This eBook is a reproduction by the State Library of New South Wales from source material that we believe is not currently covered by copyright. The original physical edition is available from the State Library of New South Wales.

The original publication details are as follows:

Title: The fourth estate : contributions towards a history of newspapers, and of the liberty of the press / by F. Knight Hunt.

Author: Hunt, F. Knight (Frederick Knight), 1814-1854.

Published: David Bogue, London, 1850

Digitised under the State Library of NSW's Digital Excellence Program. Due to the nature of the original material or digitisation process there may be instances where the digital copies are not exact matches of the originals. If you have any questions or would like to provide feedback, please email collections.library@sl.nsw.gov.au

THE FOURTH ESTATE:
CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARDS
A HISTORY OF NEWSPAPERS,
AND OF THE LIBERTY OF THE PRESS.

BY F. KNIGHT HUNT.

IN TWO VOLS.
VOL. II.
"What is it that drops the same thought into ten thousand minds at the same moment? —the Newspaper." DE TOCQUEVILLE.
"There she is—the great engine—she never sleeps. She has her ambassadors in every quarter of the world—her couriers upon every road. Her officers march along with armies, and her envoys walk into statesmen's cabinets. They are ubiquitous. Yonder Journal has an agent at this minute giving bribes at Madrid; and another inspecting the price of potatoes at Covent Garden." PENDENNIS.
LONDON:
DAVID BOGUE, 86, FLEET STREET.
MDCCCL.

LONDON:
HENRY VIZETELLY, PRINTER AND ENGRAVER,
GOUGH SQUARE, FLEET STREET.

CONTENTS.—VOL. II.

CHAPTER VII.
THE PRESS OF THE PRESENT CENTURY.

"Before this century shall have run out, Journalism will be the whole press —the whole human thought. Since that prodigious multiplication art has given to speech—to be multiplied a thousand-fold yet—mankind will write their book day by day, hour by hour, page by page. Thought will spread abroad in the world with the rapidity of light; instantly conceived, instantly written, instantly understood, at the extremities of the earth, it will speed from pole to pole. Sudden, instant, burning with the fervour of soul which made it burst forth, it will be the reign of the human word in all its plentitude—it will not have time to ripen, to accumulate into the form of a book—the book will arrive too late. The only book possible from to-day is a Newspaper."—Lamartine.

Napoleon Bonaparte in Westminster Hall.—The Libels of the French Emigrants. — L'Ambigu.—Macintosh's Speech in defence of M. Peltier.—Leigh Hunt, the Examiner, and the Prince Regent.—Cobbett.—Numerous Government Prosecutions.—" The Battle of the Unstamped."—Bulwer, and the Taxes on Knowledge.—Reduction of the Stamp.—The Increase of Newspapers.

THE present century found the press surrounded by difficulties, yet growing in power and usefulness, despite the constant suspicion of the ruling powers, the occasional attacks of the law-officers of the crown, and the weight of still increasing taxation. We have seen how its aid was invoked here by the opponents of the revolutionary party in France; how a Paper was set up in England to abuse the new rulers of the sister country, whilst, in return, a portion of the Parisian press replied to the verbal missiles thus hurled across the Channel, by abuse of England, and all things English. Soon the people of this country were surprised by the curious spectacle of VOL. II. B Napoleon Bonaparte— the rising dictator of continental Europe—seeking redress in Westminster Hall for libels alleged to have been published against him. It was not the first time that our laws had been appealed to by foreign magnates in cases of alleged libel. We have noticed one action in which the Emperor of Russia was plaintiff, and obtained a verdict against a London Newspaper; in another instance the Queen of France sought damages for an alleged libel published in this country. But whilst foreigners complained of libels printed in England, an echo of the charge might have well been raised by England against the press of the Continent. In truth, both sides, during the war, indulged also in a conflict of words, in which few scruples checked the combatants. Amongst the libels, in The Moniteur for instance, it is on record that there was " a revival of a report charging the English Government with having caused the murder of Roberjot and Bonnier, the two French plenipotentiaries, who were assassinated near Radstadt. As if to give greater publicity to this libel, a design for a monument to the unfortunate men, was placed in the gallery at Versailles, and upon a pedestal in the picture were the following words —" Est puvent egages par des assassins soudoyes parle Gouvernment Anglais." The Argus, not to be behind the official Journal, roundly accused Mr. Windham of contemplating the assassination of the First Consul, and of having expressed his intentions even in the Parliament House. He is reported by The Argus to have alluded to " the probability of seeing some opportunity recur of making an attempt on the life of the First Consul."

Bonaparte, in the first instance, applied to the Court of St. James's, to expel from their refuge, in Great Britain, the French writers, whom he regarded as the authors of the attacks upon his policy and proceedings. Peace then existed between the French Directory and the English King, but this demand, conceived in the spirit of a military dictator, was not to be complied with by a constitutional monarch. Napoleon required his envoy, Otto, " to complain to the British Government, asserting that a deep and continued system existed to injure his character, and prejudice the effect of his public measures through the medium of the press; and, at the same time, he peremptorily demanded the extradition of the French Royalists." The English minister replied that the French Journals were equally violent in their abuse of the British Government, which in fact had no control over the free press of England; while, on the other hand, the French Journals were completely under the surveillance of their own Government. He stated also, that the courts of law in England were equally open to the foreigner as to an Englishman; and at the same time he refused, in decided terms, to send the Royalist emigrants out of the country.

But Bonaparte was not to be put off in tins way. He returned to the subject, and proposed that " means should be adopted to prevent in future any mention being made, either in official discussions, or in polemical writings in England, of what was passing in France; as, in like manner, in the French official disB 2 cussions and polemical writings, no mention whatever should be made of what was passing in England." This reciprocity being also declined, the future Emperor is said to have manifested much indignation; and though the authors of the attacks upon him were not given up to his vengeance, the English Ministers sought to appease the anger of their French ally, by directing the Attorney General to proceed against the writer of one of the obnoxious Papers. Thus it was that Napoleon Bonaparte's name appeared in Westminster Hall, as asking justice for alleged libels published by the Frenchman, M. Peltier. This trial is memorable for more reasons than one. It exhibited the spectacle of a great soldier asking the help of the law; of a foreign potentate suing in an English court; and it gave an opportunity for a Journalist, Mr. Mackintosh, to vindicate still more completely his claim to the character of an orator and a lawyer. Mackintosh, it is well-known, had come to London in search of fortune, and had applied his pen to the service of a Morning Newspaper. This fact, and his general reputation as a thinker and writer of the liberal party, no doubt influenced M. Peltier to select him as an advocate; and the satisfactory mode in which Mackintosh fulfilled his high duty, his eloquent argument for the liberty of the press, not only increased his reputation, but doubtless contributed to smooth the way to the legal promotion he afterwards seemed. The public excitement created by the approach of this trial was very great. The peace had existed but a short time, and its duration was very generally believed to be dependant upon the result of the proceedings in Westminster Hall. When the days came the court and all its avenues were crowded, and an equally intense feeling was excited in another place. The Stock Exchange was in a fever of expectation, and during the week that preceded the trial, money speculations were made upon the belief that Peltier's acquittal would be regarded in France as tantamount to a declaration of war against the First Consul, and wagers were laid that a verdict of not guilty would lower the funds five per cent. The jobbers had messengers at Westminster Hall, prepared to run with all possible speed from the court to the Stock Exchange, with the first news of verdict, if it should be pronounced before the House shut. " It was under these unpropitious omens," says Peltier, in describing his trial, " that I sat in the Court of Queen's Bench, and my anxiety was naturally increased when the first objects that I saw there, were the aide-de-camp, and the secretary of the ambassador of the First Consul, placed, in some sort, en faction, beneath the box of the jurymen."

The case came on for trial on Monday, February 21, 1803, before Lord Ellenborough and a special jury. The case for the Crown was conducted by the Attorney General, Spencer Percival, the future minister, and victim of the assassin Bellingham. Manners Sutton, Abbott, and Garrow, all afterwards judges, followed on the same side; whilst Mackintosh, (the future Sir James Mackintosh, recorder of Bombay), with Mr. Fergusson, appeared for the defence.

The information stated, that there subsisted " friendship and peace between our sovereign lord the King, and the French Republic;" that, " citizen Napoleon Bonaparte was First Consul of the said Republic, and as such, Chief Magistrate of the same;" and further, that certain libels had been printed and published by Jean Peltier, of St. Anne, Westminster, traducing and vilifying the said Napoleon Bonaparte, and calculated to bring him into contempt; and to excite the animosity, jealousy, and hatred of the First Consul and the French Republicans against the King and people of England. The libels when read now, nearly half a century after their publication, appear harmless enough; but, during the excitement of 1803, were doubtless thought to be of very serious character. The most pointed and severe of these attacks on the First Consul, and the one on which the law-officers of the crown much relied, may be quoted to illustrate this remarkable trial.

" Wish of a good patriot on the fourteenth day of July, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and two.

" What fortune has the son of Lœtitia arrived at! A Corsiean, he becomes a Frenchman, his new country adopts him, nourishes him in the rank of its children, and already promises him the greatest destinies. A storm arises. By the force of the tempests the state is overturned—the most noble persons fall—everything is broken. The unhappy Frenchman regrets with sighs his error and his wishes. Napoleon appears flying from victory to victory—he reaches the summit of glory—the east, the west witnesses of his exploits, are vanquished by him, and receive his laws. The Nile had shuddered; but the lot that forces him on, recalls his vanquisher to the banks of the Seine. Five chiefs, or five tyrants, shared the power. He forces from their hands the sceptre and the censer. Behold him then seated where the throne was raised. What is wanting to its wishes? —a sceptre?—a crown? Consul, he governs all—he makes and unmakes kings. Little careful to be beloved, terror establishes his rights over a people degraded even to the rank of slaves—he reigns!—he is despotic!—they kiss their chains! What has he to dread?—he has dictated peace—kings are at his feet, begging his favours. He is desired to secure the supreme authority in his hands! The French; nay, kings themselves, hasten to congratulate him, and would take the oath to him like subjects. He is proclaimed Chief and Consul for life. As for me, far from envying his lot, let him name, I consent to it, his worthy successor. Carried on the shield let him be elected Emperor! Finally, (and Romulus recalls the thing to mind), I wish that on the morrow, he may have his apotheosis. Amen!"

These libels appeared in Numbers 1 and 3 of a Paper called " LAmbigu, or Amusing and Atrocious Varieties, a Journal of the Egyptian kind." It was in French, and was sold by a Frenchman in Gerrard Street, where the agents of the Government bought the copies used for the prosecution.

