The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1901-11-28
MR. FULTON IN ERROR,
AstoriSn Was Not Unfair IN Its synop-
sis u TIE Hammond Letter.

In C. W. Fuhon's letter. published
yesterday. there appeared a statement,
echoed by the Daily News. tbas Is sur
prfs.ngly unjust 10 this paper. Mr..
F'ulton's letter says: The answer (of
Mr. Hammond 10 Judge BowIby's re-
quest that the East Astoria s.re be
donated for the sash and door factory
was not designed for publication, but
on the l7th inst the Astorian contain
Z ed an article purporung TO state the
facts relative to the subsidy situation
and also assuming TO state the sub
Stance o. Mr.. Hammond's letter. That
J portion OF the article referring 10 Mr..
! Hammond was in a spirit So manifest
I ~ UNFAIR. ani the statements credited
to his letter were such a mixture Of
balf truth and untrIth. that Mr. Ham
mond requested the committee to pub
/ lish his letter in full"
Mr.. Fulton and the Daily News, both
OF whom refer to the Astoyian's publ
cation Of the alleged substance of 1he
Hammond letter. evidently are most
fJrg Vful. and Il would be interesting
To know why the Ast)r'an's publioa-
tion was alone picked out. Every daily
papa in the city published derticaTy
the same story which was IN effert
thai the property askei by the commit
tes dil not bslohg % Mr.. Hamm nj
and consequently could NJ, b. donated
ma. Hammond hsd other pr1per,y.
which coIid be secured by the people
" Astoria a. cost price plus aceru j
taxes and S per cent interest on the
capital invested. Careful scrutiny u
the Hanmo1d letter fails utterly t. dis
.clJsa the "half truth AMI uniruth" to
which Mr. Fulton makes r. ference. IN
deed the Hammond litter Is shown %
De just exactly a. IN. committee gave
out It's substance. The committee prob
ably did not give out Mr.. HammOnd's
reference to Smith Point property and
the price he would demand for a site
there, because Judge Taylor stood ready
20 donate a site.
Perhaps It wiz b. w1I at this time 10
enumerats a few additional facts. The
committee having in charge the sash
and door foc.ory prop sal carefully
considered the Hammond letter. and
came 10 the conclusion that it was de-
slgne1 for publication, and also to ur--
vent establishment Of the proposed fac |
tory. This belief may cr may MT have |
been correct. Usually the committee |
men ACQUAINTED a Budget man and a |
II the Asrorfan with |
everything Of importance in the nego-
tiatioas, the newspapsrmen agreeing TO |
pHn. nothing that would hurt the
The Hammond letter was |
the only document 70 which the two
70 quesAon did not have
access. However. the substance Of the
litter was made known 10 tnem. al
h1ugh the committeeman who gave
put the information took occasion 20
lcquaint the reporters with the belief
hat he letter was intended by Mr..
Hammond for publication, and that II
was designed 10 knock" the sash and
IoOr proposal The cOmmttesnen had
title dea that Mr Hammond would
give the property asked. and Il seemed
1retty generally understood that the
-equ=st for the site was made only for
ne purpose N putting him on record.
)f course, the site in question Was de-
fred, but It was correctly supposed that
Mr. Hammond warted cash for any Of
lis holdings here. The committeemeD
It all times urged the two reporters 70
be very careful in dealing with Mr..
so that the feelings Of that
yentIzman would not IN any way be Of
ended. This wish was respected, and
dr. Fulton's stotement that the Asto-
lan was untruthful and unfair IN print-