New York, 1895
Honest Republican Criticism of a Debauched Journal.
The Jamaica Standard denounces the Herald for heartily supporting the Republican members of the board of Supervisors in every effort made by them to wisely and economically administer the county government. We plead guilty to the offence. The Herald is for good government first, last and all the time. Unscrupulous leaders shall not do the Republican party in this county a lasting injury if the Herald can prevent them. This policy, we know, is not the policy of the Standard; nor is it the policy that would have the approval of the Hon. William J. Youngs or Assemblyman Vacheron, but it is the policy of loyalty to the Republican party and to the people who placed that party in power last fall, relying upon the promises of the leaders that under Republican rule this county would enjoy better government than it had ever known before.
If the Standard had denounced the vicious character of the Commissioner of Jurors bill and informed the people that it was created simply for the purpose of making a high-salaried office for Assemblyman Vacheron, then the Standard would have done both the people and its party a great service for which it would have deserved the respect and confidence of its readers. But the Standard did not dare to come out and squarely endorse a measure, which was so unpopular with the taxpayers throughout the county, but it published an article, the apparent purpose of which was to disarm suspicion, if possible, and make the devil appear less black than he was painted.
If a Republican Assemblyman or Senator introduces a bad bill in the Legislature he ought to be promptly called to account. This is what the Herald has done and the Standard has utterly failed to do. It has tried in every way to shield William J. Youngs and Assemblyman Vacheron and to keep its readers in ignorance of their conduct at Albany.
The Standard exclaims fervently:
"Now is the time to face the situation." Indeed it is time, but we fear that instead of having the moral courage "to face the situation" our contemporary will evade it, as it has all along, for the purpose of misleading the people, and saving William J. Youngs and Assemblyman Vacheron from that condemnation which they so richly deserve. — Long Island City Herald, Republican.
—Reprinted in The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, May 10, 1895, p. 8.
Showing posts with label newspapers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label newspapers. Show all posts
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Easily Proved a Liar
New York, 1895
"The Standard has not discussed the Legislative bill which proposes to create a Commissioner of Jurors in Queens County simply because it has not been favored with a copy of the measure." — Jamaica Standard, April 20.
This excuse is a bald falsehood. The bill was introduced April 3d, passed April 11th, sent to the Senate April 12th. Between April 3d and the 20th, the day the Standard said it had not yet seen the bill, B. Frank Wood spent seven days in Albany, and could have got a copy of the bill any day. He spent four days of last week in Albany lobbying with Boss Youngs and Vacheron for this bill. How could he do that without having seen the bill? The Standard lies. But think of the lack of enterprise confessed by the Standard when it says it had no copy of the bill! There were nine days in which to have got a copy. Of course it lies.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, April 26, 1895, p. 4.
"The Standard has not discussed the Legislative bill which proposes to create a Commissioner of Jurors in Queens County simply because it has not been favored with a copy of the measure." — Jamaica Standard, April 20.
This excuse is a bald falsehood. The bill was introduced April 3d, passed April 11th, sent to the Senate April 12th. Between April 3d and the 20th, the day the Standard said it had not yet seen the bill, B. Frank Wood spent seven days in Albany, and could have got a copy of the bill any day. He spent four days of last week in Albany lobbying with Boss Youngs and Vacheron for this bill. How could he do that without having seen the bill? The Standard lies. But think of the lack of enterprise confessed by the Standard when it says it had no copy of the bill! There were nine days in which to have got a copy. Of course it lies.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, April 26, 1895, p. 4.
Saturday, July 5, 2008
The Lying Standard Promptly and Emphatically Condemned
New York, 1895
(From Yesterday's Long Island City Herald, Republican:)
"The Standard has not discussed the legislative bill which proposes to create a Commissioner of Jurors in Queens County simply because it has not been favored with a copy of the measure.
"The report of the JAMAICA FARMER that the board of Supervisors passed a resolution condemning the bill is false as will be seen by a perusal of the resolution itself, which appears in our report of the Supervisors' meeting. The Supervisors, not having seen the bill, appointed a committee to read it, with power to make recommendation in the name of the board.
"The promoters of the measure claim that the act is identical with a law which has for some time been in operation in the county of Westchester and which has been found to work well." — Jamaica Standard.
The relations existing between the Herald and the Jamaica Standard have always been of the most friendly and fraternal character, but we cannot permit an editorial so full of guile and so purposely misleading to pass without the severe criticism it deserves. The article from the Standard, which we have quoted above, is one of the rankest pieces of deception of which we have ever known any paper to be guilty.
The Standard is regarded as the personal organ of William J. Youngs and Assemblyman Vacheron, who in the darkness which the wicked loves better than light, concocted the Commissioner of Jurors bill for Queens County. It was surreptitiously introduced into the Assembly by them and passed by that body before the judges, the lawyers, or the people of Queens County knew that such a bill was in existence. If Senator Childs had been in league with the conspirators it would no doubt have been rushed through the Senate and been sent to the Governor for his signature.
This is no news to the editor of the Standard, though it may be to the people of Queens County. The editor of the Standard was in Albany last week and he could easily have procured a copy of the bill and made himself familiar with all its provisions. He knew what a rumpus the bill had raised in the county, that it was denounced by both Democrats and Republicans, and that the lawyers said that the powers conferred upon the person holding the office of Commissioner of Jurors made it a most dangerous bill.
We have not talked with a lawyer who has not been outspoken in his condemnation of the bill, which was conceived in iniquity and born in sin, as we will proceed to show. The JAMAICA FARMER says that a responsible and honest member of the Legislature has sent to the editor of that paper "a signed letter asserting that if the Commissioner of Jurors bill became a law, Assemblyman Eugene F. Vacheron is to be appointed to the office."
The Herald can confirm this report. It has been an open secret that Mr. Vacheron would be appointed Commissioner of Jurors if the bill became a law. Mr. Youngs has said so and Mr. Vacheron's appointment to the office has been almost common talk in the county. It is one of the most audacious and unscrupulous acts of legislation ever attempted at Albany. An Assemblyman attempts to create an office with a large salary and giving him the powers of a despot, for his own personal benefit, and in this he is aided and abetted by the chairman of the Republican county committee.
Who is this Mr. Vacheron, who represents the Third Assembly District of Queens County and is the side-partner of William J. Youngs at Albany? He is a man of inferior intellect, but with an abnormal amount of impudence and conceit.
When the Jamaica Standard declares that the report of the JAMAICA FARMER that the board of Supervisors at their last meeting, held at Barnum's Island on Tuesday of last week, passed a resolution condemning the Commissioner of Jurors bill, is false, we must take exception to the Standard's statement, because they Herald's report of the action of the Supervisors agreed substantially with that of THE FARMER. We are informed by a member of the board of Supervisors that a resolution was prepared condemning this bill and administering a stinging rebuke to Assemblyman Vacheron, but at the urgent solicitation of George Wallace, counsel to the board, it was not presented and one couched in more moderate language was substituted and passed by a unanimous vote. Mr. Wallace was afraid, we have been told, that Assemblyman Vacheron would be so enraged that he might obstruct other legislation affecting Queens County.
All the Supervisors, however, were of one opinion, namely, that the bill was both bad and dangerous and that no effort should be spared to have it killed in the Senate. A committee consisting of Supervisors Pople, Everett and Siebs was therefore appointed with the understanding that they fight the bill to the bitter end, and they were invested with full power to that effect. To say that the resolution of the Board of Supervisors was not hostile to the bill is an evasion of the truth.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, April 26, 1895, p. 1.
(From Yesterday's Long Island City Herald, Republican:)
"The Standard has not discussed the legislative bill which proposes to create a Commissioner of Jurors in Queens County simply because it has not been favored with a copy of the measure.
"The report of the JAMAICA FARMER that the board of Supervisors passed a resolution condemning the bill is false as will be seen by a perusal of the resolution itself, which appears in our report of the Supervisors' meeting. The Supervisors, not having seen the bill, appointed a committee to read it, with power to make recommendation in the name of the board.