Percival in stating his case to the jury, declared that he prosecuted this Publication because it had a tendency " to endanger the security, the tranquillity, and the peace of the country." He said, " I do not think I am at all called on to state any general principle of law which may apply, or at least strictly to define to what extent the Government of a country, at peace with our own, may lawfully be made the subject of animadversion. I am not now called upon to lay down such a definition, but undoubtedly there are some broad distinctions on the subject. I have no difficulty in laying down this: for instance, I think no man can suppose that I mean to contend, that any Publication, professing to consider the conduct of a foreign Government at peace with us, would be a libel; which, if applied to the Government of our own country, would not be deemed to be such. Though the province of the historian be the detail of facts, yet, if he introduced the fair discussion of the politician, or of the philosopher, on the facts and events he detailed, even this, unquestionably published fairly and bona fide, and not as a cover for slander and defamation, such a Publication I should certainly never think of deeming the subject of presecution. But, if the case be this: if defamation be the sole object of the Publication, and if the Publication has the necessary and direct tendency of exciting that degree of jealousy and hatred in the country to which the Publication is directed, against the country from which it issues, and to alienate the dispositions of that country from our own, and consequently to interrupt the intercourse of peace which subsisted between them—I think it is not likely any lawyer will stand up and say such a Publication is not a libel, and that the author of it ought not to be punished. But even that is not this offence; the offence here charged to have been committed by the defendant, is this—that his Publication is a direct incitement and exhortation to the people of the French Bepublic, to rise up in arms against their First Consul and Chief Magistrate, to wrest the power from the hands in which de facto it is placed, and to take away the life of the man who presides over them. Is it possible we can have any difficulty in supporting the proposition, that such a Publication is an offence against the law of this country?"

Mackintosh's defence of Peltier, was regarded as one of the most brilliant speeches of the time. He declared the real prosecutor in the case to be " the master of the greatest empire the civilized world ever saw." " The defendant," he said, " is a defenceless proscribed exile. He is a French Koyalist, who fled from his country in the Autumn of 1792, at the period of that memorable and awful emigration, when all the proprietors and magistrates of the greatest civilized country of Europe were driven from their homes by the daggers of assassins; when our shores were covered as with the wreck of a great tempest, with old men, and women, and children, and ministers of religion, who fled from the ferocity of their countrymen as before an army of invading barbarians. The greater part of these unfortunate exiles, of those, I mean, who have been spared by the sword, who have survived the effect of pestilential climates or broken hearts, have been since permitted to revisit their country. Though despoiled of their all, they have eagerly embraced even the sad privilege of being suffered to die in their native land. Even this miserable indulgence was to be purchased by con^liances, by declarations of allegiances to the new Government, which some of these suffering Royalists deemed in-conrpatible with their conscience, with their dearest attachments, and their most sacred duties. Among these last is M. Peltier. I do not presume to blame those who submitted, and I trust you will not judge harshly of those who refused. You will not think unfavourably of a man who stands before you as the voluntary victim of his loyalty and honour. If a revolution (which God avert) were to drive us into exile, and to cast us on a foreign shore, we should expect, at least, to he pardoned by generous men, for stubborn loyalty, and unseasonable fidelity to the laws and government of our fathers."

He called upon the jury to remember certain facts in English history. " If, during our usurpation, Lord Clarendon had published his History at Paris, or the Marquis of Montrose his verses on the murder of his sovereign, or Mr. Cowley his Discourse on Cromwell's government, and if the English ambassador had complained, the President de Molé, or any other of the great magistrates who then adorned the Parliament of Paris, however reluctantly, painfully, and indignantly, might have been compelled to have condemned these illustrious men to the punishment of libellers. I say this only for the sake of bespeaking a favourable attention from your generosity and compassion to what will be feebly urged in behalf of my unfortunate client, who has sacrificed his fortune, his hopes, his connections, his country, to his conscience; who seems marked out for destruction in this his last asylum. That he still enjoys the security of this asylum, that he has not been sacrificed to the resentment of his powerful enemies, is perhaps owing to the firmness of the King's Government. If that be tbe fact, gentlemen; if His Majesty's Ministers have resisted applications to expel this unfortunate gentleman from England, I should publicly thank them for their firmness, if it were not unseemly and improper to suppose that they could have acted otherwise—to thank an English Government for not violating the most sacred duties of hospitality; for not bringing indelible disgrace on their country.*"

Turning from personal considerations for his client, to the consideration of the great principles involved in his case, Mackintosh declared the trial they were engaged in, to he the first of a series of conflicts between the greatest power in the world and the only free press remaining in Europe. " This distinction of the English press," he said, " is new—it is a proud and melancholy distinction. Before the great earthquake of the French Revolution had swallowed up all the asylums of free discussion on the Continent, we enjoyed that privilege, indeed, more fully than others, but we did not enjoy it exclusively. In great monarchies, the press has always been considered as too formidable an engine to be entrusted to unlicensed individuals. But in other continental countries, either by the laws of the state, or by long habits of liberality and toleration in magistrates, a liberty of discussion has been enjoyed, perhaps sufficient for most useful purposes. It existed, in fact, where it was not protected by law; and the wise and generous connivance of governments was daily more and more secured by the growing civilization of their subjects. In Holland, in Switzerland, in the imperial towns of Germany, the press was either legally or practically free. Holland and Switzerland are no more; and, since the commencement of this prosecution, fifty imperial towns have been erased from the list of independent states, by one dash of the pen. Three or four still preserve a precarious and trembling existence. I will not say by what compliances they must purchase its continuance. I will not insult the feebleness of states whose unmerited fall I do most bitterly deplore.

" These governments were in many respects one of the most interesting parts of the ancient system of Europe. Unfortunately, for the repose of mankind, great states are compelled, by regard to their own safety, to consider the military spirit and martial habits of their people as one of the main objects of their policy. Frequent hostilities seem almost the necessary condition of their greatness; and, without being great, they cannot long remain safe. Smaller states exempted from this cruel necessity—a hard condition of greatness, a bitter satire on human nature—devoted themselves to the arts of peace, to the cultivation of literature, and the improvement of reason. They became places of refuge for free and fearless discussion; they were the impartial spectators and judges of the various contests of ambition, which, from time to time, disturbed the quiet of the world. They thus became peculiarly qualified to be the organs of that public opinion which converted Europe into a great republic, with laws which mitigated, though they could Dot extinguish, ambition, and with moral tribunals to which even the most despotic sovereigns were amenable. If wars of aggrandizement were undertaken, their authors were arraigned in the face of Europe. If acts of internal tyranny were perpetrated, they resounded from a thousand presses throughout all civilized countries. Princes, on whose will there were no legal checks, thus found a moral restraint which the most powerful of them could not brave with absolute impunity. They acted before a vast audience, to whose applause or condemnation, they could not be utterly indifferent. The very constitution of human nature, the unalterable laws of the mind of man, against which all rebellion is fruitless, subjected the proudest tyrants to this control. No elevation of power, no depravity, however consummate, no innocence, however spotless, can render man wholly inde pendant of the praise or blame of his fellow men.

" These governments were in other respects one of the most beautiful and interesting parts of our ancient system. The perfect security of such inconsiderable and feeble states, their undisturbed tranquillity, amidst the wars and conquests that surrounded them, attested beyond any other part of the European system, the moderation, the justice, the civilization, to which Christian Europe had reached in modern times. Their weakness was protected only by the habitual reverence for justice, which, during a long series of ages, had grown up in Christendom. This was the only fortification which defended them against those mighty monarchs to whom they offered so easy a prey. And, till the French Revolution, this was sufficient. Consider, for instance, the situation of the Republic of Geneva: think of her defenceless position in the very jaws of France; hut think also of her undisturbed security, of her profound quiet, of the brilliant success with which she applied to industry and literature, while Louis XIV. was pouring his myriads into Italy before her gates; call to mind, if ages crowded into years have not effaced them from your memory, that happy period when we scarcely dreamt more of the subjugation of the feeblest republic of Europe, than of the conquest of her mightiest empire, and tell me if you can imagine a spectacle more beautiful to the moral eye, or a more striking proof of progress in the noblest principles of true civilization. These feeble states, these monuments of the justice of Europe, the asylum of peace, of industry, and of literature, the the organs of public reason, the refuge of oppressed innocence and persecuted truth, have perished with those ancient principles which were their sole guardians and protectors. They have been swallowed up by that fearful convulsion, which has shaken the uttermost corners of the earth. They are destroyed and gone for ever. One asylum of free discussion is still inviolate. There is still one spot in Europe where man can freely exercise his reason on the most important concerns of society, where he can boldly publish his judgment on the acts of the proudest and most powerful tyrants: the press of England is still free. It is guarded by the free constitution of our forefathers. It is guarded by the hearts and arms of Englishmen, and I trust I may venture to say, that if it be to fall, it will fall onlv under the ruins of the British empire."

Mackintosh went on to describe those general principles of law on the subject of political libel, and then again descending to the more immediate affairs of his client, he declared that the object of Peltier's Paper was to give a picture of the cabals and intrigues of the French factions; and then, turning skilfully upon the law officers of the crown, he inquired why other Papers, which went unchallenged in their abuse, not only of the French but of the English authorities, were not prosecuted. If the general lawfulness of republications from the French, (for Peltier's work professed to be partly a reprint from the French,) " if the general lawfulness," he said, " of such republications be denied, then I must ask Mr. Attorney General to account for the long impunity which English Newspapers have enjoyed. I must request him to tell you why they have been suffered to republish all the atrocious, official and unofficial libels which have been published against His Majesty for the last ten years, by the Brissots, the Marats, the Dan tons, the Robespierres, the Barreres, the Talliens, the Reubels, the Merlins, the Barrases, and all that long line of bloody tyrants who oppressed their own country, and insulted every other which they had not the power to rob. What must be the answer? That the English publishers were either innocent, if their motive was to gratify curiosity, or praiseworthy, if their intention was to rouse indignation against the calumniators of their country."

After a long argument intended to show the almost impossibility of libelling or overstating the blackness of character of some of the French revolutionary heroes, Mackintosh gave some historical views relative to the liberty of the press—(he accepts as true, by the way, the false story of the English Mercurie,)—" During this ignominious period of our history, a war arose on the Continent, which cannot but present itself to the miud on such an occasion as this; the only war that was ever made on the avowed ground of attacking a free press. I speak of the invasion of Holland by Louis XIV. The liberties which the Dutch Gazettes had taken in discussing his conduct were the sole cause of this very extraordinary and memorable war, which was of short duration, unprecedented in its avowed principle, and most glorious in its event for the liberties of mankind, that republic, at all times so interesting to Englishmen, —in the worst times of both countries our brave enemies,—in their best times our most faithful and valuable friends,—was then charged with the defence of a free press against the oppressor of Europe, as a sacred trust for the benefit of all generations. They felt the sacredness of the deposit, they felt the dignity of the station in which they were placed, and though deserted by the un-English Government of England they asserted their own ancient character, and drove out the great armies and great captains of the oppressor with defeat and disgrace. Such was the result of the only war hitherto avowedly undertaken to oppress a free country because she allowed the free and public exercise of reason: and may the God of justice and liberty grant that such may ever be the result of wars made by tyrants against the rights of mankind, especially against that right which is the guardian of every other."

