Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

generous and magnanimous condescension of that monarch whom, on the Queen's trial, he and his friend Denman dared to speak of as, we can never forget, they did!*

Odoherty. I confess Brougham is a fine specimen. By the way, what is all this piece of work about changes in your Scots Courts of Law?

Tickler. It is a piece of work originating in the by no manner of means unnatural aversion of the Chancellor to a law of which he is ignorant, and carried on by the base and fawning flattery (which he should have seen through) of certain low Scotch Whigs, who, nourishing the vile hope that, change once introduced, changes may be multiplied, are too happy to find, in the best Tory of England, their ally in a plan which has for its real object the destruction of all that is most dear and valuable to Scotland, and of course held and prized as such by the Tories of Scotland. But the low arts by which the whole affair has been got up and got on-the absurdity of the proposed innovations, and in particular, the pitiable imbecility with which the whole real concerns of the Jury Court-that job—are blinked-all these shall ere long be exposed in a full, and, I hope, a satisfactory manner. I shall demolish them in ten pages. Down-down--down shall they lie-never to rise again--or my name is not Timothy.

Odoherty. A letter to Jeffrey, I suppose?

Tickler. Even so let it be. My word, I'll give him a dose.

Hogg. It's aye a pleasure to you to be paiking at him—I wonder you're not wearied o't.

Tickler. I am wearied of it--but duty, Hogg, duty!

Hogg. It's my duty to tell you, that the bottom of the bowl has been visible this quarter of an hour.

[blocks in formation]

(Rings.)

[blocks in formation]

No. XVI-AUGUST, 1824.

Odoherty. By the way, North, have you seen a little book lately put forth by Hurst and Robinson, "On the Present State of the Periodical Press?" The subject is worth your notice, I should think.

North. Certainly, Ensign. I have considered the subject pretty seriously, I believe, and I have also seen the duodecimo you mention.* But I am not so well skilled in the minutiae of these affairs as to be able to give any opinion as to its minute accuracy.

Odoherty. I don't mean to swear for all the particulars neither, for I have only dipped into it; but it seemed to me that there was an air of credibility over what little I read of it. How did you find it as to the Journals with which you are really acquainted?

North. Really, I cannot pretend to be really acquainted with many of them. Blackwood and the Quarterly are the only ones of the greater class that I always read; and as for the papers, you know, I have long been contented with the Courier, New Times, John Bull, and Cobbett. I used to take the Chronicle while Jamie Pirie lived,† and I took in the Examiner till his Majesty of Cockaigne went to Italy. Of late I see none of these trash.

Ŏdoherty. Pooh! that's nonsense-you should see every thing. North. Sir, I can't read without spectacles now-a-days; and I am very well pleased to let Tickler read the Edinburgh and Westminster for me, and you may do the same for me, if you have a mind, quoad the minor diurnals of the same faction. Cobbett I always must read, because Cobbett always must write. I enjoy my Cobbett.

* This brochure, published anonymously, was written by the late Robert Alexander, at one time connected with two scandalous Scottish papers, (The Beacon, in Edinburgh, and The Sentinel, in Glasgow,) and afterwards successively editor of Flindell's Western Luminary, in Exeter, the Watchman, in London, the London Morning Journal, the Liverpool Standard, and the Liverpool Mail. Alexander was conducting the Morning Journal when Wellington and Peel astonished their own Tory party by introducing and carrying the Catholic Relief Bill in 1829. He was bitterly personal on the Ministry, for what he called their "treachery." His animadversions must have deeply galled them, for it was determined to prosecute him for libel, whenever a good casus belli should occur. Alexander, who was audacious and imprudent, wrote an article accusing the Duke of Wellington of an intention of making himself Dictator, for the purpose of marrying his eldest son, then 24, to the present Queen Victoria, a child aged 11. For this he was tried, convicted, and imprisoned. The result was the suppression of the Morning Journal. In 1833, he went to Liverpool to conduct a local paper called The Standard. In 1836, he commenced the Liverpool Mail, on which he continued until his death, in February, 1854, aged fifty-eight. He was a strong, hard-hitting writer; a man of simple tastes; a faithful friend; a consistent politician; and extremely fond of the innocent prattle of children-M.

