The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1912-09-11
scouRGING THE DAILY PRESS.

| There IL cirque OF POi'4S'o'
Congress which resents very bitterly
the freedom of newspapers in criticiz-
ing them in their acts. They have been
for a long time anxious TO make re-
prisals upon the newspapers, and would
be glad to cripple them If they could.
They set on foot proposition TO
change the postal laws so as to compel
the newspapers TO pay about Slo,oOo,-
600 year more postage than they have
been paying for carrying their publ
cations in the mail. The pretense was
that the cost of carrying second'cIass
mail matter was very largely IN excess
OF the revenue derived from it, But
the newspapers had no difficulty in
showing. first, that Canada, with
greater distances and smaller popula-
ton, makes-a good revenue ont Of sec
ond-class mail matter at even a smaller
rate Of carriage than is the charge OF
the United States; and second, ii was
easy TO show that the express COM
panies are carrying probably half OF
the newspaper transportation at rates
no greater than the mail service
costs. So it was evident that the
claim of losing money through the
TRANSFORMATION Of second-class matter
was untenable. and therefore the effort
10 increase the rate had to be aban-
doned,
But in the confusion of the final dayI
Of the recent session of Congress there
was slipped into the postofice appro-
pristion bill bit Of general legislation
requiring newspapers to publish their
circulation. ownership, stockholders
names, and many other details of the
business OF the newspaper that are
clear invasion of private rights, No
such requirement is made as TO any
other business, not even in the case OF
monopolies. But newspapers are not
monopolies. The newspaper business II
in a state Of the keenest competition
everywhere throughout tho country.
This business is probably the only great
business that really conforms to the
| laws of competition and that ia open
| 10 competition and in no wise suscept
| ible TO operation as trusts or monopo-
listic combinations. Undoubtedly the
| requirement TO publish the inner details
Of the newspaper s business will be re-
sisted by the great newspapers. and
will be set aside ss unconstitutional.
! II newspapers are required 70 publish
the inner details Of their business and
! "a n
| then. OF course, other businesses must
also be subject TO the same require
ments and restrictions. for il is not pos
sible under our system Of government
10 single out one class Of business I'VE
speak now Of legitimate and unques-
toned forms OF business, nowhere
under the ban) and impose upon
IL requirements ard restrictions
that other forms Of business are
not subject TO- But 70 require all
forms Of business 70 make public such
details Of their operation as is required
in this uew postofice legislation would
be CARRYING governmental interference
20 = point irksome and oppressive. and
far beyond anything hitherto attempted.
There is, as has fairly been stated. " no
ground FOR the adoption Of legislation
intended solely 70 CRAFTY unwarrantcd
curiosity or 20 satisfy some grudge or
90 iniurc those who have aroused the
eumity Of public men none too scrupu.
lous in tho means they employ 10 gain
their own ends.
Bot il i not all newspapers that are
subject 10 this unjust and special legis.
lstion; only the most highly competi.
, tive part of the newspaper business, 70
wit. the great daily newspapers. are the
! object Of this special legislation. Cor
gress has never even considered the
adoption ~ such legislation agsius,
monopolisiic corporations where econ
omists and students OF public ques-
tions shave agreed that such rublca.
ton would be helpful. 1, has refused