our hands, 1t is falser, If possible. than its
other statements. We ! ave never had
the contract in question In our hands and
We challenge 1t to produce any proof that
we have ever gone around among its bust
neAs friends or to anyone else with any OF its
contracts, old or new. When business men
have come to this Office armed with the
contracts, letters and receipted bills Of
the morning organ TO prove that
il was taking advertising at less than half
what We could afford to do it, and then
when Immediately upon the top Of that an
other advertiser comes along aud 'reckons"
that the HoraiHg Neics must have 8
arger circulation because it charges
so much more than other papers
We regard it as pretty conclusive proof that
the business methods Of the morning organ
are based upon the plan of charging some
Of its patrons enough over fair price to
make up what It loses on others by
| charging lees than a fair price.
As we have said, the date Of the contract
with DR.. TOmiinson was not noticed by our
| representative, but he was tacitly given 70
understand that It was recent, and in the
light of experience we are justified in giving
more weight 70 even q tacit statement than
to the Eees' positive assertion.
We are glad 10 hear that the
editor Of the morning organ was brought
up to believe in the Bible but We fear that
tue arduous duty of editing protective
paper with free trade brains has
prevented him from giving much thought
70 its precepts .oi late. Before com
plet!rg his studies OF the advertising
question We suggest that it might be proftl-
bic for him 10 devote a half hour or 90 to
the perusal OF the fifth chapter Of Deuter-
onomy, and We particularly direct his Atten-
ton TO the goth verse, which reads ''Seither
''shalt thou bear false witness against thy
''neighbor.''