THE CUSTOMS FRAUD IN AUCKLAND.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2101, 28 September 1875, Page 3

THE CUSTOMS FRAUD IN AUCKLAND.

THE ECHO'S INDEPENDENCE.

The following letter appeared in Satur-

day's Auckland Star. It throws a little light on the subject of the Echo's vaunted independence:— Sib,—On Monday morning, as I was proceeding to the Police Court to hear the charge that had been brought against me by the Customs' authorities, Mr Bent, of the "Reno, came up to-me at the corner of High street, and saying he was sorry to hear of the case on at the Police Court, asked me if l*e could do anything for me. I replied that if he wanted to oblige me, he might,do so by keeping the report out of the Echo, as there was nothing io be gained by publishing it. He then said that if I could get the other papers do it, he would, and that I could use Jgfae " leverage of the Echo " to induce the other papers to do so. A short time after the case had been decided, one of the Echo's people (a reporter of the name of Henderson) went to my brother and asked him " what about the Customs case and if he should report it," he replied "he could see nothing to be gained by giving publicity to the cnse." ' He then asked my brother for an advertisement for the Echo, who enquired if the advertisement would be the price of his silence. He replied, " That was putting the matter plainly." My brother then said " You shall have an advertisement; you can insert in your paper the following : " That in consideration of our having suppressed the report of the Customs case that was tried at the Police Court this morning, we have given this as an advertisement to the Echo." He then said he would see me. The reporter afterwards came to me and asked for an advertisement. I asked him who sent him, and he gave me an evasive answer. I then told him I would not gire- him an advertisement as a sop. as the proposal of doing me a favour had first emanated from Mr Bent himself, but that if I could put anything in their way hereafter I xmght'doso. He then left. On Thursday morning Mr George Jones, Junr., stopped me in the street and asked me to meet him at Mr Isaacs' store in five minutes " as" said he, "it would appear suspicious to be seen speaking together in the street.'/ When I met him there, he told me that keeping the report out of hi« puper had injured him, and that be had received several letter upon the subject, and: that some of his supporters had left him in consequence, and he considered it would be better for me to explain the matter. After leaving Mr. Isaacs' store, -we were joined by my brother, whom I introduced to Mr. Jones, who saidtohim " we were just talking about the case," and stated to him what he had already told me about receiving letters, &c. My brother replied that he did not think the subject worthy of notice, as the agitation upon the subject had emanated from a small uninfluential clique of agitators, and not from the respectable portion of the community. Mr. Jones then told us he would like to write a leader explanatory of the affair, generalising on it, and advised us as a friendand "brother mason" to have it done. My brother replied that, " taking into con-1 sideration the movers in the matter, we could afford to treat it with contempt." Mr Jones then said that the leader spoken j of was already written and partly in type, and that he would go and withdraw it, and he left us with, the impression that as it was opposed to, our wishes, nothing further would be written about it, so you can imagine my surprise to see in the ■ame evening's issue a leader on the subject containing many particulars that were true and many that were quite the reverse. From this it will be seen that the first suggestion of any " favor " being done to me by the newspapers came from the so-much vaunted "independent pamper ;" that it was Mr Bent, the foreman, ' that urged me to see the other papers, and use the fact of the Echo having agreed to keep silent as a " mighty lever" to move the other papers; | that it was proposed by them that I should give them an advertisement as the payment of their silence, and that it was when I made little of their favour and refused an advertisement, that then they turned round, and, becoming highly virtuous, proclaimed their independence and the purity of the Press. I had never thought of asking the papers to do anything in relation to the case until it was suggested to me by Mr. John Bent. And having had communication on the subject with all the papers, I can positively state that no paper except the Echo endeavoured to make any profit out of the transaction. —V ours, &c, Mo s M. Levy.