In concluding his speech, Mackintosh appealed forcibly to former examples where juries had vindicated the freedom of the press. " In the court where we are now met, Cromwell twice sent a satirist on his tyranny to be convicted and punished as a libeller, and in this court, almost in sight of the scaffold streaming with the blood of his sovereign, within hearing of the clash of his bayonets, which drove out Parliaments with contumely, two successive juries rescued the intrepid satirist* from his fangs, and sent out with defeat and disgrace the usurper's Attorney General from what he had the insolence to call his court! Even then, when this unhappy country, triumphant indeed abroad, but enslaved at home, had no prospect but that of a long succession of tyrants wading through slaughter to a throne—even then, I say, when all seemed lost, the unconquerable spirit of English liberty survived in the hearts of English jurors. That spirit is, I trust in God, not extinct: and if any modern tyrant were, in the drunkenness of his insolence, to hope to overawe an English jury, I trust and I believe that they would tell him —' Our ancestors braved the bayonets of Cromwell—we bid defiance to yours. Contempsi Catiline gladios—non pcrtimcscam tuos!

" What could be such a tyrant's means of overawing a jury? As long as their country exists, they are girt round with impenetrable armour. Till the destruction of their country no danger can fall upon them for the performance of their duty, and I do trust that there is no Englishman so unworthy of life as to desire to outlive England. But if any of us are condemned to the cruel punishment of surviving our country—if, in the inscrutable counsels of Providence, this favoured seat of justice and liberty, this noblest work of human wisdom and virtue, be destined to destruction, which, I shall not be charged with national prejudice for saying, would be the most dangerous wound ever inflicted on civilization; at least let us carry with us into our sad exile the consolation that we ourselves have not violated the rights of hospitality to exiles—that we have not torn from the altar the suppliant who claimed protection, as the voluntary victim of loyalty and conscience! Gentlemen, I now leave this unfortunate gentleman in your hands. His character and his situation might interest your humanity—but, on his behalf, I only ask justice from you. I only ask a favourable construction of what cannot be said to be more than ambiguous language, and this, you will soon be told from the highest authority, is a part of justice."

This powerful appeal was in vain. The jury found Peltier guilty; but war breaking out soon afterwards between England and France, he was never called up to receive sentence.

On the opening of the session of Parliament in 1805, the most prominent subjectof debate arose out of a Newspaper paragraph. Lord Melville's delinquencies had compelled his dismissal from office; but the disgraced minister found a friend in Mr. Peter Stuart, the editor of a Tory Journal then enjoying some influence, entitled The Oracle. Stuart was brother to Charles Lamb's " Dan. Stuart of The Morning Post." Who wrote the offending remarks does not now appear, but they are worth notice as a specimen of what was then thought to be " vigorous Newspaper writing." The champion of a minister dismissed for misappropriation of the public monies, retorts upon his enemies by accusing them of similar delinquencies; but the use of gross personality in partisan disputes was not then limited to the columns of the Newspapers. After stating that Sir Charles Middleton had been appointed First Lord of the Admiralty, the paragraph that caused this parliamentary disturbance went on as follows:—

While we announce this arrangement as the proper reward of public and private virtue, we cannot help sincerely regretting that party rancour and popular clamour have at this time deprived our King and country of the great and powerful abilities of Lord Melville. In no period of our political history can we find such an instance of the strong effects of prejudice. With all our profound respect for the motives which influenced the majority of the House of Commons; with all our admiration of that spirit which arouses and animates the people in their expressions of indignation at the supposed malversations of an individual; with all our regard for town and country meetings, when properly directed, in supporting the cause of independence, freedom, and public virtue, we cannot help again declaring, that Lord Melville has fallen a victim to confidence misplaced, to prejudice misjudged, and to indignation misapplied: he has been condemned without trial; when an appeal has been offered to his intemperate judges; when a request has been made to put him on his defence; when it has been earnestly solicited to give him a fair and candid hearing, and then come to a decision on the merits of the case, a strong and presumptuous negative have been given, directed and enforced by the violence of the times. If those who were so very impatient to deprive Mr. Pitt of so able a coadjutor, were equally zealous in their endeavours to restore to the public the unaccounted millions of which that public has been so disgracefully robbed, there would, perhaps, be some excuse for all C 2 that affectation of public virtue which has lately distinguished certain brawling patriots of the day. Lord Melville has not deprived the public of a single farthing'; his most implacable enemies have not dared to charge him with such an act: can as much be said of the fathers of some men? If the public were paid its pecuniary claims—long since indisputably proved —certain furious patriots, instead of living in splendour, would be put on the parish. In the future resolutions of the House of Commons, in the future resolutions of all public meetings, we hope that an immediate attention to the enormous debts still due to the public, by certain noisy individuals, will be strongly recommended.

This was the article which called down upon its author the full indignation of the House of Commons, and the debate that ensued upon it is memorable, amongst other things, by the eminence of those who took part in it. On the 25th of April, 1805, Mr. Grey, the champion of the popular party be it remembered, rose to bring the matter before Parliament, and the discussion and other proceedings that followed, as we find them stated in the publications of the time,* afford an interesting view of the temper in which Newspaper critiques on public affairs were regarded, and show also how lenient a parliamentary majority can be when a delinquent has done what agrees with its political humour.

Mr. Grey began by remarking, that whatever reluctance he might feel to take any steps which should seem inconsistent with the most perfect liberty of the press, he could not forbear calling the attention of the House to a most indecent libel on their proceedings; it was of a nature so gross that, consistent with its own dignity, the House could not suffer it to pass over, without expressing its indignation against it. He then read, from The Oracle of the former day, the paragraph we have just quoted, and concluded by moving that Mr. Peter Stuart of Fleet Street, the printer and publisher of the offending Paper, should be called to the bar of the House. One of the ministers rose to defend the literary champion of his late colleague. The Chancellor of the Exchequer admitted that the passage just read was libellous and indecent, but hoped that if gentlemen now began to turn their attention to everything of a libellous and indecent tendency, they would at least observe the strictest impartiality. Observations of the same kind on the proceedings of the House had often before appeared, and were as often overlooked; but if it was now resolved that remarks derogatory to the dignity of the House should be marked with its indignation, he was satisfied. All he desired was, that they should not select one particular instance for punishment, and let. others pass with impunity. He concluded by objecting to the motion. Mr. Grey rose to reply. If the right honourable gentleman, (he said) wished to make this a part of a general system, he could have no objection; but he had selected this case as one which it became the House to take under its special cognizance. The reason he brought it forward was, that he thought it one which was right and proper to select. Mr. Fox allowed that in affairs of this kind the strictest impartiality ought always to prevail; but, in judging of the propriety of such motions, regard should be had to particular times and circumstances. It was the duty of the House to take care that the late decision (in reference to Melville) which diffused such universal gratitude throughout the country, should not be wantonly attacked and insulted. The necessity was the greater, when men in high official situations were seen endeavouring to protect persons convicted of the grossest malversations, and when the present treasurer of the navy was continuing in office a man whom the commissioners of naval inquiry declared unworthy of acting in any pecuniary situation. This allusion to a ministerial employee, brought Mr. Canning into the discussion, and he led the House into a debate having very little to do with the Newspaper topic with which it commenced, and, after Fox and Sheridan had spoken, the debate was ended by the motion being adopted.

The following evening April 26, on the order of the clay being read for the attendance of Mr. Stuart of The Oracle at the bar, Mr. Atkins Wright said a good and wise word for the liberty of the press. He deprecated the adoption of any severe measures towards Mr. Stuart, however necessary it might be to support the resolutions. For his own part, he (Mr. Wright) did not feel his peace of mind broken in upon by any animadversions that might be made upon them. The people of this country had a right to discuss freely the conduct of their representatives. He professed to be of no party, but he highly felt the necessity of maintaining the liberty of the press in all its purity. The honour and dignity of Parliament, in his opinion, would be best consulted in passing the article over in silence; as that House ought to have a firm reliance on its own rectitude. Mr. Grey was inclined to overlook the offence. He said that if the article had appeared a trivial matter to him, or if it had been a fair comment on public affairs, he should not have complained of it; but it appeared to him, on the contrary, to be mere invective and unqualified abuse, tending to villify the proceedings, and insult the authority of Parliament; but if the House thought lightly of it, or if the honourable member who had spoken last should think proper to move that the order be discharged, he should not feel it necessary to press his motion. Mr. Atkins Wright again conjured the House not to make this a matter of any consequence, as a bare reprimand would be sufficient for the purpose. Mr. Windham, however, would listen to no such compromise. He said, he supposed the honourable gentleman who spoke last, would take care to be more tender of his own character as an individual, than he seemed to be of that of the House of Commons; but he saw no reason why gentlemen should feel in that way; as it would be as much as saying to the public, " you may say what you please, we don't mind it." If such was the rule, why not proclaim it? It would be false language to say, that, because many things of this kind were passed over, none should be noticed. The only question was, whether the present instance went to such excess as should lead them to interfere for the maintenance of their own dignity? In his opinion, it was gross, calumnious, and licentious, and he should not think himself acting on a vindictive principle if he voted for punishing the offender, in a certain degree, as a warning to others Sheridan next rose to say his word in favour of freedom of expression. He thought that though the article in itself was extremely improper, yet, when compared with a variety of others which appeared, it might be said to be mere milk and water. If the House was about to adopt a new feeling, and take notice of all expressions of this sort, after having slumbered so long, and suffered them to pass unheeded, it should first give notice of it, and not let punishment fall on a particular individual, when so many were involved in the same sort of delinquency. The House had long connived at things of this sort; it had also connived at reporting its debates, and very properly; for he should consider it a mortal blow to the liberties of the country, if the people should be kept in ignorance of the proceedings of Parliament. The members of that House took greater freedoms with each other, than they wished others to do; but as people published in the reports the severest things they said of one another in that House, was it not natural that they should fall into an imitation of their style, and speak of them, in some measure as they did of themselves. He shoidd be very sorry to find any prosecution in this instance—first, because he was a warm friend to the liberty of the press, and, secondly, because he knew the result of such prosecutions. He remembered having seen what they all conceived to be a libel on that House (he alluded to a pamphlet published by Mr. Reeve,) sent before a court of law, and there an honourable friend of his had the ingenuity to persuade the jury that it contained no reflection whatever on the House of Commons. If the author of the attack now complained of, made an ample apology, (as no doubt he would,) the matter had better drop, and it would be sufficient to have him reprimanded and discharged. The Chancellor of the Exchequer agreed that these things should not be rashly taken up; and, if they had been tolerated long, he certainly was of opinion that it would not be candid to select one individual for the purpose of punishment. As to sending this matter before a jury, the proper time to consider that would be after they had heard what he had to say in his own defence. Fox next declared for lenity. He had ever been of opinion, and he believed his conduct had pretty well shown it, that the liberty of the press should not be rashly meddled with, but it was not perhaps, altogether proper that every gross breach of privilege should escape with impunity. As to the question of prosecution, this case would resemble that of a contempt of court, and should be punished by that House, and no other. He was certain that if such an imputation as this had been thrown on the House of Commons when the majority was in favour of the minister, it would not be tolerated. Upon the whole, however, on the general principle, that the freedom of discussion, either in or out of doors, ought not to be discouraged, he was of opinion that this punishment ought not to be severe. After some further discussion, Mr. Peter Stuart was called in, and in answer to a question from the Speaker, acknowledged that the Paper was printed and published by him. The Speaker said, that the Paper had been complained of to the House, as containing libellous reflections on its conduct and character; and then put the question, What have you to say in answer to the charge? To this Mr. Stuart replied, "Permit me, Sir, to assure you, that I very much regret that any part of the contents of my Paper of yesterday should have incurred the displeasure of this honourable House. If, Sir, I have expressed myself too warmly in favour of Lord Melville, for whom I shall always entertain the highest respect and esteem, I beg this honourable House will view it as the unguarded language of the heart, and not a wilful intention to provoke the censure of a power on which our dearest rights and liberties depend. I entreat you, Sir, that some allowance may be made for that freedom of discussion of public affairs which, for a long series of years, has been sanctioned by common usage, and that the hasty composition of a Newspaper may not be considered as a deliberate design to offend this honourable House." Mr. Stuart was then desired by the Speaker to withdraw, and Mr. Grey moved, that Peter Stuart, in publishing the said Paper, has been guilty of a high breach of the privileges of this House. The Attorney General said he would not oppose the motion, considering the paragraph to be a libel, but those things wore different aspects, as they were for us or against us. He recollected when the public prints made an honourable gentleman state, at clubs and meetings, that the House of Commons was lost to everything that was just and proper, and that it was no use attending it, and that it afforded no protection to the people,—and yet the House had never interfered. Mr. Fox observed, that he thought it incontrovertible that a man may say he should not attend the House, because he could do no service in it, without being guilty of a libel; he had said so, and it was most certainlyhis opinion. As to any other observations, if the right honourable gentleman had shown him the prints he alluded to, he would have told him how far they were accurate. He did not think it very candid to pass it over at the time it happened, and now bring it forward, as an argumentum ad hominem, when such a libel as this was before the House. He confessed that he thought this a more serious libel than many others, because it seemed to be agreeable to the executive power; and in that case, there must be strong suspicions when it came from a person in the pay of the Government. The motion of Mr. Grey was then put and carried; after which Mr. Atkins Wright moved, that Mr. Peter Stuart be called to the bar, reprimanded, and discharged. Mr. Grey said, that after the paragraph in question had been voted a high breach of privilege, if the House chose to let it pass without no greater mark of its displeasure he had no objection. After hearing the apology that had been made, if it were an apology, he would leave them to their own discretion. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that however he might be disposed to lenity, as far as the individual was concerned, yet, after having once resolved that a person had been guilty of a high breach of privilege, he could not, consistently with the dignity of the House, be instantly discharged, and therefore he moved, that the said Peter Stuart be taken into the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms: which was agreed to.

