MR. FOX ON THE PAKRIAHS OF THE PRESS.

Evening Star, Issue 3059, 7 December 1872, Page 3

MR. FOX ON THE PAKRIAHS OF THE PRESS.

In a recent number of (lie Wanganui Hera hi there appeared an article in which tiie following sentences appeared:— Mr Fox has got a bad name for writing very offensive, articles (to use a mild term) in the Independent , as well as the Nelson Colonist. We suppose it is another application of. “ Give a dog a bad name,” Ac. The popular belief that ex-Premier did write* all the most bitter and personal things in certain papers detracted greatly from Ids political reputation, &c. Mr Fox addresses to the editor of the Herald a letter in which lie says;—“ It is no business of yours, or of any other person, to know whether I am in the habit of contributing to the public press or not. Though I have never been professionally connected with the press, I have quite as much right to publish my ideas, and to preserve my incognito, as you or any other professional writer who lives by Ids pen; and I am not in the habit of allowing myself to be questioned on the subject. On this occasion, however, I will so far depart from my usual practice as to toll you one or two facts which will show how very reckless and unfounded are your statements above quoted, and how unjust it is (if it be so) that my " political reputation should have been greatly damaged ” by the circulation of such rumors as you refer to. First, as regards the Colonist. On a recent previous occasion you made the same statement of my connection with that journal, adding that I had written in it “ particularly during the elections.” Now the fact is this. I never but once iu my life (as far as I can recollect) wrote an article in the Nelson Colonist. The only article I ever wrote in it attacked no political opponent, and was not written during the period of any election, or near such period. Secondly, as regards the Independent. I do not think that during the last dozen years I have written a dozen articles in that paper. I may also | have contributed the same number of letters to its columns. Nearly the whole of both these have been on subjects quite independent of party politics, sqc.li as Land Transfer, the Constitution of Courts of Appeal. ."Relations with America, Reviews of Books, the Permissive Bill, and other questions of social reform, Such has been ipy sole connection with the N<‘>v Zealand newspaper press for ten or a dozen years at least; and yet, according to you ‘it is popularly believed that I have habitually written all the most bitter and personal things ’ in the two journals named. The custom of two or three of (ho inferior journals of this Colony imputing to political opponents the authorship of particular articles in rival papers, is one entirely contrary to the morals and etiquette of the press whereon journalistic decencies are enforced. In my ease you justify your infringement, of this rule, so well known among gentlemen, by coarsely quoting the adage of “ Give a dog a bail name, Ac.” But who is it that gives the bad name? it is yon. and other journalists of your sort; and this is how you do it. First, one of you invents a calumny, or you pick one up in the street, readymade. Then the rest of you circulate it till your readers believe it. Then, you repeat it till'you come to believe' it yoqrselves. Then yon, declare that what everybody believes musf he true; and so it attains to, the dignity of a 'popular beljef,’ and you wash your hands of all responsibility for its propogation. When your calumnies are exposed, I wonder how you feel? Do you feel like an honest man? Do you feel like a respectable journalist? or dp you feel like a thief detected in the act of filching a man’s good name, which, Shakspcare tells us, is baser than taking his purse?”