"The promoters of the measure claim that the act is identical with a law which has for some time been in operation in the county of Westchester and which has been found to work well." — Jamaica Standard.
The relations existing between the Herald and the Jamaica Standard have always been of the most friendly and fraternal character, but we cannot permit an editorial so full of guile and so purposely misleading to pass without the severe criticism it deserves. The article from the Standard, which we have quoted above, is one of the rankest pieces of deception of which we have ever known any paper to be guilty.
The Standard is regarded as the personal organ of William J. Youngs and Assemblyman Vacheron, who in the darkness which the wicked loves better than light, concocted the Commissioner of Jurors bill for Queens County. It was surreptitiously introduced into the Assembly by them and passed by that body before the judges, the lawyers, or the people of Queens County knew that such a bill was in existence. If Senator Childs had been in league with the conspirators it would no doubt have been rushed through the Senate and been sent to the Governor for his signature.
This is no news to the editor of the Standard, though it may be to the people of Queens County. The editor of the Standard was in Albany last week and he could easily have procured a copy of the bill and made himself familiar with all its provisions. He knew what a rumpus the bill had raised in the county, that it was denounced by both Democrats and Republicans, and that the lawyers said that the powers conferred upon the person holding the office of Commissioner of Jurors made it a most dangerous bill.
We have not talked with a lawyer who has not been outspoken in his condemnation of the bill, which was conceived in iniquity and born in sin, as we will proceed to show. The JAMAICA FARMER says that a responsible and honest member of the Legislature has sent to the editor of that paper "a signed letter asserting that if the Commissioner of Jurors bill became a law, Assemblyman Eugene F. Vacheron is to be appointed to the office."
The Herald can confirm this report. It has been an open secret that Mr. Vacheron would be appointed Commissioner of Jurors if the bill became a law. Mr. Youngs has said so and Mr. Vacheron's appointment to the office has been almost common talk in the county. It is one of the most audacious and unscrupulous acts of legislation ever attempted at Albany. An Assemblyman attempts to create an office with a large salary and giving him the powers of a despot, for his own personal benefit, and in this he is aided and abetted by the chairman of the Republican county committee.
Who is this Mr. Vacheron, who represents the Third Assembly District of Queens County and is the side-partner of William J. Youngs at Albany? He is a man of inferior intellect, but with an abnormal amount of impudence and conceit.
When the Jamaica Standard declares that the report of the JAMAICA FARMER that the board of Supervisors at their last meeting, held at Barnum's Island on Tuesday of last week, passed a resolution condemning the Commissioner of Jurors bill, is false, we must take exception to the Standard's statement, because they Herald's report of the action of the Supervisors agreed substantially with that of THE FARMER. We are informed by a member of the board of Supervisors that a resolution was prepared condemning this bill and administering a stinging rebuke to Assemblyman Vacheron, but at the urgent solicitation of George Wallace, counsel to the board, it was not presented and one couched in more moderate language was substituted and passed by a unanimous vote. Mr. Wallace was afraid, we have been told, that Assemblyman Vacheron would be so enraged that he might obstruct other legislation affecting Queens County.
All the Supervisors, however, were of one opinion, namely, that the bill was both bad and dangerous and that no effort should be spared to have it killed in the Senate. A committee consisting of Supervisors Pople, Everett and Siebs was therefore appointed with the understanding that they fight the bill to the bitter end, and they were invested with full power to that effect. To say that the resolution of the Board of Supervisors was not hostile to the bill is an evasion of the truth.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, April 26, 1895, p. 1.
In a False Position
New York, 1895
MISLED BY COUNSEL — MISREPRESENTED BY TWO NEWSPAPERS.
The Board of Supervisors on the Commissioner of Jurors Bill — Who Forwarded the Resolution to Boss Youngs — George Wallace Suspected — A Politician Should Not be Counsel to the Board.
The Jamaica Standard said editorially on Saturday of the Commissioner of Jurors bill:
"The report of the Jamaica FARMER that the board of supervisors passed a resolution condemning the bill, is false, as will be seen by a perusal of the resolution itself, which appears in our report of the supervisors' meeting."
This statement places the board of Supervisors in a false position before the people. The Standard does so with malice. The Supervisors passed a resolution on Tuesday of last week as follows:
"Whereas, A bill has passed in the Assembly Providing for the appointment of a Commissioner of Jurors for Queens County, and
"Whereas, we have not the bill at hand, therefore
"Resolved, That a committee consisting of Supervisors Pople, Underhill and Everitt be appointed to examine the provisions of said bill, and with full power to represent the board in the matter, and to demand a hearing on the bill before the Senate Committee to which it may be referred."
Boss Youngs had a copy of this resolution in Albany on Wednesday morning. Unless George Wallace sent it to him, we cannot guess who did. B. Frank Wood of the Standard was in Albany at the time and both Youngs and Wood, in lobbying for the bill, represented that the Supervisors had expressed no opinion against the bill, and left the impression on Senators that the Supervisors were in favor of the bill.
At the board meeting every Supervisor expressed himself as opposed to the bill, and the omission of this statement from the report of the proceedings which George Wallace furnished to the Observer, his own newspaper, and also from the Standard, did an injustice to the Supervisors. It was George Wallace who led the Supervisors into the false position which they are maliciously made to occupy toward the bill. Supervisor Underhill had a resolution in his possession expressing strong protest against the bill, and here is a copy of it:
"WHEREAS, The Assembly of this state has passed an act introduced by the Hon. E. F. Vacheron, to create the office of Commissioner of Jurors in and for Queens County; and
"WHEREAS, There is no public necessity for the creation of this office, which would impose a heavy expense upon the people without in any way improving the public service; and
"WHEREAS, The powers it is proposed to confer upon the person who might be called to fill thls office are unusual and extraordinary, and
"WHEREAS, There is no limit to the expense that the officer may incur, and no discretion left with the Supervisors but to meet all his demands for expenses incurred; and
"WHEREAS, The bill is a gross violation of the principle of home rule in that the local authorities have been ignored, and the people have had no opportunity to be heard on the question, so great has been the haste and secrecy of action thereon, therefore
"Resolved, That we, the Board of Supervisors of Queens County, speaking for and in behalf of the people, do heartily oppose the enactment of this bill into law;
"Resolved, That the Hon. John Lewis Childs, Senator representing this district, be and is most earnestly requested to do all in his power to defeat the passage of said bill to the end that the people may be saved from the infliction of an unnecessary and unjust financial burden."
This resolution was read by every Supervisor prior to the organization of the board. The members talked very freely about the bill and all denounced it. At the noon recess George Wallace got the members of the board into a caucus and induced them not to adopt Mr. Underhill's resolutions, but to adopt one that he had prepared, and the one he prepared is the short one printed near the top of this article, which the Standard and Boss Youngs say does not express opposition to the bill. We knew that this claim would be made by these jobbers, and we knew that the Supervisors would be placed in a false position before the people, and we said editorially last week that Counselor Wallace had misled the board of Supervisors to serve a political purpose. This is the more apparent now for two reasons: First, some one's haste in sending Boss Youngs a copy of the resolution. Second, printing Mr. Wallace's non-committal resolution in the Observer and Standard and omitting therefrom the Supervisors' expressions of opposition to the bill. The adoption of Mr. Underhill's resolutions would have been a condemnation of Vacheron, Boss Youngs and the Republican county committee, and Counselor Wallace prevented that by leading the board into the adoption of his resolution, of which the jobbers have taken advantage to misrepresent the Supervisors and boom the bill.
Undoubtedly the Supervisors meant to condemn the bill by resolution as they had by their speech, but unfortunately for them the Standard and Observer suppress their speech and print only the resolution. It is not good public policy to have a politician as the adviser of an official body. After what has happened the Supervisors should be on their guard. Such a thing never happened before.