On the 2nd of May, Sir H. Mildmay presented the following petition from Stuart:—

To the Honourable the House of Commons, in Parliament assembled: The petition of Peter Stuart, printer and publisher of a Morning Newspaper, entitled The Daily Advertiser, Oracle, and True Briton, most humbly showeth, that for the publication of that part of the Paper of Thursday last, deemed highly offensive to this honourable House, he feels the deepest regret; and that, although certain expressions in that paragraph be indiscreet and unguarded, and such as have incurred the displeasure of this important branch of the British Constitution; yet, that your petitioner humbly hopes, on this acknowledgment of his sincere sorrow, this honourable House, in the plentitude of its condescension and liberality, will be pleased to pardon him for a transgression solely attributable to the hasty composition of a Newspaper, and not to any deliberate design of offending this honourable House. That your petitioner is emboldened to solicit your indulgence and forgiveness, on his well founded assurance, that, during the several years in which he has conducted a Newspaper, it has uniformly been his principle and pride zealously to support the character and dignity of the House of Commons; and that it has frequently fallen to his lot to have vindicated both from the charges of societies, expressly instituted to bring them into public disrepute and contempt. In any observations which your petitioner may have published on the conduct of Lord Melville, he could not but bear in mind that the views of those societies, abetting domestic treason, and assisted by the cooperation of the revolutionary power of France, would, he verily believes, have effected the destruction of the British Constitution, had not the wise and efficient measures brought forward by that administration in which Lord Melville held so conspicuous a situation, been adopted, and this honourable House would not, in that case, perhaps, have been now in existence, either to censure Lord Melville, or to pardon your petitioner. That if anything could increase your petitioner's regret, it would be its being supposed that the objectionable paragraph was directed also against the Right Honourable the Speaker of the House of Commons; that your petitioner has no hesitation to declare, that no idea was ever more remote from his mind; and that your petitioner would be the very last person to insinuate anything disrespectful of a character whom lie, in conjunction with the whole nation, highly esteems as a private gentleman, and most profoundly venerates as the head and public organ of this honourable House. That your petitioner most humbly hopes this honourable House will consent to his release; and your petitioner will ever pray, &c.

P. STUART.

After this petition had been read, its temper and contents provoked a warm discussion. Sir H. Mild-may, the Tory gentleman who had presented it, moved:—

That the said Peter Stuart be brought to the bar, and be discharged. Mr. Wyndham called the attention of the House to this petition, and asked if anything like it had ever been known? He left it to the discretion of the Honourable Baronet, whether, after hearing this extraordinary petition, he would persevere in his motion. Sir H. Mildmay said he really saw nothing improper in it, and as to the credit given to Lord Melville and those who acted with him, for those measures which enabled the House to preserve its place, he had no hesitation for himself to avow the same principle: he should, therefore, persevere in his motion. Mr. Fox. thought it unnecessary and improper to introduce, into a petition of this nature, any opinion respecting the former conduct of Lord Melville, unless it were for the purpose of attacking those who brought him before the House. He could not conceive how sueh a defence could be admitted; unless ministers meant that those who were brought before them for libelling that House might plead,as a justification, that they had uniformly supported Administration, and had only libelled those who composed the minority. The Chancellor of the Exchequer admitted, that if the petitioner stated generally that he had been in the habit of supporting Administration, it would be no justification of him; but being accused of a libel on the House of Commons, it was material to him to show, that he was so far from being in the habit of libelling them, he had always before supported their resolutions and decisions. The language of the petition was not that which appeared to him most proper, but it was almost the common fault of those connected with the press, that they assumed a loftier tone, and perhaps gave themselves more importance than naturally belonged to them. As to the danger of the times in which the petitioner said he had supported the House of Commons, and the Administration, of which Lord Melville was one, had been the salvation of the country, the opinion was not singular. It had been for years the prevailing opinion of both Houses of Parliament, and of a considerable portion of the people of the country. 'With the exception of his professions of respect for the Speaker, and esteem for the character of Lord Melville, the rest of the petition breathed nothing but sorrow and contrition. Mr. Wyndham requested the House to observe how small a part of the petition was taken up with the language of sorrow and contrition; and, on account of the character and complexion of the performance altogether, he should feel it necessary to move an amendment. But, on the suggestion of Sir William Burroughs, the Speaker acquainted the right honourable gentleman that it was incompetent for him to move any amendment, as he had spoken before on the debate. Mr. Grey considered the petition to have been written altogether in a state of defiance and accusation. It was an attack upon their character as judges, sitting in a court of justice, and calling them intemperate, partial, and presumptuous. He considered the petition as an aggravation of the original offence, and that the punishment ought to be increased. Mr. Canning said, he saw no necessity for censuring the petitioner for merely answering a charge that had been brought against him. As the petitioner had defended, with mistaken zeal, the man who had been the victim of the anger of that House, was it unfair for him, in extenuation, to show the causes which had produced that zeal? He wished, however, that the editors of Papers would take notice and receive warning, if this mode were persisted in, that a great change had taken place in the system of forbearance hitherto adhered to, and regulate their conduct accordingly. Mr. Sheridan saw nothing inconsistent in the conduct of his honourable friend (Mr. Grey). He had, on a former night, given way to a disposition of lenity, but now, when he found that disposition had been abused, there was no inconsistency in thinking that this lenity had been misplaced, and that some severer punishment should take place. He felt sorry that the petition had been so worded that he could not give it his support, and should therefore agree to the vote of his honourable friend. Mr. Whitbread asked, was it to be endured that the editor of a Newspaper should tell the House of Commons, that he had sat in judgment upon them and their proceedings, and pronounced his applause or his censure on the different parties in Parliament as he thought fit? Ho did not, however, wish any severity of punishment on the present occasion, but recommended to the honourable baronet to withdraw this petition, for the purpose of preparing another, that might be less exceptionable. Mr. Wilberforce did not think that the dignity of the House should be engaged in discussing what sort of petition it would be right to receive; but certainly this was not so. It was deficient in the temper and views of it—it was not in that style of expression which ought to be presented to the House of Commons in behalf of a person who had offended its dignity—it was a case in which the petitioner ought to make a gentlemanly apology to the whole House of Commons, and not one side of the House, which he could not help considering was the case in the present instance. The Solicitor General, at considerable length, defended the petition. He saw nothing in it of that offensive matter which had been alluded to by several gentlemen in the course of the debate. If any of the expressions in the petition were (and he did not admit they were) offensive to the House, they could not aggravate his offence when they were dictated by a spirit which intended to lessen it. He concluded by declaring that he found himself called upon to support the motion of the honourable baronet, to call the petitioner to the bar, in order to his being discharged. After some further discussion on the subject, the House divided—for the motion, one hundred and forty-two; against it, one hundred and twenty-one; majority, twenty-one. Mr. Peter Stuart was then brought to the bar, and having received a reprimand from the Speaker, was discharged.*

The Newspaper critique agreed with the political bias of the majority of the House,, and the publisher of it was allowed to escape with a nominal punishment.

From these discussions in the Legislature, we may turn to a humbler, but not less interesting, morsel of Newspaper history, which we find in Mr. Leigh Hunt's " Lord Byron and His Contemporaries." It refers to the establishment of a Journal in the same year that Peter Stuart's affair attracted so much attention. Leigh Hunt had been the companion of Coleridge and Charles Lamb at the Blue Coat School, and had distinguished himself by an early talent for versification. He was now about to enter upon more serious literary labours; and the spirit of independence which he brought to the task, soon gained him more reputation and applause than would perhaps have been his lot, had he displayed far greater talent, combined with less honesty of purpose. It would be unjust, however, to ascribe to the liberality of his opinions the popularity which was, to a great extent, due to his talents. As a critic and a scholar, he had, at the time he began his career, few equals on the press, and very few superiors; and bringing to his Newspaper duties a loftier idea of the vocation of the Journalist than was then generally entertained, he succeeded in giving to the Papers he conducted a tone, and gained for them a character, which honourably distinguished them amongst their rivals. His independence of thought and expression, involved him in persecution, and subjected him to imprisonment—as similar qualities have involved others before and since—but of this hereafter. Our present purpose is with a Journal 'which, after making a good figure in its generation, has become a portion of the past. And now let Leigh Hunt tell his own story in his own way:—

" My brother John, at the beginning of the year 1805, set up a Paper called The News, and I went to live with him in Brydges Street, and wrote the theatricals in it. It was he who invented the round window in the office of that Paper to attract attention.* I say the Paper was his own, but it is a singular instance of my incuriousness that I do not know to this day, and most likely never did, whether he had any share in it or not. Upon reflection, my impression is that he had not. At all events he was the printer and publisher, and occupied the house."

