The record-union., 1896-02-28
A HOME THRUST.

It is the too common practice of
newspapers to charge upon their an
tagonists, adversaries and Journalistic
contemporaries offenses without suffi-
cient evidence to sustain the charge.
One of the worst offenders against this
canon of good newspaper morals is the
San Francisco Examiner 1t does
not hesitate in the qualification of mall
ice to make charges against any public
or private individual, whether it's as
sertions are demonstrable by proof or
are wholly the result of heated contro-
versy. 1t recently charged Speaker
Reed with offenses which, if true,
would indicate that Republican insti-
tutions were at an end in this country.
1t has perpetually charged against c.
P. Huntington offenses of which he is
not guilty and of the truth of which
it possesses no proof. It has placed its
columns for years at the disposal of
one whose only distinction in the world
of letters is his capacity to be person
ally offensive and abusive. And yet
our contemporary is itself so thin
skinned that the very first time the
standard of journalistic ethics which
it constantly employs in the treatment
of others is applied to itself, it whines
like whipped spaniel. For proof of
this we present the following from the
editorial columns of the Examiner
OF Yesterday:
'The Southern Pacific's organ, the
Sacramento Record Union presided
over by William RI. Mills, a railroad
employe, says:
If the Roentgen ray were turned
upon the San Francisco Examiner"
behind its seeming would be discerned
powerful Eastern organized capital
reaching out to throttle California and
control its commerce.
THAT is a plain lie.''
Mr.. Mills is President of the Sacra-
mento Publishing Company which
owns the Record Union" but he is
not in immediate editorial charge of
this paper, and when the editorial SEN
tence quoted by the Examiner was
written he was in Southern California
and wholly unconscious of either its
writing or it's purpose.
Our readers will bear testimony that
the Record Union has been free
from the vice of making irresponsible
charge against its antagonists, polit-
ical or otherwise, or against its con-
temporaries, Of an offensive nature
oh, y
fragible testimony. In the case under
consideration, it may be plainly and
openly confessed that we have no evil
dence that the EXAMINER is in the re-
ceipt of money from the combination
which proposes to buy the Pacific rail-
roads as the result of the plan of fore
closing the mortgage We do know that
such combination exists; that the adj
vocacy of the policy of foreclosing the
mortgages upon the Pacific railroads
is strictly in the interest of a syndicate
which desires to purchase these roads;
that the neutrality-suspicious. wit
tinglyor unwittingly-is engaged in as
Sisting this scheme; but we do not know
that it has been the recipient Of money
or other favors at the hands of this
syndicate. We, however, applied to
the Examiner" its own standard of
journalistic ethics. and the arrow sped
straight to its mark When the 'Ex-
aminer' is charged with an offense of
which perhaps it feels itself to be inno-
cent, it replies by methods character
istic only of the bully It says this is
a plain lie. In very truth, the same
character of charges against which the
Examiner" protests in so emphatic a
manner is in the nature of accusations
which the Examiner itself peruetu-
ally applies to its antagonists. Jour
nalistic or otherwise, without sufficient
proof Of the truth of its assertions.
Toward itself it demands that the
highest standards of criticism and de-
bate shall be applied. Toward others
1t perpetually practices the lowest and
most vicious ethics known to the pro-
fession of journalism. A journal which
perpetually makes unfounded accusa-
tions and irresponsible charges should
be less sensitive.
With its sensitiveness and its jour
nalistic practice, we leave it face to
face.