Can it be that Boss Youngs had a copy of George Wallace's resolution before the day the Supervisors met and adopted it?
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, April 26, 1895, p. 1.
MISLED BY COUNSEL — MISREPRESENTED BY TWO NEWSPAPERS.
The Board of Supervisors on the Commissioner of Jurors Bill — Who Forwarded the Resolution to Boss Youngs — George Wallace Suspected — A Politician Should Not be Counsel to the Board.
The Jamaica Standard said editorially on Saturday of the Commissioner of Jurors bill:
"The report of the Jamaica FARMER that the board of supervisors passed a resolution condemning the bill, is false, as will be seen by a perusal of the resolution itself, which appears in our report of the supervisors' meeting."
This statement places the board of Supervisors in a false position before the people. The Standard does so with malice. The Supervisors passed a resolution on Tuesday of last week as follows:
"Whereas, A bill has passed in the Assembly Providing for the appointment of a Commissioner of Jurors for Queens County, and
"Whereas, we have not the bill at hand, therefore
"Resolved, That a committee consisting of Supervisors Pople, Underhill and Everitt be appointed to examine the provisions of said bill, and with full power to represent the board in the matter, and to demand a hearing on the bill before the Senate Committee to which it may be referred."
Boss Youngs had a copy of this resolution in Albany on Wednesday morning. Unless George Wallace sent it to him, we cannot guess who did. B. Frank Wood of the Standard was in Albany at the time and both Youngs and Wood, in lobbying for the bill, represented that the Supervisors had expressed no opinion against the bill, and left the impression on Senators that the Supervisors were in favor of the bill.
At the board meeting every Supervisor expressed himself as opposed to the bill, and the omission of this statement from the report of the proceedings which George Wallace furnished to the Observer, his own newspaper, and also from the Standard, did an injustice to the Supervisors. It was George Wallace who led the Supervisors into the false position which they are maliciously made to occupy toward the bill. Supervisor Underhill had a resolution in his possession expressing strong protest against the bill, and here is a copy of it:
"WHEREAS, The Assembly of this state has passed an act introduced by the Hon. E. F. Vacheron, to create the office of Commissioner of Jurors in and for Queens County; and
"WHEREAS, There is no public necessity for the creation of this office, which would impose a heavy expense upon the people without in any way improving the public service; and
"WHEREAS, The powers it is proposed to confer upon the person who might be called to fill thls office are unusual and extraordinary, and
"WHEREAS, There is no limit to the expense that the officer may incur, and no discretion left with the Supervisors but to meet all his demands for expenses incurred; and
"WHEREAS, The bill is a gross violation of the principle of home rule in that the local authorities have been ignored, and the people have had no opportunity to be heard on the question, so great has been the haste and secrecy of action thereon, therefore
"Resolved, That we, the Board of Supervisors of Queens County, speaking for and in behalf of the people, do heartily oppose the enactment of this bill into law;
"Resolved, That the Hon. John Lewis Childs, Senator representing this district, be and is most earnestly requested to do all in his power to defeat the passage of said bill to the end that the people may be saved from the infliction of an unnecessary and unjust financial burden."
This resolution was read by every Supervisor prior to the organization of the board. The members talked very freely about the bill and all denounced it. At the noon recess George Wallace got the members of the board into a caucus and induced them not to adopt Mr. Underhill's resolutions, but to adopt one that he had prepared, and the one he prepared is the short one printed near the top of this article, which the Standard and Boss Youngs say does not express opposition to the bill. We knew that this claim would be made by these jobbers, and we knew that the Supervisors would be placed in a false position before the people, and we said editorially last week that Counselor Wallace had misled the board of Supervisors to serve a political purpose. This is the more apparent now for two reasons: First, some one's haste in sending Boss Youngs a copy of the resolution. Second, printing Mr. Wallace's non-committal resolution in the Observer and Standard and omitting therefrom the Supervisors' expressions of opposition to the bill. The adoption of Mr. Underhill's resolutions would have been a condemnation of Vacheron, Boss Youngs and the Republican county committee, and Counselor Wallace prevented that by leading the board into the adoption of his resolution, of which the jobbers have taken advantage to misrepresent the Supervisors and boom the bill.
Undoubtedly the Supervisors meant to condemn the bill by resolution as they had by their speech, but unfortunately for them the Standard and Observer suppress their speech and print only the resolution. It is not good public policy to have a politician as the adviser of an official body. After what has happened the Supervisors should be on their guard. Such a thing never happened before.
Can it be that Boss Youngs had a copy of George Wallace's resolution before the day the Supervisors met and adopted it?
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, April 26, 1895, p. 1.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Left A Sinking Ship
New York, 1895
The Pauperized Standard Must Soon Co Under.
B. Frank Wood of Jamaica contributed an article to Sunday's New York World extolling his own virtues and abilities, and his portrait was printed with the article, and he really appeared to advantage. The people will be surprised, however, to learn that he has left the sinking Standard to go to the bottom of the sea.
We copy here what the World printed:
JAMAICA, April 12. — B. Frank Wood, who was elected a Justice of the Peace here last Tuesday, is exceptionally fitted for the position. He is a lawyer and has experience on the bench. He is also a thorough business man, and the interests of the town will not suffer in his hands as a member of the town board. Mr. Wood will not take office until the first day of 1896.
For the past few years he has been the editor of Jamaica's foremost paper, but he retired from the journal just before he was nominated for the office. While he was editor Mr. Wood conducted a vigorous paper and showed up some official abuses.
Personally the new judge is a handsome, jovial man. He has a close-cropped beard and dresses stylishly, is a good conversationalist and has a fund of stories with which he aptly illustrates any subject he may be discussing, He moves in Jamaica's exclusive society.
Mr. Wood was born on Staten Island and lived there for a number of years. He went South when he was a youth and started in business. A few years ago he came to Jamaica and was soon recognized as a progressive man. He will commence the practice of law in the village as soon as he takes office. He came naturally by a judicial mind, as his father was a judge before him.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, April 19, 1895, p. 1.
The Pauperized Standard Must Soon Co Under.
B. Frank Wood of Jamaica contributed an article to Sunday's New York World extolling his own virtues and abilities, and his portrait was printed with the article, and he really appeared to advantage. The people will be surprised, however, to learn that he has left the sinking Standard to go to the bottom of the sea.
We copy here what the World printed:
JAMAICA, April 12. — B. Frank Wood, who was elected a Justice of the Peace here last Tuesday, is exceptionally fitted for the position. He is a lawyer and has experience on the bench. He is also a thorough business man, and the interests of the town will not suffer in his hands as a member of the town board. Mr. Wood will not take office until the first day of 1896.
For the past few years he has been the editor of Jamaica's foremost paper, but he retired from the journal just before he was nominated for the office. While he was editor Mr. Wood conducted a vigorous paper and showed up some official abuses.
Personally the new judge is a handsome, jovial man. He has a close-cropped beard and dresses stylishly, is a good conversationalist and has a fund of stories with which he aptly illustrates any subject he may be discussing, He moves in Jamaica's exclusive society.
Mr. Wood was born on Staten Island and lived there for a number of years. He went South when he was a youth and started in business. A few years ago he came to Jamaica and was soon recognized as a progressive man. He will commence the practice of law in the village as soon as he takes office. He came naturally by a judicial mind, as his father was a judge before him.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, April 19, 1895, p. 1.
Friday, June 20, 2008
A Bad Record
New York, 1895
Partial Review of Vacheron's Albany Work.
COUNTY BILLS HELD UP.
Corporations More Influential Than Supervisors.
A $150,000 BRIDGE JOB.
Other Things Which Menace Tax-Payers.
READ AND REFLECT.
