Untitled

Evening Star, Issue 12365, 1 December 1904, Page 4

W® are afraid that the engineer of the Drainage Board suffers from A Defective a short memory, for only on Memory. that snppoeition can we account for the ex parte version ho gave to his Board on Tuesday of the interview ho had with the editor of this journal ou November 16. Mr Anderson writes;

The action I have taken so far is as follows;—I waittf upon the editor of the newspaper, informed him of my legal advice,_ called his attention to the fact that his contributor grossly bungles his figures and misstates his facts, and stated that I was prepared, provided he submitted these contributions, prior to publication, to give him the correct figures ami true facts in each particular contribution, on the condition that ho would publish them as a footnote to the contribution. This he flatly refused to do, and &ud that the best ho could do-was to publish my refutation in the following issue. Now, what actually occurred was this: Mr Anderson had that afternoon requested us to despatch one of our staff to the office of the drainage engineer, who would dictate an. explanation and correction of certain figures that bad appeared in our article of the previous' day entitled ‘A F.ltuous Board.’ Wo returned a reply that owing to pressure of work it would' not bo passible. for a reporter to he detailed for such a purpose that afternoon. Mr Anderson, however, expressed much concern that his view of the position should be placed before the public that evening, and with a view to meeting his request the editor himself took from Mr Anderson the explanation of the figures which the engineer furnished. read it over carefully to Mr Anderson, and made some minor alterations in the phraseology, at the latter’s wish, before the “ copy" was passed on to the printer. Then there took a vepf short (Jisi^usu

pion on the articles on Drainage Board policy that have been tunning through this journal. M? Alklerson appeared to labor under th© impression that we took no responsibility for them, but w© promptly undeceived him on that point. We told him very directly and plainly that we had carefully considered our position before publishing the first of the series, hod confidence in the bona tides and ability of our contributor, and would continue our investigation through the medium we had chosen until it pleased the Board to make the public familiar with all the details of cost and administration that it was desirable, should bo in the possession of the ratepayers. There was no feeling or warmth on either side—just a pleasant, everyday Sort of conversation, that we are always glad to have with Air Anderson, whom we have ever found courteous and agreeable whenever he has made it convenient to come into our sanctum or wo to pay him a' visit at his quarters. He did certainly prefer a request that ho should before publication be allowed to scrutroiso our contributor's matter, and make such alterations therein and supply such figures os, iu hie opinion, the circumstances demanded, and that his comments and statistical matter should appear concurrently with the articles. We certainly gave, a prompt and unequivocal refusal to that request, which we assured him was quite contrary to newspaper ethics, as practised by any self-respecting journal; but we did not decline, ns his quoted remarks imply, to give him any meed of satisfaction. As our earnest desire is to put the public in possession of the fullest available information concerning drainage scheme operations, we made him practically this oiler, which it is still open to him to act upon if he wishes : We agreed to supply him with corrected proofs of the articles before they are published, in order that he might bo afforded proper opportunity for analysing the writer’s arguments and figures; that we would accept any reasonable criticism thereof that he felt it incumbent to furnish; and that his rejoinders should always appear in the next succeeding imm. Having regard to the nature and scope of tho controversy, to the amount of space that the disputants are likely to demand, and to tho exigencies of the time, wo could not 1 make any other offer, and wo leave it to the public to say whether, in the circumstances, wo have merited the extraordinary abuse that Mr Anderson has_ levelled at us in his latest communication to his employers.