The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas et Prevalebit. MONDAY, JULY 16, 1883. Journalistic Immorality.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume IV, Issue 996, 16 July 1883, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas et Prevalebit. MONDAY, JULY 16, 1883. Journalistic Immorality.

One of the features of New Zealand newspaper enterprise is that during every parliamentary session there is scarcely a journal that has not its representative at the seat of Government. These gentlemen chronicle those incidents that would not otherwise find their way into the public prints, and although the opinions they express are naturally tinctured with the party views held by the papers they work for, their facts are for the most part perfectly trustworthy. There are, however, we are sorry to say, exceptions to this rule, and we feel it our duty to point out one flagrant instance of this. We refer to the Wellington correspondence of our local contemporary, the Mail. The identity of the correspondent may be recognised in every contribution sent from Wellington to that paper. Who but one person could be so impressed with the importance ot every utterance of the member for Wakanui, that he imagines the people of this district care for no other political news ? There may, after all, strange as such a taste may seem, be some who devour with avidity the reports of the eloquence of Mr Ivess when he is putting a question to the Minister for Justice as to our promised Resident Magistrate, or when he is giving his rather vague reasons for supporting Mr Green’s Moral Training in Schools Bill. If, however, our contemporary likes to fill his columns with this sort of thing it is no business of ours, although the conceit that prompts the publishing of it is amusing enough to cause a smile. But when we find facts deliberately misrepresented, it is entirely a different matter. To formulate the charge we have to bring against our contemporary,

we would refer to the issue of last Tuesday, the 10th inst., wherein a report is given of a meeting of the Canterbury members held re the West Coast Railway. There it is distinctly stated that the Committee appointed at the meeting for the purpose of drawing up a report as to the best line of route to be followed, consisted ot Messrs Wilson, McMillan, O’Callaghan and Holmes, while the Lyttelton Times correspondent adds to the names of these gentlemen that of Mr E. G. Wright. That this omission was made with the deliberate intention of injuring the member for Ashburton in the eyes of his constituents we have not the slightest doubt. This same corespondent has followed much the same tactics before, but a more contemptible exhibition of petty meanness than is shown in this instance we do not remember to have met. Luckily, however, Mr Wright’s reputation stands too high for such underhand blows from a political opponent to do it harm. Still, we should advise our contemporary for its own sake to give over dishonest reporting, especially when exposure is so easy as on this occasion. At any rate, we can promise him that we shall be on the vfatch, and if another attempt is made to grossly misrepresent facts, it will inevitably be pointed out.