Untitled

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 250, 15 October 1908, Page 2

While it. i s generally known that a newspaper, in ull'urding .1 certain aniOlllll lII' space I'm' till! fl'l'C discussion of mutters til' general interest, docs not hold itself responsible j'ur, or nm-*iiiril.v endorse, tile views of its s, l it frequently happens that reiulers fail 1 to discriminate between the views of an individual correspondent and those of the paper which publishes ilicni. A ca.ie in point was brought tinder our mitiee yesterday, nu individual ascribing to vis some remiirl\!i made ill a letter which appeared in the \'ew s of yesterday over the lionwle-pliinie of "Observer.''' Our correspondent observed, inter alia, with reference to the matter of the School Commissioners and Messrs. Malone. Anderson and .lohnstone's letter concerninjr t| M . publication of certain information by |l|L paper, "that it will hardly improve Mr. Malone's candidature for a seat in the House." This expression of opinion was not ours, nor do we endorse it. We will go further and make if clear thai 110 dill'erence of opinion we might have with the firm of Malonc, Anderson and .Johnstone would bo allowed to inllueiice us in the slightest with respect to Mr. Malone's candidature, which will be dealt with, so l'ar as we are concerned, entirely yn lis merits politically, ill'. Malone's candidature may be freely criticised by us. but only from the point of his litness for the position. As a matter of fa'i, we are perfectly aware thai Mr. Malorlo has for -onie time entirely disassociated himself from active participation in it's business, ami probably was quite unaware of the terms of I lie letter to. which we look eM eplion. Hut evil li id | thai mil I „o. \\i- >liouhl never ha\ej Used a pr'uale dillercnce of opinion on i such a mailer i" disparage ill,, public aspirations of the landidate. With the views oi private eoiTe- poudeni s. hn-v----ever, we have uolllillg lo do. and were it nol that a misconstruction lias been placed 011 "I ih.-ei vcr's" remarks, in certain ipiarter-. we should not have lu'isideretl this explanation was rt.Vjiiiivi.l.