Ruffian Eugene F. Vacheron and all other ruffians of his stamp may as well understand that THE FARMER is a newspaper that cannot be swerved from its course of serving the people fearlessly and honestly by assault upon its editor or threats to take his life. The ruffian and blackguard respects no law and has recourse to brutal means to answer a criticism as naturally as a fly takes to molasses. If THE FARMER ever did Mr. Vacheron a wrong of any kind, these columns were open to him to correct it, and we would be glad to correct an error in his case or the case of any person. If a guilty conscience be a man's best accuser, making a coward of him, then Mr. Vacheron's silence under criticism is perfectly understood. He has complained of no wrong done him by THE FARMER. He thinks that we have no right to criticise his public acts, but that, of course, is ridiculous, unAmerican, and in conflict with law, which guarantees to every citizen the right of criticism of a public officer within the facts and within reason. And THE FARMER has kept itself well within the law.
Mr. Vacheron took umbrage at THE FARMER several months ago because it published as news, and without any comment whatever, the fact that Mr. Haywood, of Woodhaven, had brought an action in the Supreme Court against the Assemblyman to recover money that the plaintiff had loaned him. Mr. Vacheron put in an answer denying that he owed the money. The plaintiff produced his check in proof of the indebtedness with Mr. Vacheron's indorsement on it. When the trial could be staved off no longer Mr. Vacheron paid the money, thereby confessing the falsity of his defense. This news came direct from the court room and was published just as all news is published. There was no reason why we should suppress news affecting Mr. Vacheron any more than we should suppress news respecting any other man. To hide one man's offense while exposing another's would be dishonest journalism. THE FARMER is not that kind of a newspaper.
THE FARMER took Mr. Vacheron to task for sitting idly by while the people of Binghamton were trying to steal the Normal School from Jamaica. A great wrong was attempted to be done. Our citizens had labored for years to secure this educational advantage. The town of Jamaica had given $10,000 for a site and deeded it to the state. The loss of the normal school under the circumstances, and in a general way, would have been a gross outrage. The bill to steal the school had been progressed to second reading in the Assembly without any opposition from Mr. Vacheron. Either he was ignorant of it or he wilfully permitted it. In either case he had no valid excuse to make to his constituents, and he made none. What THE FARMER said and felt about it every citizen must have thought and felt.
In the public interest we were obliged to take Mr. Vacheron to task for his attitude toward the tax arrears bill. At home he denounced the bill as a job. At Albany he declared that he would kill the bill if he were not allowed to increase the number of commissioners, so that if the bill was a job he was perfectly willing to get into the job for patronage. But the bill was an honest bill, having the approval of the board of Supervisors, and being intended to relieve the tax-payers of the heavy burden of unpaid taxes. There were already three persons named in the bill as commissioners who reside in Mr. Vacheron's district, therefore he could not complain that his district was slighted. The man he wanted to put in the commission lives in Flushing, which is Mr. Fairbrother's district, with what motive, or for what purpose, the people may judge for themselves. The addition of another commissioner meant an increase of $4,500 in the expense, but that was too insignificant a thing to bother Mr. Vacheron, who is so good a citizen that he lets his small property be advertised for sale rather than pay his taxes. The Long Island City Herald says that Mr. Vacheron desired to increase the commission to make a place for a political friend of Boss Youngs, and the Herald is a Republican paper. If this be true it makes the attempted wrong all the greater, for there never can be invented an excuse for making the people pay to uphold a political boss. Mr. Vacheron held this bill in the Assembly so long that Senator Childs came to the conclusion that he meant to kill it, and knowing the importance of the measure to the public welfare the Senator went over to the Assembly and had the bill favorably reported over Mr. Vachcron's head without the name of Boss Youngs' political lieutenant getting into it. This job the public can digest to their own satisfaction.
We have had occasion to disagree with Mr. Vacheron over a bill to put $20,000 of the people's money in the pocket of Lucien Knapp of Long Island City. Mr. Knapp had not warmed his seat as City Treasurer before he sent to Albany a bill to make the city pay him $10,000 a year for two years for settling some back tax accounts. The grab bill was not sent to the representative of Long Island City, but to Mr. Vacheron, who introduced it, and is supporting it. Senator Childs spurned it. The selfishness of the thing is apparent from the fact that the law was to be operative during Mr. Knapp's term of office only. The people of Long Island City rose up against it, public meetings were held to denounce it, and every newspaper in the city spoke against it. These things make no difference to Mr. Vacheron.
A recent occasion for adverse comment was the alteration of a bill in the Assembly which had been approved by the board of Supervisors and passed by the Senate in its original form. For years Brooklyn politicians and others have been trying to compel the Supervisors to build a bridge over Newtown creek at Maspeth avenue. The expense would be $150,000 at least. These plotters tried to force the building of a bridge by an action at law. The Supervisors have been fighting against it in the courts, and have been to the Court of Appeals twice, and the case is now just where it started. The Supervisors had an act drafted giving them discretionary power as to building bridges, which is right, and Mr. Childs passed it through the Senate. In the Assembly the bill has been amended to compel the Supervisors to build the bridge. In addition to the politicians who want the bridge a railroad company wants to cross the creek and prefers that the county should provide a way. So in this matter the taxpayers are confronted with a possible addition of $150,000 to their burdens without any good reason whatever, and Vacheron does not care.
The Supervisors sent to Albany still another bill. It was intended to improve the method of assessing property. One clause provided that all contractors should file with the board of Assessors a statement as to all new buildings erected and their cost. The purpose was to furnish reliable figures from which the assessors could fix the percentage of assessments. It was an essentially just provision. The bill went through the Senate all right, but in the Assembly it was held up and this provision was stricken from it. The only reason for cutting it out is that speculators did not want it in. It would prevent them from getting low assessments by misrepresentation or a worse offense.
There is still another bill that has been held up in Assembly. The Brooklyn City railroad company induced the authorities of Flushing, to provide for an improvement of Strong's Causeway, including the erection of a bridge, at an estimated expense of $25,000, one half of the sum to be a charge upon the county at large. The railroad company has a franchise to lay tracks on the causeway when it shall be completed, and some of the railroad people have started a cemetery close by, and the improvement is really in the interest or these two corporations. Supervisor Pople fought against it, but he was overruled. The board of Supervisors protested that it would be an outrage to compel the property owners of the whole county to pay one-half the expense of what is really a private improvement over in Flushing, and they sent a bill to Albany to prevent the wrong. The railroad company appeared at Albany in opposition to it. Nevertheless, it passed the Senate. From the time it reached the Assembly until now it has slumbered. The contract for the work has been let and the outlook is that the county will have to foot half of the expense. It is not a pleasant reflection for tax-payers in these hard times.
The Supervisors have worried and fretted under this miserable condition of things. They have passed resolutions urging action on these bills in Assembly, and they have sent committees to Albany to see Mr. Vacheron, but the bills do not move. Politicians and rings have more influence than the Supervisors.
Vacheron's conduct has been such that the Brooklyn Eagle, Brooklyn Times, New York Herald, New York World, New York Sun have made editorial protests, and the Albany correspondents of many daily newspapers have felt justified in flaying him.
For printing these statements and apprising the public of the character of the man who represents them in the Legislature, a brutal assault has been made upon the editor of this paper and threats have been made to kick his head off. We were fully aware of the risks we run when we denounced ruffians and scoundrels. We have taken them before and will not shrink from taking them again. This late act of ruffianism will not swerve us for one moment from the exposure of Vacheron's acts.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, April 5, 1895, p. 1.
Partial Review of Vacheron's Albany Work.
COUNTY BILLS HELD UP.
Corporations More Influential Than Supervisors.
A $150,000 BRIDGE JOB.
Other Things Which Menace Tax-Payers.
READ AND REFLECT.
