THE PRINTING DEBATE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XXXIX, Issue 3863, 12 June 1873, Page 4

THE PRINTING DEBATE.

TO THE EDITOB OF THE LYTTELTON TIMES. gißj—l hope you will allow me space to make a few remarks on the above subject. At the request of the Government, I took a report of the printing debate on Friday. This you declined to publish when furnished to you, on the ground that the report that you had already given was “substantially the same.” This was a line of notion which you had a perfect right to adopt, and, if the matter had ended there, I should not have troubled you with this letter; but it has now gone beyond that. You have seen fit tomsert in this morning’s issue, in parallel columns, a portion of Mr Kennaway’s speech as given by myself and by your reporter. It is to this course that I feel bound to take exception, on the ground that you ought to have published the whole of that speech, instead of selecting only that part which would seem to convey the impression that your report was the more full of the t vfo. I have compared the two versions, as you give them, and I thmk, to sav the least, that my report does not suffer by the comparison. Your very accurate reporter has, however, omitted to give Mr Kennaway’s statement at the interview—” whether we remain in office six minutes or six months, &c. The reply of the proprietor of the Times is also given merely as “ yes,” whereas Mr Kennaway distinctly quoted the reply as- “ Yes, I consider that the Government are bound to accept the tenders in the province. The difference between the two versions, as far as you have given them, is, after all, a matter of little moment. You do not attempt to deny the fact that in your report the whole of the latter part of Mr Kennaway’s speech is omitted; so that while your reporter has expended his energy in giving a "minute account of the “ interview,” he has altogether left out a very important part of the speech, as bearing on the subject under discussion. Your reputation for fairness'would certainly not be diminished if you were to give the remainder of the two versions of Mr Kennaway s speech in parallel columns, so that an estimate of the completeness of the two reports might be arrived at. Perhaps you would also publish in the same manner, the opening speech of Mr Hayhurst, and the speeches of Mr Turnbull and Mr Andrews. There is another rather singular discrepancy. Mr Wynn Williams addressed the Council in a speech as long as that of Mr Beswick, but your reporter was probably too full of the necessity of giving a “ minute ” account of the “ interview,” to notice the fact, as that gentleman’s remarks do not appear in your report. Again, your reporter, in his anxiety to be “ minute,” gives Mr Beswick’s speech immediately after that of Mr Kennaway, whereas he did not speak until after Mr Williams and Mr Andrews had done so. I would also remind you that in your report of that day’s proceedings, a peculiar mistake occurred at the end of the “ printing debate,” a mistake which was corrected in a subsequent issue.

I think I have sufficiently established the fact that the two reports are not as a whole, “ substantially the same.” Your obedient servant, GEO. M'INTYRE. June 11.