The tone of Newspaper criticism was then at a low ebb, not as regards talent, which was plentiful enough, but on account of the venality and unblushing partiality of the reviewers. Mr. Hunt's is by no means an exaggerated account of the condition of the art. He says:—" It was the custom at that time for editors of Papers to be intimate with actors and dramatists. They were often proprietors as well as editors; and, in that case, it was not expected that they should escape the usual intercourse, or wish to do so. It was thought a feather in the cap of all parties, and with their feathers they tickled one another. The Newspaper man had consequence in the green-room, and plenty of tickets for his friends; and he dined at amusing tables. The dramatist secured a good-natured critique in his Journal, sometimes got it written himself, or, according to Mr. Eeynolds, was himself the author of it. * * The best chance for an editor, who wished to have anything like an opinion of his own, was the appearance of a rival Newspaper with a strong theatrical connexion. Influence was here threatened with diminution. It was to be held up on other grounds; and the critic was permitted to find out that a bad play was not good, or an actress's petticoat of the lawful dimensions. Puffing, and plenty of tickets, were, however, the system of the day. It was an interchange of amenities over the dinner-table; a flattery of power on the one side, and puns on the other; and what the public took for the criticism upon a play, was a draft upon the box-office, or reminiscences of last Thursday's salmon and lobster sauce. We saw that independence in theatrical criticism would be a great novelty. We announced it, and nobody believed us; we stuck to it, and the town believed everything we said."

The spirit and independence which characterized Leigh Hunt's critiques on literature and the drama were extended to his political writings. He commented on the events of the day, with a freedom very distasteful to those who enjoyed a share of the taxes, or who worshipped at the shrine of fashion and the Prince of Wales. He had the talent to detect, and the honesty and the courage to declare, the necessity for various changes which have since been made. He was, in fact, one of the pioneers of the changes which have been effected during the present century. When the nation was infected with the war fever, he advocated peace; when millions were being lavished upon armies sent against Napoleon, he argued for retrenchment; and when noblemen bought and sold pocket boroughs, he demanded Parliamentary reform. The Attorney General was soon on his track; and, as we shall see, this literary champion for extension of liberty to the people was quickly instructed in the forms of Westminster Hall, and ultimately shut up in gaol, whilst the property earned by his pen was being filched from him by fines and law costs. He was a man of no private fortune, and had to earn the guineas which the Government compelled him to expend in defending his writings in the courts.* Three years after the starting of The News, The Examiner was established. Leigh Hunt thus speaks of it in the work which we have already quoted:—"At the beginning of the year 1808, my brother John and myself set up the weekly Paper of The Examiner in joint partnership. The spirit of the theatrical criticism continued the same as in The News for many years. ***** I have long ceased to have any hand in it, and latterly to have any property in it. I shall, therefore, say nothing more of the Paper, except that I was very much in earnest in all I wrote; that I was in a perpetual fluctuation during the time of gay spirits and wretched health, which conspired to make me a sensitive observer, and a very bad man of business; and that I think precisely on all subjects as I did when I last wrote in it, with this difference, that I am inclined to object to the circumstances that make the present state of society what it is still more; and to individuals who are the creatures of those circumstances, not at all." Some of the articles he wrote when he was " very much in earnest' were those which brought down upon him the attentions of the Attorney General. And here we cannot again avoid noticing upon what slight grounds the law officers of the Crown ventured to attack a public writer, secure in the belief that juries would convict any man who dared to print troublesome statements. In 1810 there appeared in The Examiner the following paragraph:—

What a crowd of blessings rush, upon one's mind that might be bestowed upon the country, in the event of a total change of system! Of all monarchs, indeed, since the Revolution, the successor of George the Third will have the finest opportunity of becoming nobly popular.

Being printed whilst George the Third was on the throne, this was declared to be a seditious libel; and Sir Yicary Gibbs took steps accordingly. Informations were filed against Leigh Hunt and his brother John, and also against Mr. Perry of The Morning Chronicle, who had reprinted the paragraph. Perry's case came on first for trial, before Lord Ellenborough and a Middlesex special jury, February 24, 1810. Attorney General Gibbs, in opening the prosecution, declared, that " nobody who saw such language held could doubt that it must have a manifest tendency to alienate and destroy the affections of the people towards their sovereign, and to break down that link of love which ought to connect the sovereign and his people in the tenderest ties." Perry conducted his own case, and, after arguing the points at issue with great address, he thus concluded his defence:—" Gentlemen of the jury, the cause of the liberty of the press in England, under the direction of the noble and learned judge, is in your hands this day. The Morning Chronicle stands now, as it did in 1793, in the front of the battle, not only for itself, but for the liberty of the press of England. The point at issue is—whether it shall continue to assert the principles upon which the Whigs have ever acted, and by which their only object is to perpetuate to His Majesty and his heirs the throne to which they persuaded the people of England to call his ancestors, by securing it upon that basis which forms not only its strength but its lustre, and which I find truly described in a recent column of my own Paper:—' Nothing on earth ever equalled the magnificent and richly ornamented power and greatness of the kingly office in the Constitution of England, when exerted in due harmony with the influence and authority of the two Houses of Parliament, in unison with the public voice. The boasted unity and vigour of despotism is impotence compared with the concentrated energy of such a Government.'—May it be perpetual."

The jury gave a verdict of Not Guilty, upon which the ex-officio information against The Examiner, for the original publication of this so-called libel, was withdrawn by the Attorney General. This officer evidently feared another defeat, and postponed his wrath against the " Radical print," until he could make what he thought a stronger case against its editor.

Such an opportunity soon arose. The Examiner was not now the only Paper that attacked the abuses of our political system. Cobbett had made his way into the political arena, and with unfailing vigour kept up a constant fire in defence of democracy. Amongst other things, he had drawn the attention of the whole country to the question of military flogging. Cobbett, who had himself been a soldier, objected only to this cruel mode of punishment in certain cases; Leigh Hunt, in The Examiner, denounced such degrading inflictions altogether. In 1811, Leigh Hunt republished from The Stamford News an article denunciatory of flogging, in which the writer admits that punishments are requisite under military law for the preservation of discipline; but argues, that an army might be kept effective without the use of whipcord; and, in proof of this position, refers to the French army of Bonaparte, where the lash was unknown. This article was prosecuted by the Crown officers, and the case against John Hunt and Leigh Hunt of the Examiner came 011 for trial before Lord Ellenborough on the 22nd of February, 1811.* Mr. Brougham, then a rising advocate in the English courts, was engaged for the defence, and, in opening his address to the jury, he recalled the names of a number of distinguished military men—Abercromby, Lord Moira, General Simcoe, Sir Robert Wilson—who condemned the practice of corporal punishment, and argued that the discussion of such a subject was one which might be safely and properly allowed without danger to the state. He declared that the question the jury had to decide really was, whether, on the most important and interesting subjects, an Englishman had the privilege of expressing himself as his feelings and his opinions dictated?—A question which the jury decided (much to the chagrin of Sir Vicary Gibbs) by a verdict of Not Guilty.

But this was not to be the last of Leigh Hunt's appearances in the law courts. The Prince Regent took offence at some remarks in The Examiner, in which the writer declared The Morning Post had overstated the truth in declaring the then middle-aged Prince to be an Adonis. A more absurd ground for a royal prosecution can scarcely be imagined; but the fact of the Prince having commenced an action for libel in such a case proves, if such proof were necessary, that his vanity was much greater than his discretion. One result of the proceedings against The Examiner was, that this royal gentleman was for years afterwards continually spoken of, in the spirit of Hone's political squib, as—

The dandy of fifty,
Who bows with a grace;
Has a taste in wigs, collars,
Cuirasses, and lace.

In reference to the article in The Examiner on the Prince Regent, Leigh Hunt candidly says:—" I was provoked to write the libel by the interest I took in the disappointments of the Irish nation, which had very particular claims on the promises of His Eoyal Highness; but what perhaps embittered it most in the palate of that illustrious personage was its contradiction of an awkward panegyric which had just appeared from the pen of some foolish person in the Morning Post, calling him at his time of life a charmer of all hearts, and an Adonis of loveliness. At another time I should have laughed at this in a rhyme or two, and remained free—the courts of law having ajudicious instinct against the reading of merry rhymes; but the two things coming together, and the Irish venting their spleen very stoutly over the wine at the dinner on St. Patrick's day (indeed they could not well be more explicit, for they groaned and hissed when his name was mentioned), I wrote an attack equally grave and vehement, and such as everybody said would be prosecuted."*

The expectation was realized; proceedings were taken, and, in this instance, the jury found a verdict of guilty against Leigh Hunt and his brother John Hunt. The sentence against them was a fine of £500 (which, with the costs, made the total penalty £2000), and two years' imprisonment (each) in Horsemonger Lane Gaol. The imprisonment he might have avoided had he chosen to have acceded to an offer made " through the medium of a third person, but in a manner emphatically serious and potential," binding him to abstain in future from similar attacks; but which, although afterwards repeated as far as the payment of the fine was concerned, Mr. Hunt and his brother with the utmost constancy rejected.

The minds of these two Newspaper martyrs could not be cramped by the aspects of a gaol. They went to work to make the best of their fate, and succeeded so well as to render the imprisonment very endurable. Politicians, poets, and other writers, paid them visits of compliment and condolence, and amongst the number were Byron and Moore. They found in Horsemonger Lane a realization of the truth of the old cavalier's rhyme:—

Stone walls do not a prison make,
Nor iron bars a cage;
Minds innocent and quiet take
These for a hermitage.

Leigh Hunt had metamorphosed his prison rooms. " I papered the walls," he says, " with a trellis of roses; I had the ceiling coloured with clouds and sky; the barred windows were screened with Venetian blinds; and when my book-cases were set up, with their busts and flowers, and a piano-forte made its appearance, perhaps there was not a handsomer room on that side the water. I took a pleasure, when a stranger knocked at the door, to see him come in and stare about him. The surprise on issuing from the Borough, and passing through the avenues of a gaol, was dramatic. Charles Lamb declared there was no other such room except in a fairy tale. But I had another surprise, which was a garden. There was a little yard outside, railed off from another belonging to the neighbouring ward. This yard I shut in with green palings, adorned it with a trellis, bordered it with a thick bed of earth from a nursery, and even contrived to have a grass plot. The earth I filled with flowers and young trees. There was an apple-tree, from which we managed to get a pudding the second year. As to my flowers, they were allowed to be perfect. A poet from Derbyshire (Moore) told me he had seen no such heart's-ease. Here I wrote and read in fine weather, sometimes under an awning. In autumn, my trellises were hung with scarlet runners, which added to the flowery investment. I used to shut my eyes in my arm-chair, and affect to think myself hundreds of miles off. But my triumph was in issuing forth of a morning. A wicket out of the garden led into the large one belonging to the prison. The latter was only for vegetables, but it contained a cherry tree, which I twice saw in blossom."

Men who could thus bend to circumstances, and make even a gaol agreeable, were not to be conquered by state prosecutions. They continued to write as before; and when, in course of time, The Examiner passed from their hands, it found (fortunately for the progress of liberal opinions) new possessors, animated by an equal zeal for the elevation of literature and the progress of freedom.