Ruffian Eugene F. Vacheron and all other ruffians of his stamp may as well understand that THE FARMER is a newspaper that cannot be swerved from its course of serving the people fearlessly and honestly by assault upon its editor or threats to take his life. The ruffian and blackguard respects no law and has recourse to brutal means to answer a criticism as naturally as a fly takes to molasses. If THE FARMER ever did Mr. Vacheron a wrong of any kind, these columns were open to him to correct it, and we would be glad to correct an error in his case or the case of any person. If a guilty conscience be a man's best accuser, making a coward of him, then Mr. Vacheron's silence under criticism is perfectly understood. He has complained of no wrong done him by THE FARMER. He thinks that we have no right to criticise his public acts, but that, of course, is ridiculous, unAmerican, and in conflict with law, which guarantees to every citizen the right of criticism of a public officer within the facts and within reason. And THE FARMER has kept itself well within the law.
Mr. Vacheron took umbrage at THE FARMER several months ago because it published as news, and without any comment whatever, the fact that Mr. Haywood, of Woodhaven, had brought an action in the Supreme Court against the Assemblyman to recover money that the plaintiff had loaned him. Mr. Vacheron put in an answer denying that he owed the money. The plaintiff produced his check in proof of the indebtedness with Mr. Vacheron's indorsement on it. When the trial could be staved off no longer Mr. Vacheron paid the money, thereby confessing the falsity of his defense. This news came direct from the court room and was published just as all news is published. There was no reason why we should suppress news affecting Mr. Vacheron any more than we should suppress news respecting any other man. To hide one man's offense while exposing another's would be dishonest journalism. THE FARMER is not that kind of a newspaper.
THE FARMER took Mr. Vacheron to task for sitting idly by while the people of Binghamton were trying to steal the Normal School from Jamaica. A great wrong was attempted to be done. Our citizens had labored for years to secure this educational advantage. The town of Jamaica had given $10,000 for a site and deeded it to the state. The loss of the normal school under the circumstances, and in a general way, would have been a gross outrage. The bill to steal the school had been progressed to second reading in the Assembly without any opposition from Mr. Vacheron. Either he was ignorant of it or he wilfully permitted it. In either case he had no valid excuse to make to his constituents, and he made none. What THE FARMER said and felt about it every citizen must have thought and felt.
In the public interest we were obliged to take Mr. Vacheron to task for his attitude toward the tax arrears bill. At home he denounced the bill as a job. At Albany he declared that he would kill the bill if he were not allowed to increase the number of commissioners, so that if the bill was a job he was perfectly willing to get into the job for patronage. But the bill was an honest bill, having the approval of the board of Supervisors, and being intended to relieve the tax-payers of the heavy burden of unpaid taxes. There were already three persons named in the bill as commissioners who reside in Mr. Vacheron's district, therefore he could not complain that his district was slighted. The man he wanted to put in the commission lives in Flushing, which is Mr. Fairbrother's district, with what motive, or for what purpose, the people may judge for themselves. The addition of another commissioner meant an increase of $4,500 in the expense, but that was too insignificant a thing to bother Mr. Vacheron, who is so good a citizen that he lets his small property be advertised for sale rather than pay his taxes. The Long Island City Herald says that Mr. Vacheron desired to increase the commission to make a place for a political friend of Boss Youngs, and the Herald is a Republican paper. If this be true it makes the attempted wrong all the greater, for there never can be invented an excuse for making the people pay to uphold a political boss. Mr. Vacheron held this bill in the Assembly so long that Senator Childs came to the conclusion that he meant to kill it, and knowing the importance of the measure to the public welfare the Senator went over to the Assembly and had the bill favorably reported over Mr. Vachcron's head without the name of Boss Youngs' political lieutenant getting into it. This job the public can digest to their own satisfaction.
We have had occasion to disagree with Mr. Vacheron over a bill to put $20,000 of the people's money in the pocket of Lucien Knapp of Long Island City. Mr. Knapp had not warmed his seat as City Treasurer before he sent to Albany a bill to make the city pay him $10,000 a year for two years for settling some back tax accounts. The grab bill was not sent to the representative of Long Island City, but to Mr. Vacheron, who introduced it, and is supporting it. Senator Childs spurned it. The selfishness of the thing is apparent from the fact that the law was to be operative during Mr. Knapp's term of office only. The people of Long Island City rose up against it, public meetings were held to denounce it, and every newspaper in the city spoke against it. These things make no difference to Mr. Vacheron.
A recent occasion for adverse comment was the alteration of a bill in the Assembly which had been approved by the board of Supervisors and passed by the Senate in its original form. For years Brooklyn politicians and others have been trying to compel the Supervisors to build a bridge over Newtown creek at Maspeth avenue. The expense would be $150,000 at least. These plotters tried to force the building of a bridge by an action at law. The Supervisors have been fighting against it in the courts, and have been to the Court of Appeals twice, and the case is now just where it started. The Supervisors had an act drafted giving them discretionary power as to building bridges, which is right, and Mr. Childs passed it through the Senate. In the Assembly the bill has been amended to compel the Supervisors to build the bridge. In addition to the politicians who want the bridge a railroad company wants to cross the creek and prefers that the county should provide a way. So in this matter the taxpayers are confronted with a possible addition of $150,000 to their burdens without any good reason whatever, and Vacheron does not care.
The Supervisors sent to Albany still another bill. It was intended to improve the method of assessing property. One clause provided that all contractors should file with the board of Assessors a statement as to all new buildings erected and their cost. The purpose was to furnish reliable figures from which the assessors could fix the percentage of assessments. It was an essentially just provision. The bill went through the Senate all right, but in the Assembly it was held up and this provision was stricken from it. The only reason for cutting it out is that speculators did not want it in. It would prevent them from getting low assessments by misrepresentation or a worse offense.
There is still another bill that has been held up in Assembly. The Brooklyn City railroad company induced the authorities of Flushing, to provide for an improvement of Strong's Causeway, including the erection of a bridge, at an estimated expense of $25,000, one half of the sum to be a charge upon the county at large. The railroad company has a franchise to lay tracks on the causeway when it shall be completed, and some of the railroad people have started a cemetery close by, and the improvement is really in the interest or these two corporations. Supervisor Pople fought against it, but he was overruled. The board of Supervisors protested that it would be an outrage to compel the property owners of the whole county to pay one-half the expense of what is really a private improvement over in Flushing, and they sent a bill to Albany to prevent the wrong. The railroad company appeared at Albany in opposition to it. Nevertheless, it passed the Senate. From the time it reached the Assembly until now it has slumbered. The contract for the work has been let and the outlook is that the county will have to foot half of the expense. It is not a pleasant reflection for tax-payers in these hard times.
The Supervisors have worried and fretted under this miserable condition of things. They have passed resolutions urging action on these bills in Assembly, and they have sent committees to Albany to see Mr. Vacheron, but the bills do not move. Politicians and rings have more influence than the Supervisors.
Vacheron's conduct has been such that the Brooklyn Eagle, Brooklyn Times, New York Herald, New York World, New York Sun have made editorial protests, and the Albany correspondents of many daily newspapers have felt justified in flaying him.
For printing these statements and apprising the public of the character of the man who represents them in the Legislature, a brutal assault has been made upon the editor of this paper and threats have been made to kick his head off. We were fully aware of the risks we run when we denounced ruffians and scoundrels. We have taken them before and will not shrink from taking them again. This late act of ruffianism will not swerve us for one moment from the exposure of Vacheron's acts.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, April 5, 1895, p. 1.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Honest Men Assailed for Doing an Honest Act
New York, 1895
The Standard assails the board of Supervisors for having paid Counselor Van Vechten about $7,000 for a year's work as the county's lawyer. The Supervisors, as honest officers, could do no less than pay a reasonable fee to a lawyer who had won damage suits aggregating $194,000, and having saved the county from being compelled to build a $150,000 bridge over Newtown creek at Maspeth avenue, and having attended to all the other legal business of the county for twelve months. Some lawyers would have charged the county $25,000 for their services in the damage suits alone, which grew out of the Blissville bridge disaster, and yet no higher priced lawyer could have been more successful than Mr. Van Vechten was. The Supervisors have not done an unreasonable thing at all.
