The Evening Star MONDAY, JUNE 5, 1871.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2589, 5 June 1871, Page 2

The Evening Star MONDAY, JUNE 5, 1871.

The stupid charge against Mr Lemon is disposed of, and thus the covert attack upon the General Government made by our contemporary is foiled. We scarcely recollect hearing of a more ungenerous or paltry proceeding on the part of any journal, than that of persecuting the working head of a department in order to be revenged on his superiors. Had there been a shadow of reason for the charge of abuse of the telegraphic department for private or political ends, in the transmission of Mr Stafford’s speech, no one would have condemned it more than ourselves. But no such abuse was disclosed in evidence. In fact, everything that did transpire showed clearly that the knowledge of what Mr Stafford said in Tiraaru was confined strictly and literally within the telegraphic department. To our minds there is something repulsive in the manner in which the affair has been conducted by our contemporary. The facts are simply these : It being known that Mr Stafford was going to address his constituents at Timaru, the Daily Times very laudably sent special reporters thither iii order that his speech might be fully and accurately reported. And that the earliest intimation of this supposed important utterance should be given to the people of Dunedin, the managers of the Times put themselves in communication with the telegraph department, and asked that the clerks might be retained beyond the usual’ hour in order to transmit the report for publication in the Daily Times next morning. The Government met them fairly and liberally. Not only were the wires placed at their disposal, but although by the regulations, the Daily Times was chargeable with double rates for transmission of messages after live o’clock, the Government courteously charged them only the single rate. By this liberal concession on the part of the Government, the public in Dunedin were put in possession of what Mr Stafford said or thought about public affairs, some ten or eleven hours after it was spoken, at a moderate cost to the paper. At six o’clock next morning the speech had become public property, and it would have been competent for any one to have telegraphed the message verbatim et literatim to Mr Gisborne, Mr Fox, or anybody else. Mr Gisborne, who was at the head of the telegraphic department, and had full control over the working of every station, knew all at eleven or twelve o’clock at night when the speech was being printed—but, like every other officer in the service, was bound to keep secret the messages transmitted. The evidence given both in Dunedin and Wellington is conclusive on that point. He did not disclose it. When we first heal’d of the affair, our idea was that improper use had been made of the message—that it had been communicated to some other paper to the prejudice of our contemporary ; that very likely Mr Lemon hud sold it to the Wellington Evening Dost or some other opponent of the Government. But no—nothing of the sort. Our contemporary worked on, either in blissful ignorance that Mr Gisborne knew what had been said at Timaru some six or eight hours before it could be telegraphed back to him from Dunedin, or, if cognisant of the fact, quite indifferent to it. The purpose had been served ; tho message had been

transmitted cheaply, the Daily Times received deserved commendation for public spirit, and nobody outside knew, or ought to have known, that one officer in a department had sent an account of it to a superior in the same department. Most likely, had the Stafford Government been in office, no one would ever have heard more about the case. But it suited our contemporary to allow the matter to rest for some sixteen months before action was taken upon it, and then this really innocent matter is dressed up as a grave charge against an officer who had done his very best to accommodate the paper to the utmost at the smallest possible cost. If the offence was of so grave a character in May, 1871, it was equally reprehensible in June, 1869. Why should so Jong a time elapse before taking action 1 Unfortunately it is too evident that our contemporary, having placed himself in a false position, made no scruple, in his awkward efforts at justification, to stoop to the subterfuge of sacrificing the reputation and prospects of a public officer in order to wreak its venom upon the Government of the day. But there is one singular point that has never yet appeared in the evidence. How did our contemporary obtain the information that the message had been transmitted from one officer to another in the department ? Mr Gisborne, in his evidence in Dunedin, said he locked the slips up in his desk after reading them, and told nobody he had received them. It is not likely that Mr Lemon himself would tell anybody. Our contemporary then must have obtained the information by some eaves-dropping process that should • put every department on its guard. It is very evident that no establishment—mercantile, manufacturing, or banking—could go on satisfactorily if what passes within it is published outside as soon as it occurs. One of the first lessons a lad receives in business is to keep his master’s secrets; and we know of no offence more likely to lead to the discharge of a servant than giving to others in-

formation of what passes in the firm to which he is attached. It is, therefore, evident ‘that our contemporary has been guilty of gross breach of confidence, or is aware of some person in the telegraphic department, who, through imprudence, or want of principle, is evidently unfit for the responsible office he occupies. As we anticipated, when we become aware of the facts the case has been very properly dismissed—not on mere technical grounds, but after investigation of its merits. Had there been nothing more involved than tho paltry charge, so properly dismissed in Wellington, our contemporary would have simply exposed himself to ridicule ; but when on such trumpery evidence, it is attempted to rain the name and reputation, of not only one, but several public officers, we know of no words sufficiently severe for condemnation of its proceedings.