New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-06-30
fYENIL JOURNAL REBUKFD.

dignity OF his nlgn OlnCe TIC Ttpcateu lho
scandalous tattle and reckless insults CT The
New- York Times and openly charged those
journals with being improperly influenced by
the Bell Telephone Company. What must
have been his feeling of disgust and mortifca-
ton when the official investigation disclosed
the fact that the only newspaper which had
been taking money from the telephone COM
panies was The Times itself! How bitter must
be his resentment when the extent to which
his creduity was imposed upon is laid bare by
the Investigating Committee The folio wing
passage from the minority report of the Pam
Electric Committee, and is signed by the four
Republican members, the Hon. A. A. Ranney,
the Hon. s. G. Willard, the Hon. l.. Hanback,
and the Hon. S. G. MOffat:
An article Of Mr.. Van Benthuysen mIscaled notice,
In The ye,o York Times misprinted The World" p
$780, and editorials OF that paper In the same limo p
s9 seen to have given rise to this branch OF the in
ouiry and governed Its course. The result OF the
Investigation Is what might naturally expect Tho
charges made against the Pell Company are baseless,
and the sceusers II Gny alone culr able The
eydense 10 that the Bell Telepto Company resolved,
OF the of this not to go into any news
paper discussion. and has adhered to that policy Tho
only money paid by 1t TO any OF tho newspapers named
for any purpose 81 200 paid to The Times for the In
srrtipn OF Industrial Article, occupying -FOUR fuii
columns in its issue OF January l. 1886. That paper
was engaged writing and publishing series OF indus
trial articles insludDg on rival Telephone ana this
waa solicited by its agent aud inserted among the
number The price charged and paid was at regular ad-
vertisng rates. on the otner hand, watson van Ben
huysen has used quite freely the columns OF Inc Times
for the advancement OF the views and interests OF his
company ally. Some of mis- communications nave
already been adverted to- See record SsS, 1892 O6i
Ie for tla n o them
NJ least, probably for more We have dealt with them
already In another connection and shown their decep-
tive and misleading character, and prefer to leave them
there The committee have examined some or the
editors OF The Nec York World Su. TRIBUNE and Times
what principle governed tue selection do not know,
IA 1t was made by the chairmarl They have all dealt
with the subject. matter OF this inquiry in their own
chosen way.
George jones, OF The Times says the charges OF
venaty made we're based UpOn suspicious raised by the
character OF what published With our views OF the
facts If adopt this rule OF evidence, we should
feel constrained TO look for oxtraneous motives and
causes in The Times and not in the case OF any
other one OF the papers assaied We note lew more
facts:
The only one OF the new spapers named which has re-
ceived pay for articles published, relating to the ele
phone controversy, The Times lite whole course ana
conduct since controversy began has been 10 the line
the Electric interest AMI OF bitter hostility 10 the
opposing interest Mr.. Van Benthuysens communica-
tons and most tho editorials are in full harmony OF
one and spirit %. SS5. S9iD. Whe Mr.. Geor1e Jones
declined to do anything himself by way of influencing
the President ( $751; no did not hesitate to publish
communications OF Mr. Van Benthuyseu - nat direction
opp. 1I6i, 1,l66 1882 The developments first made
I'm regard to Electric scheme md its mode OF
execution were deemed by The Tim " possess any
public interest and therefore not pubshed as news
even (p 500. The facts proved III this inquiry were
not deemed Of any worthy OF notice. while the
rejected or par affidavit OF Mr. WilbOr was furnished Dy
Mr. Benthuysen and inserted with much nonrlsh Oh
headlines and comments without the impeachng proof
before the commttee; item OF which was mat the
first affidavit in the conflicting series was got by that
gentleman of the same witness by payment of money
price and then used OF inducing the Govern
ment suit Tho affidavit held to be incompetent
and rejected by the unanimous action Of the committee
p. 1,15sl.
1t not for to discuss newspaper ethics The line
of distinction seems be this: newspaper whch mas
already adopted particular view on question OF pubic
interest may properly seek information anu articles 10
express and support its views, even from Interested
narties But H. instead OF seeking thou 1t takes pay
from interested parties for publishing them, 1t cannot
escape being stigmatlzed as vena
The stigma thus attached to venal, reckless
and irresponsible newspaper ought to be ana
will be indclible. The only proof which the
Editor of The Times had to furnish for his
wanton and malevOlent charges was the
consciousness of his own depravity and his
sinister suspicion that other journals were as
sordid and merc.nary and us devoid OF char
acter as his own. 1t had solicited and received
advertising from the Bell Company. 1t had
been paid for publishing Mr.. Van Benthuysens
letters, which were intended to mlslead the
public and to pervert the facts. 1t had
trafficked shamelessly with both sides, yet had
tb. etirontery to insult honest and reputable
journals, which had not made merchandise OF
their columns, with wanton charges OF
venality. The public rebuke which the Repub-
lican members have felt called upon to admin
lister to The Times is a righteous judgment
upon it.