We have seen that one of the prosecutions against The Examiner was grounded on the opinions expressed in its columns on the subject of military flogging; and that this subject had been brought prominently forward by Cobbett—a political journalist of great mark in his generation. William Cobbett was born near Farnham, Surrey, on the 9 th of March, 1792. His father was a small farmer; and the future public writer, who was to alarm ministers and be persecuted by Attorney Generals, found occupation, when a boy, in the day labour of the fields. As he grew older, he made a plunge into the world of London in search of work, and found himself, first, the rejected candidate for employment behind a draper's counter; next, the drudge of the copying desk in a lawyer's office; and next, the bearer of a musket in a regiment of the line. He possessed qualities eminently desirable in the ranks. He was tall, strong, active, cleanly, punctual, and exact, and this combination of useful qualifications soon obtained all the promotion which the rules of the service permitted. Not content, however, with his humble distinctions, and having a great thirst for knowledge, he worked with an unconquerable perseverance in pursuit of political and other information; and being, moreover, very prudent and economical in his habits, he saved money from his scanty pay to purchase his discharge, which he received, with an excellent character from the officers under whom he had served,—one of whom was the unhappy Lord Edward Fitzgerald. When free from the clutches of the Horse Guards, he brought some charges against certain military men, and a court-martial was ordered; but, finding himself unable to substantiate his allegations, he fled to France, whence he subsequently sailed for America, where his career as an author commenced. His first productions were some political pamphlets, but the bookseller who published them having, as Cobbett thought, behaved unfairly towards him, he set up a shop for himself, in Second Street, Philadelphia, and soon made himself a reputation by certain high Tory writings, which appeared with the signature of Peter Porcupine. His notoriety was increased also by the way in which he filled his shop windows. These he crowded with portraits of George the Third and his ministers, with likenesses of princes of the royal family, and with other regal and noble faces. Such an exhibition was regarded as an outrage upon popular feeling in the republican city, for no one had dared exhibit publicly a likeness of the King since the declaration of independence. Cobbett thus became at once notorious and unpopular.

The explanation of this early display of antidemocratic feeling is to be found,probably, inCobbett's innate dislike to tyranny. In the United States he found, fifty years ago, an intolerance towards all and every other opinion except that which had then newly gained the ascendant by the establishment of the republic. The Americans were bigots in their republicanism, and, like all bigots, were tyrannical in their strength. This tyranny Cobbett felt and attacked, and the more his opponents threatened him, the more stubborn and abusive he became. At length a libel, which he had written on Dr. Rush, was brought before the courts of law, and he was convicted (December, 1799), and fined 5,000 dollars, a sum which he had no means of paving, and, to avoid further consequences, he fled ingloriously to England. No sooner had he reached this country, than he (in 1800) re-commenced his work as a writer, still adhering to the Tory principles he had adopted; and his Paper, The Porcupine, contained many clever compositions, in which the energy and powers of abuse for which he was afterwards so famous were fully displayed. Mr. Wyndham praised him in the House of Commons for his defence of aristocratic institutions; and one of his compositions is declared to have been read from the pulpit in all parts of the country. But the service he had taken soon became irksome. He must have felt that nature never meant him for an obsequious supporter of the silver-fork school he so often ridiculed; and before long he recanted his errors; commenced his Political Register; and went over to the democratic camp, by which he stood faithfully to the end of his career. The exposure of Governmental abuses, and the ridicule of Government men and their friends, afforded him ample employment, and, before long, brought down upon him an equally ample share of prosecution. His first appearance in the courts of law was for the publication of a libel on the chief members of the Government of Ireland—Lord Hardwicke, Lord Redesdale, and others. This libel he declared he had received at his shop in Pall Mall, from an anonymous correspondent, and that the letter containing it bore the Irish post mark. He was found guilty, but escaped judgment (if the State Trials are to be relied on) by giving up the MS. of the objectionable letters, —the handwriting of which led afterwards to the celebrated proceedings against Judge Johnson. An action was subsequently brought against Cobbett for the same libel, by Plunkett, the Irish Solicitor General, who gained a verdict, with £500 damages. These were heavy blows, but more severe inflictions were in store for him. In 1809 he was again put on his trial for an alleged seditious libel. Some English local militia men, the sons and servants of farmers, had been flogged in Cambridgeshire. Such punishments were unhappily common enough, but in the case denounced by The Political Register, these English conscripts had been so flogged whilst under a guard of some foreign mercenary troops then in this country. Cobbett declared this to be a national disgrace, which nothing could wipe out. The lash was scandalous enough under any circumstances, but that " free-born Englishmen," enrolled to defend their country from threatened foreign invasion, should, for some paltry infraction of military rule, be tied up like dogs to be flogged under a guard of German bayonets, was a thing not to be suffered in a land that declared itself free. The comment upon what was regarded as a very shameful act, created a great sensation. The Attorney General Gibbs was set to work—a verdict of guilty was obtained, and Cobbett was sentenced to pay a fine of £1,000, to be imprisoned for two years in Newgate, and to give bonds for £3,000 that he would keep the peace for seven years. Hansard, the printer of The Eegister, together with two of the venders of the Publication were also punished; though they had sought mercy of the authorities by confessing their share of the transaction, and by giving up the name of the writer of the article.

The imprisonment, which would have crippled the energies of many less vigorous men, seemed to steel Cobbett to renewed exertions. Friends rose up to offer him sympathy and assistance; his pen was plied incessantly; and the Government, who thought they had shackled a troublesome enemy, found that though their gaoler had the body of the man, the press bore his thoughts over the length and breadth of the land. Cobbett adopted an ingenious mode of revenge. To give his persecuted Paper a wider and therefore more influential range, and so harass the authorities, he reduced its price to twopence, and soon the country rang with mingled abuse of the minister, and applause of the Twopenny Trash, as it was christened. In the real abuses of the Government lay the real strength of their opponents, and that strength was used with terrible effect; but when Castlereagli and his friends had gained full power—when the continental kings, who'had been toppled from their thrones by Napoleon, had been restored by English money and the Holy Alliance—the flood of democracy was met by the strong hand, and a despotic minister, to gain his point, did not hesitate, in 1817, to use his majority in the unreformed House of Commons to pass the notorious Six Acts. These laws were specially directed —not against the morning Newspapers, which had been cajoled or frightened into comparative silence, or shared in the then general feeling in favour of a " strong Government"—but against the Radical writers and speakers, " Cobbett, Wooler, Watson, Hunt," as Byron reminds us, all of whom had contributed, by cheap political publications and strong political harangues, to raise a demand for reform, loud enough and daring enough to be most troublesome to the authorities. The prisons were soon full of political prisoners, but Cobbett again sought refuge in America, where his opinions were now more acceptable. From thence he poured over a constant supply of Radical opinions, until the suspension of the terrible acts, in 1819, permitted his return. During his sojourn in the States, he had stolen the bones of Thomas Paine from the grave, and when he reached London again, he proclaimed the fact, and boasted of their preservation as an act of glorious homage to the memory of that departed deist and democrat. This gained him more notoriety than praise; but his re-appearance on the English political stage was nevertheless signalized by a succession of Radical dinners, public meetings, and speeches. His Weekly Registers now appeared with punctuality worthy of the man who boasted of his early rising and exact mode of life; and each succeeding year, instead of displaying any flagging energy, found his pen apparently more fluent in'its task, and his mind, if possible, more vigorously bent upon its duty. The tone of his writings deepened in their democracy as the voice of public opinion grew more loud and general in its demands for representative VOL II. E changes; and, when the agitation that finally carried the Reform Bill was approaching its crisis, the law was once more employed to stop the bitter denunciations of the hero of Bolt Court. In 1831, the Attorney General proceeded against Cobbett for sedition. The trial was long and most interesting, and the verdict was anticipated with great anxiety as likely to influence the approaching decision on the vital question, whether or not the rotten boroughs were to stand or fall. Again upon the shoulders of a jury rested the onus of influencing a political crisis. They consulted anxiously and long—their views differed—they could decide upon no verdict—and were discharged. Cobbett walked free out of the court which was expected to witness his condemnation — the Reform Bill passed—and, instead of spending a few more years in gaol, he gained the long-coveted, and before-sought, honour of a seat in Parliament. This crowning fruition of his cherished hope, proved more fatal than persecution. The denunciations, the name-callings, and other coarse " telling" features of his written Registers, could not be vented in a spoken address before Mr. Speaker, and the pure English style that clothed the early morning thoughts of the early-rising journalist, was less ready on the lip of the jaded M.P., who stood up at midnight to address the House. As a political writer, considering the natural disadvantages he encountered and conquered, he had achieved a perfectly marvellous success; as a senator he failed. Late hours sapped his health; and a cold, caught whilst attending his parliamentary duties, led to his death on the 18th of June, 1835.

This notice of the career of Cobbett has carried us over a number of years, and brought us to a comparatively recent date but we must not omit some mention of other victims to the spirit of persecution.

In a paper ordered to be printed by the House of' Commons, we have a return of the ex-officio informations filed for political libel, and seditious conduct, in the Court of King's Bench in England, between 1808 and the beginning of 1821; distinguishing those which had been followed up by prosecution, and those which had not.

This document shows that, in 1808, four persons were prosecuted by Government for libel; in two, defendants were sentenced; in one, defendant suffered judgment by default, but was not sentenced ; in one, defendants inserted au apology in their Newspaper, and proceedings were stayed. The subsequent cases were:—

In 1809, three Government prosecutions for libel, four for seditious conduct; in one, defendant was acquitted; in one (for the same libel), defendants not tried; in two, defendants were sentenced; in two, defendants were not apprehended; in one, issue joined.

In 1810, twelve Government prosecutions for libel, four for seditious conduct; in six, defendants were sentenced; in four, defendants were convicted, and gave security to appear for sentence when required; in one, defendant was outlawed; in one, defendant was not apprehended; in two, defendants were acquitted; in two, issue joined.

In 1811, one Government prosecution for seditious conduct, defendant was sentenced. In 1812, one for E 2 libel, defendant was sentenced; one for seditious conduct, defendant was not apprehended.

In 1813, two for seditious conduct; in one, defendants were sentenced: in one, issue joined.

In 1814, one for libel, defendant was sentenced.

In 1815, two for seditious conduct; in one, defendant was sentenced; in one, issue joined.

In 1816, none.

In 1817, sixteen for libel; in one, defendant was sentenced; in three, defendants were convicted, not sentenced; in one, defendant was convicted, but new trial granted; in two, defendants were acquitted; in five, proceedings were stayed. Three of these were for the same libel, for the publication of which, another defendant had been acquitted. In two, proceedings stayed, defendants sentenced in another prosecution; in one, issue joined; in one, defendant not apprehended.

In 1818, none.

In 1819, thirty-three for libel; in eight, defendants were sentenced; in three, defendants convicted, and under recognizance to receive sentence; in twelve, proceedings stayed, defendants being sentenced in other prosecutions; in seven, proceedings stayed, other defendants being sentenced for publishing the same libels; in one, trial put off, on defendant's application; in two, issue joined.