+ James Perry, proprietor of the London Morning Chronicle, was a native of Aberdeen, and his original name was Pirie.—M,

[blocks in formation]

Odoherty. Surely, surely. But what think ye of the proposal which this new scribe sets forth? I mean his great plan for having the duties on the newspapers lightened? What will Robinson* say to that?

North. I have very little doubt that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will, in the course of a few sessions, bring in and carry through a bill for this purpose. It is the only way to level the arrogance of those great a-thousand-times-over-be-cudgelled monsters-I mean the Old Times and such like-the worst disgrace of the nation.

Odoherty. It would do that, to be sure, with a vengeance; but would not the revenue get some sore slaps?

North. Not one cuff, I honestly believe. These overgrown scampish concerns are, at present, enabled to brave, not merely the influence of government, for it is no evil, but a great good, that newspapers should be independent of this-no, no, that is not what I think of-but the general indignation of all honest men of all parties, the wide, the deep, the universal scorn with which the whole virtue and sense of the British people regard the unblushing, open, avowed, acknowledged, even boasted profligacy, of some of those establishments.

Odoherty. They are so to a certain extent, I admit; but, surely, the little book exaggerates their triumphs.

North. I don't know that, nor do I care for a few hundreds or thousands, more or less. But this I am certain of, that if the duty on the advertisements were considerably lowered, and also the duty on the newspapers themselves, two consequences would infallibly be the result. People would advertise in more papers than they do at present, and people would take in more papers. These are clear and obvious consequences, and from them I hold it scarcely less certain, that two others would ensue. I mean, that an honest new paper would contend on more equal terms with a dishonest old one, and that the far greater number of advertisements published, and the far greater number of newspapers circulated in the country, would more than atone to the Exchequer for the loss Mr. Robinson might at first sight apprehend, from a measure so bold and decided as that of striking off one-half of the newspaper tax, and of the tax on advertisements. Odoherty. Which are

North. Threepence-halfpenny on each copy of each newspaperand three and sixpence on every thing, however trifling, that assumes the character of an advertisement.

Odoherty. I confess it appears a little hard to tax journals of one sort so heavily, and journals of another sort not at all. Why not tax a Magazine or a Review, as well?

North. Certainly. The excuse is, that newspapers are carried postage-free; but this is, of course, quite inapplicable to the enormous pro

* Frederick Robinson, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, and now Earl of Ripon.-M.

1824.]

LONDON NEWSPAPERS.

459

portion of all papers circulated exclusively in London and its suburbs -and it is far too much to make a man living in Bond Street pay threepence-halfpenny, in order that a man living in the Orkney Islands may get his newspaper so much the cheaper.*

Odoherty. Viewed in one light it may seem so; but do you not see the policy in those days of trying to make the provinces balance the capital, by equalizing their condition as to all such things, in so far as it is by any means possible to do so?

North. Very true too, sir. But I can tell you this, Odoherty, that I see very great danger in this same balancing and equalizing you talk of, and nothing so likely to meet the danger as the adoption of the plan I am lauding. It is obvious, that the speedy conveyance of the papers published in the capital into every part of the empire, is gradually enabling those who influence the political feelings of the capital to influence also, and this almost in the same moment of time, the feelings of the remotest provincialists. Thus, in another way to be sure, London bids fair to become to Britain, what Paris has so long been to France;—and that London never can become, sir, without the whole character, not only of the Constitution, but of the nation, suffering an essential and most perilous change. To check the danger of this, I again tell you, I see nothing half so likely, as the adoption of a scheme which will at once deprive old hard determined villany of its exclusive means of lucre, and soon reduce all papers whatever under a decent measure of subjection to the general opinion of decent society. Sir, had there been no three-and-sixpence duty on advertisements, the thirty or forty traders who own the Times would not have dared to meet together in a tavern, and decide by a vote, whether that already infamous journal should, or should not, double its load of infamy, by fighting the battle of the late miserable Queen. This maximum opprobrium had been spared.

