OCR Text |
Show MALICE OF THE TRIBUNE. In tho Tribune of Thursday there appeared ap-peared a sensational article headed "Post OiTlco Makes Another Blunder." The article stntos In substance that a special delivery letter addressed to W. W. Cook, caro City Clerk, arrived at tho postofflco at 10 o'clock on Tuesday Tues-day morning and that Instead of sending send-ing it to tho ofTlco of the City Clerk it was sent to tho "homo of a man named Cook living in tho western part of tho city," and was not delivered to tho person it was Intended for until twenty-nlno hours after It was received. re-ceived. That is what tho Tribune said, but tho Tribune knew it stated falsehoods false-hoods and did so wilfully and with malice aforethought. Wo will now glvo tho facts in tho case, and lot tho public judge as to the kind and character of post office news being furnished almost dally by the Tribune. On Tuesday at 10 o'clock p. m. (not a. m., as alleged by the Tribune) a letter bearing a special delivery stamp was received from the oast addressed as stated. The city clerk's offlco was closed at that late hour of tho night, and tho postofflce clerk in charge handled the letter as required by tho postal laws and regulations, regu-lations, which provides that If a special spe-cial delivery letter addressed to a party par-ty at his place of business cannot bo delivered thero it should bo delivered it his place of residence. The clerk found In tho postofflco directory an order filed on Mnrch 30, 190C (just thirteen days before tho letter In question ques-tion was received) by W. W. Cook, a stranger in tho city, directing that all mall addressed to W. W. Cook bo delivered de-livered at 179 West Sixth South street Shortly after filing tho ordor Mr. Cook mado an Inquiry concerning a special delivery letter he expected from tho east, and becauo of this In quiry tho clerk mado a special entry to oblige Mr. Cook If tho sepclal delivery de-livery letter should bo received. The clerk sent tho letter to Mr. Cook's residence. res-idence. Ho was not at homo, and hit wife receipted for It. Tho letter wa& returned to tho postofflco the next afternoon with tho statement that It was not for W. W. Cook at 179 West Sixth South street. No explanation was given why Mr. Cook retained th2 letter so long beforo returning it. Tho Tribune made no effort to get at tho facts, and deliberately published publish-ed a misstatement as to the time the letter was received, alleging it was at 10 o'clock In tho morning instead of 10 o'clock at night. This It did purposely pur-posely to deceive Its readers and to Injuro Postmaster Thomas, against whom tho Tribune's owner bears malice. |