The Standard's attack on the Supervisors is malicious. The Supervisors are assailed because they do not give the Standard patronage. The reason they do not take kindly to the Standard is that they caught the Standard in an attempt to cheat the county out of $255, which involved false swearing, and, like honest men, they defeated the steal. This dishonesty and false swearing taught the Supervisors not to trust the Standard, but to avoid it, just as every honest man mistrusts and avoids a notoriously dishonest person. Besides, the Supervisors have the common knowledge that the Standard has no facilities for doing public work, but is compelled to sublet work to city offices, where high prices are charged, and the Supervisors are not willing, nor would they be justified, in paying profits to New York printers and the Standard, too, for no better purpose than to keep alive a dishonest political newspaper. We have an honest board of Supervisors, thank goodness, and while we have there will be no robbery of the tax-payers to help political mendicants and pauperized newspapers.
We have at hand this very moment the evidence of the incapacity of the Standard to do public work. The Town Clerk of Jamaica is a Republican. He gave the Standard the work of printing the ballots for the town election. The Standard does not own a numbering machine, and has not the type or the presses to produce election tickets. After ten days' waiting the Standard was obliged to throw the job back on the Town Clerk with the humiliating confession that it could not do the work. Consequently, the Town Clerk was obliged, in order to have the election tickets printed at all, to send his order to THE FARMER, in whose office there are eighteen numbering machines, perforators, and presses of the very best kind. Here is the evidence of the Standard's default:
JAMAICA, L. I., March 23, 1895.
The LONG ISLAND FARMER will please furnish 15,000 official Democratic ballots, 15,000 official Republican ballots, 15,000 resolution ballots "For," 15,000 resolution ballots "Against," 15,000 Democratic excise ballots, 15,000 Republican excise ballots, 200 tally sheets, and 200 cards containing lists of candidates.
JOHN B. McCOOK, Town Clerk.
Now the public can see what a shabby concern the Standard is, and why the Supervisors are justified in ignoring it.
The Standard's malice toward Counselor Van Vechten grows out of the fact that he discovered and exposed the Standard's attempt to cheat the county. If Mr. Van Vechten had kept silent about the Standard's steal he would have the friendship of that dishonest paper, but he preferred to act the part of an honest attorney toward the Supervisors, and the Supervisors preferred to act honestly toward the tax-payers, and so the Supervisors and Mr. Van Vechten must submit to the billingsgate of this discredited newspaper.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, March 29, 1895, p. 4.
The Standard assails the board of Supervisors for having paid Counselor Van Vechten about $7,000 for a year's work as the county's lawyer. The Supervisors, as honest officers, could do no less than pay a reasonable fee to a lawyer who had won damage suits aggregating $194,000, and having saved the county from being compelled to build a $150,000 bridge over Newtown creek at Maspeth avenue, and having attended to all the other legal business of the county for twelve months. Some lawyers would have charged the county $25,000 for their services in the damage suits alone, which grew out of the Blissville bridge disaster, and yet no higher priced lawyer could have been more successful than Mr. Van Vechten was. The Supervisors have not done an unreasonable thing at all.
The Standard's attack on the Supervisors is malicious. The Supervisors are assailed because they do not give the Standard patronage. The reason they do not take kindly to the Standard is that they caught the Standard in an attempt to cheat the county out of $255, which involved false swearing, and, like honest men, they defeated the steal. This dishonesty and false swearing taught the Supervisors not to trust the Standard, but to avoid it, just as every honest man mistrusts and avoids a notoriously dishonest person. Besides, the Supervisors have the common knowledge that the Standard has no facilities for doing public work, but is compelled to sublet work to city offices, where high prices are charged, and the Supervisors are not willing, nor would they be justified, in paying profits to New York printers and the Standard, too, for no better purpose than to keep alive a dishonest political newspaper. We have an honest board of Supervisors, thank goodness, and while we have there will be no robbery of the tax-payers to help political mendicants and pauperized newspapers.
We have at hand this very moment the evidence of the incapacity of the Standard to do public work. The Town Clerk of Jamaica is a Republican. He gave the Standard the work of printing the ballots for the town election. The Standard does not own a numbering machine, and has not the type or the presses to produce election tickets. After ten days' waiting the Standard was obliged to throw the job back on the Town Clerk with the humiliating confession that it could not do the work. Consequently, the Town Clerk was obliged, in order to have the election tickets printed at all, to send his order to THE FARMER, in whose office there are eighteen numbering machines, perforators, and presses of the very best kind. Here is the evidence of the Standard's default:
JAMAICA, L. I., March 23, 1895.
The LONG ISLAND FARMER will please furnish 15,000 official Democratic ballots, 15,000 official Republican ballots, 15,000 resolution ballots "For," 15,000 resolution ballots "Against," 15,000 Democratic excise ballots, 15,000 Republican excise ballots, 200 tally sheets, and 200 cards containing lists of candidates.
JOHN B. McCOOK, Town Clerk.
Now the public can see what a shabby concern the Standard is, and why the Supervisors are justified in ignoring it.
The Standard's malice toward Counselor Van Vechten grows out of the fact that he discovered and exposed the Standard's attempt to cheat the county. If Mr. Van Vechten had kept silent about the Standard's steal he would have the friendship of that dishonest paper, but he preferred to act the part of an honest attorney toward the Supervisors, and the Supervisors preferred to act honestly toward the tax-payers, and so the Supervisors and Mr. Van Vechten must submit to the billingsgate of this discredited newspaper.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, March 29, 1895, p. 4.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Cracker Frank the Gouger
New York, 1895
Cracker Frank of the Standard is very much concerned about the welfare of the tax-payers, quite in the same way that a hypocrite is concerned about salvation. The tax-payers must not be bled, unless Cracker Frank does the bleeding. Cracker Frank has tried to do some bleeding. When detected, exposed and defeated in an attempt to cheat the county out of $255, he tries to cover his own offense from view by crying out against some honest person who has committed no offense. The Cracker's attempt to extort money from the county was detected by the board of Supervisors and defeated. At once he made a target of the Supervisors. When the Town Board of Jamaica concluded to economize by having public work, including printing, done by contract, Cracker Frank raised a howl against the town officers. If the Cracker were really sincere he would welcome these methods, take his chances along with the other printers, and be good natured. He is against doing public printing by contract, consequently he is against the true welfare of the tax-payers. The reason he is against open competition is that he cannot compete with well equipped printing offices, his own office, so called, being a miserable little affair and incompetently conducted. In the competition for election printing he imitated the barn yard fowl vulgarly called the Dunghill — he sneaked and did not bid at all. He was no more in it for the tax-payers this time than when he tried to gouge the county out of $255. He used every influence, good and bad that he could bring to bear to induce Town Clerk McCook and Justice Kissam, both Republicans, to get the printing without competition, going so far as to bring Boss Youngs of Oyster Bay and sub-Boss Wallace of Freeport here to bulldoze and threaten the Town Clerk into being a party to a job to fleece the tax-payers. A nice thing, this alcoholized Cracker, to be parading his hypocritical sympathy for tax-payers.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, March 22, 1895, p. 4.
Note: In one of the references to "Cracker Frank" they said "Cranker," an obvious typo. Frank is B. Frank Wood, "proprietor" of The Jamaica Standard, The Farmer's arch-rival. I put "proprietor" in quotes because of this curious article, "Woods' Name Is Down." There's also a little more about their relationship in this article, Malicious Attacks and Their Motive.
