Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5188, 7 November 1877, Page 2

Considerable comment has been made regarding the apparently unaccountable delay in the transmission of telegrams from Europe. At times, when all the telegraph lines and cables have been in full working order, it has taken four and five days ajiparently for messages of the utmost importance to reach New Zealand, and for this the local Press Agency has been most unjustly blamed. The Melbourne Argus of October the 22nd, however, points out where the real blame should be land, and says :—“lt is not often that we trouble our readers with matters personal to this journal, but there have been so many irregularities of late in connection with the transmission of our cable messages, that we feel compelled to make public complaiut on the subject. For some time past, as our readers are aware, we have incurred very considerable trouble and expense to secure special telegraphic war news from London. These messages our correspondent has endeavored to make as full and complete as possible, so that a single telegram costs a considerable sum of money. It is with much mortification, therefore, that we have several times observed that these lengthy and costly messages have been unduly delayed, while shorter and less important telegrams received prompt and rapid transmission. A long special message to the Argus, costing £BO, and dated London, 6th October, was received and published a day later than shorter messages of the same date. Again, a short message dated London, October 16, was received in Melbourne on Friday last, and published on Saturday morning, while the lengthy special message which we publish to-day from our London correspondent, dated October 12, and costing £6O, was not deli vered until Saturday forenoon. Messages from Reuter’s Bombay agency, dated 12th and 13th iust., were also received oniy on Saturday. It is evident from these discrepancies that cable messages are not forwarded on any intelligible system, and that priority of date does not secure priority of transmission. The oniy explanation we can suggest of these irregularities is the very unsatisfactory one that a preference is given in transmission to short telegrams, and that long messages are delayed until it suits the convenience of the operators to forward them. If this should be the case, wo need hardly point out that it would not afford a favorable idea of the business principles on which the management of the Cable Company is regulated, while it would act as a great discouragement to those who, like ourselves, are anxious to give the fullest and most complete information with regard to the stirring events which are now occupying public attention all over the world. We shall certainty look to the officials of the Cable Company for an explanation of the irregularities to which we have called attention.”