Year: 1873

or MEDDLING AND MALICIOUS UNTRUTH.


We have to thank our brethren of the city
press for volunteering many private ex-
pressions of their approval of the course
which we felt constrained to pursue with
reference to the systematic libels OF The
TRIBUNE by Mr.. Henry c. Bowen
of Brooklyn, and his New-YOrk echo.
These gentlemen regard the circulation
of such monstrOus calumnies, designed
to injure rivals business, precisely as high
minded business men in any other vocation
would regard it. We can have no contro-
versy with the libelers in our columns, and
we had no desire to bring them into the
courts but they were engaged. for the
meanest of purposes, in circulating
three gross and specific falsehoods
about THE TRIBUNE, which, if not
met promptly and effectually, were calculated
to do it harm with the unthinking. They re-
ported positively and with great show of de-
tail that its Weekly circulation had fallen
below $4,000, and its Daily below 10000; that
Mr.. VIM. 0rton had sold a controlling
interest in alarm because of his discovery
of these facts and that a notorious railroad
speculator (himself reputed to be very intimate
with the author of these calumnies) had lent
to the members of Mr.. Greeley's staff the
money with which they bought back the con-
troll of his paper. Each Of these assertions was
as distinctly untrue as it was malicious; and
there could have been no motive for thus med
ding in our business save to injure it in the
interest of some of the meddlers.


Any newspaper editor is liable to be de-
ceiyed. If he shows o willingness to correct
Ills misrepresentation when they are pointed
out and correction is asked, practical and SEN
sible men are likely to seek for nothing more
But neither the libeler nor his echo has done
this though each, with all bis display of
offensiveness, is careful to avoid repeating
the libel. We have therefore instructed our
counsel to bring suits at once against both,
and press them to prompt trial. In one the
summons was served ON Saturday. We shall
meet the libels ~ by proving that the circu-
lation of THE TRIBUNE is nearly or quite
double what they assert, and that it has not
been for many years anywhere near the
low figures they mamie, enormous as these
would nevertheless be TO most newspapers,
even in this city; e, by putting Mr.. VIM.
Orton on the stand to testify whether the
story concerning him is true or false or





whether there is shadow Of a shade of foun-
datlon for anything resembling it; and (3) if
the point can be properly brought into such a
suit, by proving that the notorious railway
speculator referred to never lent penny,
directly or indirectly, either then OF
ever in his life, to the gentlemea of
The TRIBUNE staff who regained the control.


Two of our ablest cotemporaries, we OBJ
serve, take opposite views of the policy of
refusing to be dragged into controversy in
our own columns withithese Gbelous med
dlers in our business. The Brooklyn Eagle
thinks it might be better to make
counter attacks. The N. Y. Epening Post com
mends the mode we have preferred TO adopt.
We are entirely clear about it. We can have
no discussion with these people about their
gratutous falsehoods concerning our business
affairs. That is not what our readers take
THE. TRIBUNE for; and the law should
afford the remedy.