* In 1824, upon every single newspaper there was a stamp which cost four pence, (eight cents,) less 20 per cent. discount. At that time, there was a duty of three shillings and sixpence (84 cents) upon each advertisement. A slight equivalent for the stamp-duty was afforded by allowing all newspapers to be carried, free of charge, through the post-office. In September, 1836, a remission of these duties, commonly called "Taxes upon Knowledge," came into effect. The newspaper duty was diminished to one penny (two cents) on each newspaper, and one cent for supplements. At the same time, the duty was reduced from 84 to 36 cents on each advertisement. In August, 1853, the advertisement duty was wholly abolished, and the supplement stamp further reduced. As The Times has not abated its charges, it thus gains 36 cents extra on each advertisement, and the reduction in the supplement duty has enabled it to extend its daily sale from 44,000 (beyond which it previously could not print, to sell at 10 cents each copy, without loss) to 73,000, which are its numbers at the present date [July, 1854]. These changes have put £100,000 per annum extra profit in the treasury of The Times, inasmuch as it has wholly appropriated to itself the benefits of the reduction legislatively intended for the public. All British newspapers continue to be carried free by the post-office, but it is probable that the law will be further amended, so as to provide that newspapers which do not pass through the post-office shall be unstamped, and that only those which are so conveyed shall bear a penny stamp, or be charged with a penny postage.-M.

It was reported, and obtained many believers, that, early in 1820, on the accession of George IV., when a difficulty appeared likely to arise about his wife, the proprietors of The Times met and had a long discussion as to the part that journal should take in the coming

Odoherty. I don't follow you exactly—why?

North. I can't help it, if you can't see what is to me as plain as any pike-staff. A groom out of place advertises in only one paper, because he can't afford to pay two three-and-sixpences to the King-make the duty only one shilling and ninepence, and he will give himself the benefit of two advertisements, and a clever lad is he if he finds means to patronize another paper as blackguard as the Times. But I take much wider ground than all this, sir. If the newspaper press, particularly the Sunday one, were as free and unshackled (I mean as to taxes) as every other press is, we could not see it so infinitely above any other press that exists on the score of profligacy. We could not see it the daily, the hourly practice of a newspaper to take BRIBES, if the bribers were, in consequence of a greater competition, compelled to bribe many more than they at present have to do with. Thus, for example, we should see no more of the scandalous subjection to the interests of particular Stock-jobbers and brokers *—we should have no more of those egregious lies which every day shows and detects—we should have no more of those attacks on men who pay ten guineas next day or next week, to have their characters vindicated. This most crying evil of open venality would at least be greatly, very greatly diminished.

Odoherty. Well, I had rather see than hear tell of it, as Hogg's phrase is.

North. You remember what Clement of the Observer did about the trial of Thistlewood. The court prohibited in the most solemn manner the publication of any part of the evidence, in any one of that batch of trials, until the whole had been terminated. Mr. Clement was the only one who disobeyed this. Well, he was ordered into court, and fined £500 for the contempt-and what followed ?

Odoherty. I can't charge my memory, i'faith, with such doings. North. Why, he paid the money, and after he had done so, very coolly informed the public, that he had not only paid the fine out of the extra profits of the paper, containing the offensive matter, but put, over and above, a very handsome sum into his own pocket. This was as it should be!

Odoherty. Quite so.

contest. It was decided, by a majority of one, that it would side with the Queen, which it did, with great force and success, from the time her name was first mentioned in Parliament, in February, 1820, until and after her death in August, 1821.-M.

It has never been attributed to The Times that it took advantage of its peculiar sources of information for stock-jobbing purposes. On the contrary, the Morning Chronicle, under Sir John Easthope, himself a member of the Stock Exchange, was strongly suspected as having been used by him to bull or bear particular stocks as his interests required.-M.

Mr. Clement sold over 200,000 copies of the Observer, with the report of Arthur Thistlewood's trial for high treason. Taking the nett profit on each number to be three cents, the amount would be £1250 on that single issue, (to say nothing of its acting as the very best advertisement of the paper,) so that, by disobeying the order of the Court, he cleared £750.-M.

« PoprzedniaDalej »