In 1820, eight for libel; in two, defendants were sentenced; in one, defendant convicted 21st February, 1821; in two, proceedings stayed, defendant being sentenced in another prosecution; in three, defendant absconded.

In 1821, two for libel; at issue when the return was made.*

It will be seen that in this response to a House of Commons' question on the subject of political libel, as little information is given as possible. No names, no exact descriptions of persons, or offences, no account of terms of imprisonment appear. Another Parliamentary paper ordered to be printed is more explicit. It gives a return of the individuals prosecuted for political libel and seditious conduct, in England and Scotland, between 1808, and April, 1821; with the sentences passed on them. The return from the Court of King's Bench, so far as relates to libel, is as follows:—

In 1808, Francis Browne Wright, for libel, to be imprisoned in Lancaster Castle six calendar months; George Beaumont, for libel, to pay a fine of fifty pounds, to be imprisoned in Newgate two years, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more.

In 1809, William Cobbett,† for libel, to pay a fine of one thousand pounds, to be imprisoned in Newgate two years, and to give security for good behaviour for seven years more; Thomas Curson Hansard, for libel, to be imprisoned in custody of the Marshal three calendar months, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more; Richard Bagshaw and Henry Budd, for libel, to be imprisoned in custody of the Marshal two calendar months.

In 1810, Thomas Iiarvey and John Fisher, for libel, each to be imprisoned in Newgate twelve calendar months, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more; Daniel Lovel, for libel, to be imprisoned in Newgate twelve calendar months; Euge nius Roche, for libel, to be imprisoned in custody of the Marshal twelve calendar months, and to give security for his good behaviour for three years more; John Drakard, for libel, to pay a fine of two hundred pounds, to be imprisoned in Lincoln Gaol eighteen calendar months, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more.

In 1812, John Hunt and Leigh Hunt,* for libel, each to pay a fine of five hundred pounds, to be iinprisoned two years, and to give security for good behaviour for five years more.

In 1814, Charles Sutton, for libel, to be imprisoned one year, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more.

In 1817, James Williams, for libel, to pay a fine of one thousand pounds, to be imprisoned eight calendar months, and to give security for good behaviour for five years more.

In 1819, Christopher Harris, for libel, to be imprisoned in the House of Correction for seven weeks, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more; William Watling, for libel, to be imprisoned in the House of Correction for six weeks, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more; Thomas Whithorn, John Cahuac, and Philip Francis, for libel, each to be imprisoned in the House of Correction one month, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more; Robert Shorter, for libel, (having been in custody ten weeks,) to be imprisoned in the House of Correction three weeks; Robert Shorter, for libel, to be further imprisoned in the House of Correction three weeks, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more; Sir Francis Burdett, Bart., for libel, to pay a fine of two thousand pounds, and to be imprisoned in custody of the Marshal three calendar months; Joseph Russel, for libel, to be imprisoned eight calendar months, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more; John Osborne, for libel, to be imprisoned in the House of Correction for one year; Joseph HavnesBrandis, for libel, (having been in custody six months,) to be imprisoned and to give security for good behaviour for three years more; George Ragg, for libel, to be imprisoned in the House of Correction twelve calendar months.

In 1820, Charles Whitworth, for libel, to be imprisoned six calendar months, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more; William Great-head Lewis, for libel, fined fifty pounds, to be imprisoned two years, and to give security for good behaviour for five years more; Henry Hunt, for seditious conspiracy, to be imprisoned two years and six months, and to give security for good behaviour for five years more, Jane Carlile, for libel, to be imprisoned two ye are, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more.

By the returns received from the several other jurisdictions in England, besides the Court of King's Bench, it appears, that the total number of prosecutions between 1808 and 1821, had been one hundred and one; and that the sentences were as follows: viz., twelve, transported for seven years; one, imprisoned for four years and a half; one, four years; one, three years, and fined five shillings; eighteen, two years, with recognizances to keep the peace for two years more; seven, two years; two, twenty calendar months; two, one year and a half; one, fifteen calendar months; one, one year, with recognizances to keep the peace for three years more; one, one year, with recognizances to keep the peace for two years more; one, one year, with recognizances to keep the peace for one year more; one, one year, and fined one shilling; four, one year; one, six months, with recognizances to keep the peace for three years more; four, six months, with recognizances to keep the peace for two years more; one, six months, and fined one hundred pounds; one, six months, and fined one shilling; ten, six months; one, four months, with recognizances to keep the peace for two years; four, three months; one, two months, with recognizances to keep the peace for two years more; one, two months; one, one month; two, a fortnight, with recognizances to keep the peace for one year; one, was required to give recognizances to keep the peace for one year; nine, were discharged on recognizances to appear, when called for, to receive judgment; one, was fined five pounds; one, one pound; two, sixpence; seven, were acquitted.

Thus it appears that the sum total of punishment inflicted at the instigation of the ministers of England upon persons charged with written and spoken political libels, between 1808 and 1821, was one hundred and seventy-one years' imprisonment! divided into various terms amongst eighty persons, many of whom were also required to give security for their conduct for further terms; whilst others were fined in various sums; only seven out of one hundred and one, obtaining acquittal.

Two years after these facts had been made public through the medium of a Parliamentary Paper, another return was ordered by the House of Commons,* " of the individuals who have been prosecuted, either by indictment, information, or other process, for public libel, blasphemy, and sedition, in England, Wales, and Scotland, from 31st December, 1812, to 31st December, 1822, distinguishing the following particulars, viz.:—"Whether prosecution was commenced by the Attorney or Solicitor General, or by what other persons; the name of each individual prosecuted, and bis then place of residence; the character of the offence, whether libel, blasphemy, or sedition; the county in which the prosecution was commenced, and the date when commenced; whether tried, or not; if tried, the county and court in which the case was tried, and date when tried; whether acquitted or convicted; if convicted, the sentence passed, and the date thereof; when released from prison; and if not released, why detained."

From this document we glean the following more exact particulars of further proceedings against persons charged vrith libel:—

Charles Sutton, prosecuted by Mr. Attorney General for seditious libel; tried at Nottingham at Nisi Prius, at the summer assizes, 1815; convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned in Northampton county gaol one year, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more; released from gaol, 8th February, 1817.

William Hone, of London, prosecutedby Mr. Attorney General, for profane and seditious libels, in Easter term, 1817; tried at London, at Nisi Prius, in sittings after Michaelmas term, 1817; and acquitted on three indictments (to the great vexation, it may be added, of Lord Ellenborough and the ministers).*

Benjamin Steill, of London, prosecuted by Mr. Attorney General for seditious libel. Not tried: defendant having confessed himself guilty, and given a recognizance for his good behaviour.

T. J. Wooler, of London, prosecuted by Mr. Attorney General for seditious libel; tried at London, at Nisi Prim; sittings after Easter term, 1717; and acquitted on one indictment, and convicted on another, but not sentenced, new trial being granted.

John Pares, of Leicester, prosecuted by Mr. Attorney General for seditious libel; Easter term, 1817. Not tried.

James Williams, of Portsea, prosecuted by Mr. Attorney General for profane libel. Defendant suffered judgment by default, and was sentenced to be imprisoned four calendar months in the county gaol at Winchester; and on another indictment fined £100, to be imprisoned eight calendar months in county gaol at Winchester, and to give security for good behaviour for five years more. He was released from gaol, 18th April, 1818, having received a free pardon.

Joseph Russell, of Birmingham, prosecuted at Warwick, for profane and seditious libel, March, 1818; tried at Warwick, at Nisi Prius; Summer assizes, 1819; convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned six calendar months in Warwick gaol, and security for good behaviour for three years more. Released 5th May, 1820.

Richard Garble, of London, prosecuted by Mr. Attorney General for blasphemous libel; tried at London, at Nisi Prius, at the sittings after Trinity term, 181!); convicted and fined £1,000, and ordered to be imprisoned two years inDorchester Gaol. He was detained in prison until he paid to the King a fine of £1,000. He was again tried for a similar offence, at the sittings of Nisi Prius, in London, on October 15, 1819; convicted and sentenced to a fine of £500, and imprisonment in Dorchester Gaol for one year (after expiration of former sentence); and to give security for good behaviour for life, in £1,000, £100, and £100, November 16, 1819. On this second sentence he was detained until he shall pay to the King a fine of £500, and give security for his good behaviour during his natural life in the sums ordered.

Sir F. Burdett, Bart., prosecuted by Mr. Attorney General for seditious libel at Leicester, tried at Leicester, at Nisi Prius, in the Spring Assizes of 1820; convicted and sentenced to be fined £2,000, to be imprisoned, in the custody of the Marshal, three calendar months; released from gaol May 7, 1821.

Many other names appear in this list of sufferers, prosecuted in the King's Bench for opinion's sake, and amongst them W. G. Lewis, (for some time a writer on the press in London), Charles Whitworth and J. H. Brandis, of Warwick; J. Mann, of Leeds; T. J. Evans, John Hunt, W. Franklin, T. Flindell, and G. Beve, all of whom were convicted, and suffered various punishments. Another long catalogue contains an account of prosecutions on the different circuits; but enough has surely been given to show the temper of the Government towards the press, during an eventful period of its history.

These ample lists, however, do not give a complete idea of the history of Governmental prosecutions of those who have printed distasteful statements. Documents subsequently moved for in the House of Commons will assist us in making up the deficiency. In a return* " of all prosecutions during the reigns of George the Third, and George the Fourth, either by ex-officio information orindictment, under the direction of the Attorney or Solicitor General, for libels or other misdemeanours against individuals as members of His Majesty's Government, or against other persons acting in their official capacity, conducted in the department of the Solicitor for the affairs of His Majesty's Treasury, we find the following statements of dates of proceedings taken:—

In 1761, Earl of Clanrickarde, prosecuted for a libel on the Duke of Bedford, late Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in a letter to him.

In 1786, Henry Sampson Woodfall, for libel on Lord Loughborough, Chief Justice of Common Pleas, intending to villify him, by causing him to be suspected of being in bad circumstances, and not able to pay his debts, or willing to pay them -without an execution.

In 1788, Mary Say, for libel on Mr. Pitt and the House of Commons, relative to the impeachment of Sir Elijah Impey. William Perryman, for the like. The same defendant, in the following year, was prosecuted for a libel 011 the King, Mr. Pitt, and the Ministry, concerning His Majesty's health.

In 1790, Sampson Perry, for a libel on the King and Mr. Pitt, charging them with keeping back intelligence respecting the Nookta Sound, for the purpose of Stock Jobbing, and with publishing a false Gazette.

In 1792, Joseph Johnson and John Martin, for libel on the President and members of the Court-Martial and witnesses on trial of Grant.

In 1793, Matthew Falkner and another, for libel on the King and Constitution; Mr. Justice Ashurst and his charge to the Grand Jury; Mr. Pitt and Mr. Dundas. Jonathan Thompson, for a libel on the Ministers and Mr. Justice Ashurst.

In 1801, Allen Macleod, for a libel on Lord Clare, Lord Chancellor of Ireland, censuring him for describing the Irish as vindictive and bloodthirsty, and comparing him to the Duke of Buckingham, who was assassinated by Felton. Joseph Dixon and another, for a libel on Mr. Pitt and the then times and condition of the people.

