THE INJURED INDEPENDENT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume III, Issue 649, 11 December 1865, Page 5

THE INJURED INDEPENDENT.

Wk Lave, it appears, inadvertently given offence to the Wellington Independent, by attributing to that journal the authorship of an article which appeared in the Advertiser. The same mistakes 3Te of pretty general occurrence, as we hare more than once seen original articles re-pub-lished from the New Zealand HEBAtD ia Southern papers, with the authority of the Southern Cross attached to them. Wo' have never considered such mistakes worlh noticing. Not so the Independent, On the 30th that journal attacked us in a local article, which drew forth the following amusing letter in the Advertiser of the nest day :— (To the Editor of the Advertiser.) THE INJURED IS DEPENDENT. Sir, —I should feel obliged to you if you would' Hndly allow mo a 1 little of your valuable spare for the following remarks upon your much-injured contemporary, the Independent. During the session it may be remembered that an nrgument or discussion a 9 to the reporting of the different papers, and the Independent then put itself forward as hnving the only competent staff of shorthand reporters in tli'-s Province. Now, I happen ciyself to know something of .the management of newspapers, having bpon connected with one in England, and I took tho trouhlo to fiud out what the real stiito of tho case wus. I thin found that the " competent Btaff of short - hjind reporters" engaged on the Independent during the session consisted of — one ! I know that that gentleman had tho assistance of tho stenographic reporters-if the Canterbury Press and the Auckland Heuaij); but these cent emeu were by no means responsible to the editor or proprietor of the Independent, mi i therefore could n>>t bo said to belong to its stair, as they looked to those by whom they were permanently employed for approval or censure. The gentleman whom they had engaged as " own" roporter wns a very competent man, and as good at his profes-iion as any gentleman that came to Wellington from any part of the colony during last session, but he has now left, and, us 1 am informed, is engaged on a paper " down South." And now it may be asked what called forth these observations from me, and why did I not speak before ? In to-day's Independent I bvo a paragraph headed " Thk Nkv Zealand Hf.hal»," and on reading that " ingratitude more ba K c than traitors' arms," I felt forced to make a few remarks upon it. Allow me to quote the parag;aph referrel to. It begins by saying :—

" Wo wish the Editor of the "New Z-\t. ITekaii) would bo a little more caroful when i) •

from tho Wellington journals, to" state cnrrec ' ,v

what paper articles and pntngriinhs aro tnke.i. l)i.iing the last seven or eight months, the usual practice of our contemporary Ims heen to state that extracts from tho Independent were from the Advertiser, while those clipped Irom the Utter journal are credited to ua. Sometimes, too, the opinions of the Evening Post —when it has any—aro put forth to the Auckland public as ours.' -

Now can anything hut moro absurd than to say that for tho last scv. n or eighth months the editor or nub-editor of the Uekald has been in the habit of clipping paragraphs at random from tho Wellington journals, trnd writing the natm? of Independent or. Advcvtiscr hap-hazarl at the end o! tliojn ? Perhaps, when there was some doubt from what paper a paragraph was talcfn, the editor or subeditor of the Hbkald to=sed up to decide what paper they should credit it with. Is it. not usually the habit in " clipping" to :ir,te carefully from what paper tho extract is taken, and if it is not so, how is it that these " dreadful mistakes," which father everything that looks like twa die on the Independent onl oceur to the Independ nt ! The editor of tho New Zkaland HkuaLD possibly is so accustomed to the usual style of the Independent, that ho puts down everything " milky "ai once tu that puper. I will not ma e any remarks upon the unjustifiable attack on the opinions expressed in the Evening Post. Tho writer of the paragraph then goes on to sjV :—

1 It was. only the other day that the HtHAiD pub-i-hei an extiaet from a Wellington paper (saying hut it whs taken fro., the Indipmdent) about Dr. Featherston's conduct in the .Assembly, in which the writer tulk.'d somo utter nonsense, and the Hebald attacked this journal as being responsible for it; when, in pjint of fact, the paragraph never appeared in the Independent at all."

Kow, 1 nnd the article in tho Advertiser referred to, and I did noi consider it •■ ultor nonsense." but tliat is only a. matter of opinion. Let ua grant, however, that it wa« " utter noneens ," and what I have already said will bo borne out, viz., that because it hths " niter nonsense" it was immediately put down to the Independent. To continue tho paragraph:—" We could give twenty instances of the sumo oarttlessnoss—even in "* paper just received, we find the Wellington news all misquoted." I'uor Independent ! tho news is all misquotsd, but ho does not give the instances ho refers to, and after complaining of the misquotation of news, and uttering his lament thereon, he Bays: —".Now, wo don't core whether news gets mis-quoted or not, but where options >»re expreFßod. it is certainly very hard that wo should bo hold responsible for what never appeared in our column"." Injured Independent !! It is " very hard that you should be held responsible" either for your own or anybody else's opinions. And now conies tho amusing part of the paragraph After indulging in the lament Quoted jin order to soften down the wrath of tho Editor of the Heiuld for ftar ho would not lend him his reporter at the next session, he closes the paragraph with the following touch of *• oily gammon ":—" of couro in tho hurry of nowspapor Work mistakes will unavoidably oeiur, but really we can't uuderatand why the.v should form the rule rntherthan the exception, still less can wo comprehend why an ably conducted journal like the Hehald Bhould adopt such a peoutiiar system of sub-editing." Apologising for trespassing so far on your space. I remain, Sir, &c, &c, A PESSS-MAIf. November 30 th, 1865. The Wellington Post angry at being thus slightingly alluded to says :— This morning's Independent complains of its news!!! being misquoted bv the Kbw Zealand Herald, extracts from tho Advertiser, " in which tha the wi iter talked some utter nousenso," bo : ng credited to the Independent. Ko far good ; but why should this bright particular star fling a stone at the Evening lost— how has it offended ? We fear tho dull times are telling on our contemporary's better understanding. " Sometimes, too," (says the lumimiry on the other r'l: of the s'reet) the opinions of the Evening Post —when it has any—are put forth to the public as ours." True, our opinions are seldom inflicted on tho public, but, when in the vein, we do not indulge in sneers, neither do we transfer to our columns, in absent moc*, from other journals without any acknowledgment-an offence for which the Indepednent lately received a rap on the knuckles from that very Auckland paper, " whoso peculiar stylo of subediting it cannot comprehond." •