New-York tribune., 1918-08-24
To Whom 1t Shall Concern

AS this is the only newspaper that
prints the news of the fight Of the news
dealers, supported by The Tribune,
against Hearst, the Publishers Associa-
tion of New York and the Hylan admin
istration, the other side of the case is
not brought into the open. Those papers
that mention the matter at all, as the
Herald and Sun did very briefly yester-
day morning, make it out to be merely
strike on the part of some newsdealers
for lower wholesale price on papers,
so as to increase their margin of profit.
The Globe puts the responsibility on the
government, saying:
"The January strike for cheaper papers
was stopped on February 7swhen the pub
fishers agreed to restore return privi-
leges, so that the dealers might adjust
their purchases to the public demands
upon them. The strike resumed
when the publishers, obeyng the instruc-
tons of the War Industries Board, dis
continued the return privilege, as waste
full Of white paper"
1t is for us, therefore, to state one Of
the main contentious on the other side.
It is the one that impugns our good
faith Privately, it is being said that
in cutting the price of The Tribune from
s140 to s1.2O per hundred copies to
newsdealers we broke our word with the
Publishers Association not to change the
price e9cspt on ninety days-astiss. V . ~ q.
To his We say first, that as a mem
Der Of the Publishers Association we
knew of no such agreement; second, that
we challenge proof of its existence by
any minutes, resolutions or writings;
third, that all of this is immaterial and
tends to confuse the main issue.
The Tribune's decision to act indie
pendently was inevitable from the nat
ure of the circumstances.
First, the newsdealers Of their own ac
cord declared war upon the Hearst news-
papers for reasons in which economic in
terest, desire for revenge, and feelings
of patriotism were ineXtricably mixed.
The Tribune had nothing to do with the
newsdealers' decision, and did not know
of it until after it had been reached.
But what happened next was Of vital
concern to u.s. The Publishers Associa-
ton met, resolved to treat the newsdeal-
ers' ban upon the Hearst papers as an
illegal boycott and agreed-The Tribune
alone dissenting-thatn newsdealers who
refused to sell Hearst papers should be
cut off from all other papers.
The Tribune had either to support
Hearst against the newsdealers or stand
alone. We elected to stand alone. We
advertised our intention to supply papers
to all newsdealers without discrimina-
ton.
Thereupon the Publishers Association
instructed the American News Company
TO refuse to deliver Tribunes to any
newsdealers who cut the Hearst papers.
The American News Company is an
air-tight monopoly. 1t absolutely con-
trolls the distribution of morning news
papers in New York City.
By this action on the part of the Pub
fishers Association, through the Ameri-
can News Company, The Tribunes cir
culation was threatened with destruction
We could submit. We could stultify our
selves by going over to the support Of
Hearst. Or we could organize an inde-
pendent delivery system. This no New
York morning paper has yet succeeded
IN doing, and nobody believed The Trib-
une would attempt it.
We accepted the challenge and decided
TO stand entirely with the newsdealers
and against Hearst. We gave the news-
dealers the price they were asking for.
namely, $1.2o per hundred, which, Incl
dentally, we believe to be fair price.
We shall now proceed to organize our
own system Of distribution.
The American News Company not only
has refused to deliver us to newsdealers
who will not sell Hearst papers also, but
1t has refused to deliver us at all to any
newsdealer except at the old price of
$1.40 per hundred.
That is to say, the American News
Company, acting under instructions from
the Pnblishers' Association, undertakes