Cracker Frank of the Standard is very much concerned about the welfare of the tax-payers, quite in the same way that a hypocrite is concerned about salvation. The tax-payers must not be bled, unless Cracker Frank does the bleeding. Cracker Frank has tried to do some bleeding. When detected, exposed and defeated in an attempt to cheat the county out of $255, he tries to cover his own offense from view by crying out against some honest person who has committed no offense. The Cracker's attempt to extort money from the county was detected by the board of Supervisors and defeated. At once he made a target of the Supervisors. When the Town Board of Jamaica concluded to economize by having public work, including printing, done by contract, Cracker Frank raised a howl against the town officers. If the Cracker were really sincere he would welcome these methods, take his chances along with the other printers, and be good natured. He is against doing public printing by contract, consequently he is against the true welfare of the tax-payers. The reason he is against open competition is that he cannot compete with well equipped printing offices, his own office, so called, being a miserable little affair and incompetently conducted. In the competition for election printing he imitated the barn yard fowl vulgarly called the Dunghill — he sneaked and did not bid at all. He was no more in it for the tax-payers this time than when he tried to gouge the county out of $255. He used every influence, good and bad that he could bring to bear to induce Town Clerk McCook and Justice Kissam, both Republicans, to get the printing without competition, going so far as to bring Boss Youngs of Oyster Bay and sub-Boss Wallace of Freeport here to bulldoze and threaten the Town Clerk into being a party to a job to fleece the tax-payers. A nice thing, this alcoholized Cracker, to be parading his hypocritical sympathy for tax-payers.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, March 22, 1895, p. 4.
Note: In one of the references to "Cracker Frank" they said "Cranker," an obvious typo. Frank is B. Frank Wood, "proprietor" of The Jamaica Standard, The Farmer's arch-rival. I put "proprietor" in quotes because of this curious article, "Woods' Name Is Down." There's also a little more about their relationship in this article, Malicious Attacks and Their Motive.
Malicious Attacks and Their Motive
New York, 1895
In the Standard last week appeared an editorial attack on Counselor Van Vechten and Justice Lester which was prompted by malice against Mr. Van Vechten and by politics and malice against Mr. Lester. It was in the essence dirty business. Mr. Van Vechten's bill against the town for $1,500 for legal services was made an excuse for the attack on him, and because Justice Lester did not oppose the audit of the bill the fact is made use of to attack him. The Standard's malice against Mr. Van Vechten grows out of the fact that, as counsel to the board of Supervisors, he detected the Standard in an attempt to cheat the county out of $255, and defeated it. It is for this honest act that he is assailed. Had he permitted the Standard to accomplish its steal of county money, the Standard would fawn upon him as it does upon others who have winked at its crooked work.
The Standard attacks Justice Lester in the hope of injuring him with the people and to make votes for B. Frank Wood, who expects to run on the Republican ticket for Justice of the Peace, with the probability that Mr. Lester will be the Democratic nominee. The Standard's malice against Justice Lester grows out of the fact that he, as a member of the Town Board, favored the contract system for public printing, to the end that the public departments shall be supplied at the least possible expense. It has proved a good thing for the people, but a bad thing for the Standard, as in every competition for work the Standard has been beaten. So the people will see that Mr. Lester is assailed for having honestly performed a public duty, the same as Mr. Van Vechten is assailed for having prevented an extortion of public money.
As an act of simple justice THE FARMER is bound to say that Mr. Van Vechten's bill is not unreasonable. It covers a period of fifteen months, and is in full for all services. There was a vast amount of work to perform and there are lawyers in the town who would not have done the work for the same sum. In the Town Hall condemnation proceedings the court made Counselor Monfort, who appeared for Mrs. Denton and Mr. Herzog, an allowance of $450, and his clients probably paid him $500 more, and yet Mr. Van Vechten is attacked for asking $1,500 for services extending over fifteen months. The malice which underlies the attack destroys the force of it.
The public will not have failed to observe that Justice Lester is the only town officer attacked for auditing the lawyer's bill. This shows again the malice and political intrigue of the Standard. There were five members of the Town Board present, two of them Republicans, and the motion to audit the bill was seconded by a Republican, Mr. Kissam. These facts were suppressed by the Standard because suppression was necessary to its game of falsification and deception to injure Mr. Lester. The Standard did not stop to think that it could not put Mr. Lester in a false position without at the same time making the Republican officers keep company with him, and injuring them in the same measure that it injured Justice Lester. If Mr. Van Vechten's bill would not bear inspection and criticism, it goes without saying that it would not have been presented for audit two weeks before election.
There has been nothing in journalism or politics in recent years so despicable as this. If every man who does his duty honestly and fearlessly is to be maliciously assailed the public welfare is threatened and anarchy and fraud usurps the place of reason and morality.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, March 22, 1895, p. 4.
Note: There's a poem about some of this, called "The Man From Georgia," at this link. Just going by the poem and the above article and this other article, the man from Georgia was B. Frank Wood, recently the "proprietor" of The Jamaica Standard, the Farmer's arch rival. Obviously the Farmer preferred Justice Lester as J.P., predicting, "After January next" Lester's name will have after it, "J.P."!
In the Standard last week appeared an editorial attack on Counselor Van Vechten and Justice Lester which was prompted by malice against Mr. Van Vechten and by politics and malice against Mr. Lester. It was in the essence dirty business. Mr. Van Vechten's bill against the town for $1,500 for legal services was made an excuse for the attack on him, and because Justice Lester did not oppose the audit of the bill the fact is made use of to attack him. The Standard's malice against Mr. Van Vechten grows out of the fact that, as counsel to the board of Supervisors, he detected the Standard in an attempt to cheat the county out of $255, and defeated it. It is for this honest act that he is assailed. Had he permitted the Standard to accomplish its steal of county money, the Standard would fawn upon him as it does upon others who have winked at its crooked work.
The Standard attacks Justice Lester in the hope of injuring him with the people and to make votes for B. Frank Wood, who expects to run on the Republican ticket for Justice of the Peace, with the probability that Mr. Lester will be the Democratic nominee. The Standard's malice against Justice Lester grows out of the fact that he, as a member of the Town Board, favored the contract system for public printing, to the end that the public departments shall be supplied at the least possible expense. It has proved a good thing for the people, but a bad thing for the Standard, as in every competition for work the Standard has been beaten. So the people will see that Mr. Lester is assailed for having honestly performed a public duty, the same as Mr. Van Vechten is assailed for having prevented an extortion of public money.
As an act of simple justice THE FARMER is bound to say that Mr. Van Vechten's bill is not unreasonable. It covers a period of fifteen months, and is in full for all services. There was a vast amount of work to perform and there are lawyers in the town who would not have done the work for the same sum. In the Town Hall condemnation proceedings the court made Counselor Monfort, who appeared for Mrs. Denton and Mr. Herzog, an allowance of $450, and his clients probably paid him $500 more, and yet Mr. Van Vechten is attacked for asking $1,500 for services extending over fifteen months. The malice which underlies the attack destroys the force of it.
The public will not have failed to observe that Justice Lester is the only town officer attacked for auditing the lawyer's bill. This shows again the malice and political intrigue of the Standard. There were five members of the Town Board present, two of them Republicans, and the motion to audit the bill was seconded by a Republican, Mr. Kissam. These facts were suppressed by the Standard because suppression was necessary to its game of falsification and deception to injure Mr. Lester. The Standard did not stop to think that it could not put Mr. Lester in a false position without at the same time making the Republican officers keep company with him, and injuring them in the same measure that it injured Justice Lester. If Mr. Van Vechten's bill would not bear inspection and criticism, it goes without saying that it would not have been presented for audit two weeks before election.
There has been nothing in journalism or politics in recent years so despicable as this. If every man who does his duty honestly and fearlessly is to be maliciously assailed the public welfare is threatened and anarchy and fraud usurps the place of reason and morality.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, March 22, 1895, p. 4.
Note: There's a poem about some of this, called "The Man From Georgia," at this link. Just going by the poem and the above article and this other article, the man from Georgia was B. Frank Wood, recently the "proprietor" of The Jamaica Standard, the Farmer's arch rival. Obviously the Farmer preferred Justice Lester as J.P., predicting, "After January next" Lester's name will have after it, "J.P."!
Wood's Name Is Down.
New York, 1895
NO LONGER PROMINENT ON THE STANDARD'S FIRST PAGE.
