The Hastings Standard Published Daily MONDAY, OCT. 12, 1896. PRESS TELEGRAMS.

Hastings Standard, Issue 143, 12 October 1896, Page 2

The Hastings Standard Published Daily

MONDAY, OCT. 12, 1896. PRESS TELEGRAMS.

Fur the cause that lacks assistance, For the wrongs that nfed resistance, For the future in the distance, And the good that we can do.

Df. u.in<; -with the report of the Copyright Telegrams Committee, the Evening Post says, " If the rate be raised it is the newspaper reader and not the publisher who will suffer. The loss, whatever it may be, is in the nature of a subsidy paid by the Government for the benefit of the whole community," and in this our contemporary is delightfully misleading. The special concessions made by the Government on press telegrams was no doubt intended to benefit the community, but surely it cannot be claimed that this subsidy also gave to the large newspapers of the colony, such as the Evening Post, a chance to enter into a combination to prevent as far as possible the public receiving the full benefit of the subsidy. The Press Association is the baby of the big " dailies," but it has to be nursed by the country papers. But that is of small importance ; the main question is whether the State is justified in incurring loss so that a little clique might dominate the newspaper press of the colony, and practically dictate whether or not a newspaper shall be allowed the privileges of the Association, which rest entirely on the goodwill of the State. The- setting-up of the Copyright Telegrams Comiuiifee was, we believe, directly due to the exot-Litant fee demanded by the Press Association from ; a fee which we were disposed to pay, but which we were prevented from paying through the very acute business instincts of ttje Chairman of tlie Press Association. Not one of the papers associated with this news agency monopoly has dared

to justify the high entrance fee demanded from us or the discourteous treatment we were subjected to at the hands of Mr Knowles. Let us recount the history of this very peculiar business. We applied for admission to Press Association, and the manager, Mr Atack, of whom we wish to speak in the most courteous terms, for we received nothing but kindness and consideration from him, informed us that the entrance fee for a paper starting at Hastings was £SOO. We endeavored to get in at a lower rating, and instanced several papers that were admitted for very much less than we were asked to pay. To all our requests for a reduction we were told it was impossible, the rate having been fixed by the directors, it could not be altered until the annual meeting. Finding it practically impossible to escape the exorbitant charge, we agreed to pay the amount, and arranged to deposit ±;-JOO in cash and give a three months' bill for £2OO, the bill to be approved by the Chairman of the Association. We looked upon the matter as settled, thinking that the approval of the chairman was a mere matter of form, and were justified in so thinking, and for this reason : It could not have mattered one jot to the Association whether the bill carried sound names or otherwise, so long as it was a legal document, for if it was dishonored the Association stood to gain. It would have had our £3OO and we should have been cut off from the enjoyment of its privileges ; but we reckoned without Mr Knowles and his ideas of business and courtesy. Had the Standaud made its appearance in some other township there would probably have been no trouble, but in seeking to invade the territory supposed to belong to the Daily Telegraph, we put ourselves beyond any hopes of reasonable treatment by the Chairman of the Press Association. The littleness of Mr Knowles is thus shown. The subsidy of the State was not intended to encourage exorbitant charges and selfish behaviour, and now that the newspaper clique scents danger there is a cry about the community suffering. Will the Evening Post say that it gives to the community in proportion to what it receives '? Would it dare give less than it does now "? Even the excellent monopoly it enjoys will not, we think, tempt it into curtailing its news columns, but we are quite certain that with healthy opposition the Evening Post would be a more readable paper than it can possibly claim to be now. Our contemporary should say less about the " interests of the community " for it knows nothing about that, never having studied the matter. The pockets of the proprietors are the only interests that were ever studied.