The Newspaper Is Still Alive, but the Public Do Not Know Who is Responsible for It — Some Things That Seem Very Queer.
The following used to be displayed conspicuously on the first page of the Jamaica Standard:
THE JAMAICA STANDARD.
JAMAICA, QUEENS CO., N. Y
PUBLISHED EVERY SATURDAY
—BY—
B. FRANK WOOD, PROPRIETOR.
B. Frank Wood's name no longer appears anywhere in the Standard. This is very queer. Taking down his name would not save him from prosecution for having tried to get $275 from the county, through an audit by the board of Supervisors, when entitled to but $20, which wrong was prevented by Counselor Van Vechten, who saw that it was a steal.
A fortnight ago THE FARMER announced that a New York paper manufacturing company had instructed their counsel to bring an action against the Standard to recover pay for goods delivered to Mr. Wood. The Standard was not responsible for the debt, the property being owned by a corporation, who leased the plant to Mr. Wood. He was personally responsible for the debt. The bill was finally paid. Taking his name out of the paper would not help him against his creditors.
The Standard has received from the town of Jamaica money to which it was not entitled. Perhaps the Town Board will demand the return of the money by Mr. Wood. Removing his name from the paper would make no difference as to his liability to the town. The corporation owning the Standard would not be responsible.
The Standard at present stands in an uncertain relation to the business world. It Mr. Wood is no longer responsible for utterances of the paper, or the conduct of the office, who is? There is not a line in the paper to indicate that the company of owners have resumed possession, control and responsibility. This is all wrong in a business sense. Business men, when they are asked to sell goods on time, are entitled to know whether Mr. Wood or the corporation is the responsible party. One might shift responsibility to the other.
When Mr. Wood, as lessee, put his name up as proprietor, he did an act that was very misleading. Proprietorship means ownership. He took the corporation name down then. But now, when he has taken his name down, he has not put the corporation name up. So the concern is afloat without captain or compass. Mr. Wood says he has lost $3,500 keeping the paper alive. If it is true, he cannot be blamed for wanting to remove his name as the responsible party. If the corporation has taken charge again, a statement to that effect should be made.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, March 22, 1895, p. 1.
NO LONGER PROMINENT ON THE STANDARD'S FIRST PAGE.
The Newspaper Is Still Alive, but the Public Do Not Know Who is Responsible for It — Some Things That Seem Very Queer.
The following used to be displayed conspicuously on the first page of the Jamaica Standard:
THE JAMAICA STANDARD.
JAMAICA, QUEENS CO., N. Y
PUBLISHED EVERY SATURDAY
—BY—
B. FRANK WOOD, PROPRIETOR.
B. Frank Wood's name no longer appears anywhere in the Standard. This is very queer. Taking down his name would not save him from prosecution for having tried to get $275 from the county, through an audit by the board of Supervisors, when entitled to but $20, which wrong was prevented by Counselor Van Vechten, who saw that it was a steal.
A fortnight ago THE FARMER announced that a New York paper manufacturing company had instructed their counsel to bring an action against the Standard to recover pay for goods delivered to Mr. Wood. The Standard was not responsible for the debt, the property being owned by a corporation, who leased the plant to Mr. Wood. He was personally responsible for the debt. The bill was finally paid. Taking his name out of the paper would not help him against his creditors.
The Standard has received from the town of Jamaica money to which it was not entitled. Perhaps the Town Board will demand the return of the money by Mr. Wood. Removing his name from the paper would make no difference as to his liability to the town. The corporation owning the Standard would not be responsible.
The Standard at present stands in an uncertain relation to the business world. It Mr. Wood is no longer responsible for utterances of the paper, or the conduct of the office, who is? There is not a line in the paper to indicate that the company of owners have resumed possession, control and responsibility. This is all wrong in a business sense. Business men, when they are asked to sell goods on time, are entitled to know whether Mr. Wood or the corporation is the responsible party. One might shift responsibility to the other.
When Mr. Wood, as lessee, put his name up as proprietor, he did an act that was very misleading. Proprietorship means ownership. He took the corporation name down then. But now, when he has taken his name down, he has not put the corporation name up. So the concern is afloat without captain or compass. Mr. Wood says he has lost $3,500 keeping the paper alive. If it is true, he cannot be blamed for wanting to remove his name as the responsible party. If the corporation has taken charge again, a statement to that effect should be made.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, March 22, 1895, p. 1.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Saving Money for the County
New York, 1895
The Standard says that THE FARMER gets $10,000 a year out of the county for public printing and advertising. That's right. And we give the county full value for its money. This the Standard does not deny. We printed election ballots for $5 per 1,000, and the Standard charged $10 per 1,000 for ballots that it had printed in the city, but the Supervisors refused to pay the Standard's price and cut its bill down to THE FARMER'S price of $5. The Standard lost some money, of course, but then the Supervisors are not obliged to subject the county to extortion to keep a pauperized newspaper alive. Only very recently the Standard tried to extort $275 from the county when legally it was entitled to but $20. Only last week the Standard succeeded in euchering the town of Jamaica. The paper has got to do this sort of thing or go out of existence. It has no facilities for doing public work, and therefore has to sublet its work to high-priced offices in the city, and that is why its prices are so frightfully high. The town has to pay two profits instead of one. The Standard's jealousy of THE FARMER'S unexcelled equipment does not lessen as its condition wanes more and more toward final extinction.
A corrupt newspaper is a public curse. In the latter part of the old year the Good Government Club of Newtown preferred charges of corruption against the commissioners of excise, had them indicted, and then asked Judge Garretson to remove them from office. The Jamaica Standard made a shameful attack on the Good Government Club in the interest of the accused officials. Well, they have had a fair trial before Judge Garretson, and his Honor finds them guilty and removes them from office. This decision of the court is a stinging rebuke to the Standard and a complete vindication of the Good Government Club. If there is any crime the Standard would not defend for petty gain, we wish some one would name it.
The Standard attacked the board of Supervisors last week. That paper is down on the Supervisors, individually and collectively, because they cut its skin bill of $275 down to $20. Honest officials can easily bear the malicious abuse of a dishonest newspaper.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, Feb. 1, 1895, p. 4.
The Standard says that THE FARMER gets $10,000 a year out of the county for public printing and advertising. That's right. And we give the county full value for its money. This the Standard does not deny. We printed election ballots for $5 per 1,000, and the Standard charged $10 per 1,000 for ballots that it had printed in the city, but the Supervisors refused to pay the Standard's price and cut its bill down to THE FARMER'S price of $5. The Standard lost some money, of course, but then the Supervisors are not obliged to subject the county to extortion to keep a pauperized newspaper alive. Only very recently the Standard tried to extort $275 from the county when legally it was entitled to but $20. Only last week the Standard succeeded in euchering the town of Jamaica. The paper has got to do this sort of thing or go out of existence. It has no facilities for doing public work, and therefore has to sublet its work to high-priced offices in the city, and that is why its prices are so frightfully high. The town has to pay two profits instead of one. The Standard's jealousy of THE FARMER'S unexcelled equipment does not lessen as its condition wanes more and more toward final extinction.
A corrupt newspaper is a public curse. In the latter part of the old year the Good Government Club of Newtown preferred charges of corruption against the commissioners of excise, had them indicted, and then asked Judge Garretson to remove them from office. The Jamaica Standard made a shameful attack on the Good Government Club in the interest of the accused officials. Well, they have had a fair trial before Judge Garretson, and his Honor finds them guilty and removes them from office. This decision of the court is a stinging rebuke to the Standard and a complete vindication of the Good Government Club. If there is any crime the Standard would not defend for petty gain, we wish some one would name it.
The Standard attacked the board of Supervisors last week. That paper is down on the Supervisors, individually and collectively, because they cut its skin bill of $275 down to $20. Honest officials can easily bear the malicious abuse of a dishonest newspaper.
—The Long Island Farmer, Jamaica, NY, Feb. 1, 1895, p. 4.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