In 1804, William Cobbett and the Hon. Robert Johnson, for a libel on the Lord Lieutenant and Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and the Under Secretary of State.

In 1808, John M'Ardell and others, Charles Bell VOL II. F and others, John Hunt and another, William Hors-man, Peter Finnerty, Richard Bagshaw, and Garret Gorman, for a libel on the Duke of York, as Commander-in-Chief. John Harriot Hart and another, for libels on Lord Ellenborough, as Chief Justice of England, respecting the administration of justice; and on Mr. Justice Le Blanc, and the Jury who acquitted Chapman of murder. Peter Stuart, for a libel on Sir Arthur Paget and the Ministers, respecting his mission to the Sublime Porte.

In 1809, Garret Gorman, for a second libel on the Duke of York, as Commander-in-Chief.

In 1810, John Harriot Hart and another, for a libel on the Duke of York and the Government.

In 1817, Richard Gay thorn Butt, for a libel on Lord Ellenborough, as Chief Justice, respecting a sentence passed upon the defendant, stating that a fine had been imposed to make money of him; and on Lord Ellenborough, as Chief Justice, and Lord Castlereagh, as Secretary of State.

Iii 1818, Arthur Thistlewood, for challenging Lord Sidmouth, Secretary of State.

In 1827, John T. Barber Beaumont, for a libel on Lord Wallace, as Chairman of the Commissioners of Revenue Inquiry.

In 1829, John Fisher and two others, for a libel on the Lord Chancellor, and the Solicitor General and his appointment; and for a libel on the King, the Government, and "Ministers, and Duke of Wellington. George Marsden and two others, for a libel on the Duke of Wellington. Charles Baldwin, for a similar libel. Ann Durham and another, for a libel on the Lord Chancellor.

Mr. Hume procured iu 1834 another return, which brings our information on this subject up to that date. It gives an account of all prosecutions for libel after the accession of William the Fourth, either by ex officio informations or indictment, conducted in the department of the Solicitor for the Treasury. The cases returned were six in number:—

In 1831: Rex v. William Cobbett, indictment; William Alcock Haley, ditto; Richard Carlile, ditto.

In 1833: Rex v. James Reeve, indictment; John Ager, Patrick Grant, and John Bell, information; Henry Hetherington, and Thomas Stevens, indictment.

One other document obtained also by that indefatigable reformer, Mr. Hume, must be noticed. It is a return* relating to " individuals prosecuted for seditious libel and political conduct since the 17 th of March, 1821, with the sentences passed on them," and affords the following facts:—

In 1821, Robert Wardell, for libel; to enter into a recognizance to be of good behaviour for two years. David Ridgway, for libel; to be imprisoned in Lan caster Castle for one year, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more. Susannah Wright, for libel; to pay a fine of £'100, and to be imprisoned in the House of Correction for Middlesex eighteen calendar months, and to give security for good behaviour for five years more.

In 1823, Daniel Whittle Harvey and John Chapman, for libel; Harvey to pay a fine of £'200, and to be imprisoned in the King's Bench prison three months, and to give security for five years more. Chapman to be imprisoned in the King's Bench prison two months. John Hunt, for libel; to pay a fine of £100, and to give security for good behaviour for five years.

In 1829, John Fisher, Robert Alexander, and John Matthew Gutch, for libel; Alexander to pay a fine of £101, and to be imprisoned in Newgate four calendar months; Gutch and Fisher not sentenced. Same, for libel; Alexander to pay a fine of £100, and to be imprisoned in Newgate four calendar months; Gutch and Fisher not sentenced. George Marsden, R. Alexander, and Stephen Isaacson, for libel; Marsden to enter into a recognizance to be of good behaviour; Alexander to pay a fine of £100, and to be imprisoned in Newgate four calendar months, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more. Isaacson to pay a fine of £100.

In 1831, Richard Carlile, for seditious libel; fined £200, imprisoned two years in Giltspur Street Prison, and sureties ten years more. Stephen Holman Crawle, for libel on the King, and also on the mayor, bailiffs, and burgesses of Leicester; imprisoned in gaol six weeks, and find sureties, himself £50, and two sureties in £25, to be of good behaviour one year more.

In 1833, James Reeve, for libel, to be imprisoned in Newgate twelve calendar months. Joseph Russell, for libel, to be imprisoned in Warwick county gaol three calendar months, and to give security for good behaviour for three years more.

Thus closes this Parliamentary catalogue of persons proceeded against by the authorities for alleged libels. The list has carried us over a number of years, but we must return to the period from which these documents have led us.

Government prosecutions were not the only difficulties the press had to encounter. In December, 1820, the opponents of the extension of popular liberty set up a society with the dignified title of The Constitutional Association, the object of which was to play the part of censor of the press. It is certain that the attempts of the despotic minister who framed the Six Acts, had not the effect he expected, and that the fetters he prepared for his opponents hung perhaps more painfully upon the presses of his friends than on those of his enemies. Nearly every printer was compelled, more or less, to offend the stringency of the law, and clandestine means were soon found to complete what could not with safety be done more openly. These secret offences against obnoxious and tyrannical decrees soon begot a lax morality which did not hesitate to produce whatever could find a sale, and the vicious portion of the public were regaled with libels very injurious to the general character of the press. These productions were the excuse for proposing and establishing a self-elected body who put themselves forward as censors-general. They collected subscriptions, and commenced prosecutions, and would doubtless have continued their operations to a still more dangerous extent, had not public opinion rebelled against the attempt to suppress what remained of the liberty of the press. The " Bridge-street gang" became the nickname of the self-styled "Constitutional Association," and, after a short prosperity, the society dwindled and fell. In the list of its committee were the names of forty peers and church dignitaries; but neither rank, wealth, nor party zeal could maintain them against the outcry of the public. In July, 1821, an indictment was preferred against the committee for acts of extortion and oppression, on which, however, they escaped conviction. At the end of the same year they prosecuted several printers and venders of pamphlets, but failed to secure a verdict upon it being shown that the sheriff who returned the jury was himself a member of the Association! A debate in the House of Commons had further assisted in exposing the unconstitutional and dangerous character of the society, and its extinction was regarded by all, except its promoters, as a source of congratulation.

Another prominent episode in the history of the press, during the present century, may be fairly called the battle of the unstamped—a contest in which certain printers, aided by public opinion, were enabled to maintain for some years a struggle with the Government and the Stamp Office officials, during which, about five hundred venders of cheap Newspapers found place in the gaols. The growing political excitement which at length carried the Reform Bill, had drawn great attention to passing events, and created an increased demand for Newspapers. This had been partially supplied by the publication of weekly pamphlets, which, without assuming the character of regular Journals, or giving digests of general News, afforded information of political movements at less than a third of the price of the Newspapers then selling at sevenpence. Carpenter's Political Letter, and Hetherington's Poor Man's Guardian, which appeared in 1830 and 1831, were amongst the first of these productions; and, gaining circulation, were declared by the Stamp Office to be liable to stamp duty. Now the contest began. Hetherington was a quiet, determined man, not to be readily subdued, and he soon found supporters and emulators on all sides. Several prosecutions were commenced against the Poor Man's Guardian, and whilst those were pending its sale increased tenfold. But this was not all. If the small Paper, with little News, was to be prosecuted, a large Paper, containing all the News of the week, could be in no worse condition, and soon a number of regular unstamped weekly Newspapers sprang into existence. Their price was twopence, and their sale enormous. One of them alone, Hetherington's London Dispatch, is said to have sold 25,000 copies of each number, and many other such speculations became equally successful. The total weekly sale of those prints could not have been less than 150,000 copies. In politics they were ultra-democratic; but one feature in their history is full of interest, as indicating the morality of the English working people. Some of the first of these illegal prints followed the example of certain orthodox Sunday Papers, and gave full details of trials, and other cases not very delicate or very moral in their tendency. The cheap Paper buyer bought the sheets containing these reports; but when unstamped Journals were set on foot, which assumed a higher tone, repudiating all objectionable matter, these purer and better Papers soon surpassed in circulation their less moral rivals.

The cheap Papers made considerable inroads npon the circulation of their high-priced legal predecessors, and moreover their conductors, like most persons who act illegally, were very unscrupulous in the means adopted for obtaining News for their columns. The high-priced Papers obtained and prepared reports which were reprinted without acknowledgment in the twopenny Papers. It was clear that the law was inefficient to prevent the continuance of the evil, and that something must be done. High-priced and low-priced were equally interested in demanding a change, and who so fit a champion to demand a repeal of the Taxes on Knowledge as the poet and novelist M.P., Edward Lytton Bulwer? He undertook the task; and, on the 15th of June, 1832, opened a debate in the House of Commons on the subject—a debate which ultimately led the way for the mitigation of the Newspaper stamp-duty from fourpence to one penny.

The Examiner, published two days after the debate, affords us a summary of its more interesting features:—"The abolition of all taxes impeding the diffusion of knowledge, was urged by Bulwer in a speech replete with luminous exposition, cogent argument, and the eloquence which is inspired by earnestness. He showed how these barbarous imposts perpetuate ignorance, or allow of what is yet worse, namely, the propagation of the most mischievous prejudices; and he showed the connection of ignorance and crime. He argued that poverty and toil were impediments to knowledge, to which it was a cruel impolicy to add artificial checks; and traced the debaucheries of a deleterious contraband spirit to the high duties, under which a smuggling trade had sprung up. He remarked on the appetite of the people for political information, and showed, that as the better sort is placed out of their reach, they fasten on the matter which is made level to their means, through the defiance of the law, and seasoned for their passions and prejudices. Here no corrector can follow them; no advocate for truth, reason, and sobriety, can be heard; and the poor man eats his own heart away as he devours the anti-social doctrines. An intelligent mechanic stated to him, 'We go to the public house to read the sevenpenny Paper; but only for the News. It is the cheap penny Paper that the working man can take home and read at spare moments, which he has by him to take up, and read over and over again whenever he has leisure, that forms his opinions.' By taking off the stamp duties and lowering the advertisement duties, Bulwer contended that the best Papers would, through the increased profits of advertisement, be sold at the very low price of 2d., and thus compete with the uninstructed fanatics, who were misguiding the working classes. In lieu of the loss of the stamp duties to the revenue, he proposed a low postage on Papers sent into the country, which now go free.

" In conclusion, he said, he wished to demonstrate that the stamp duty checked legitimate knowledge (which was morality—the morals of a nation), but encouraged the diffusion of contraband ignorance; that the advertisement duty assisted our finances only by striking at that very commerce from which our finances were drawn; that it crippled at once literature and our trade; that the time in which he called for a repeal of these taxes was not unseasonable; that it would be no just answer that the revenue could not spare their loss, and yet he was provided with an equivalent which would at least replace any financial deficiency. * * We have heard enough, (he said,) in this house, of the necessity of legislating for property and intelligence—let us now feel the necessity of legislating for poverty and ignorance! At present we are acquainted with the poorer part of our fellowcountrymen only by their wrongs and murmurs—their misfortunes and their crimes; let us at last open happier and wiser channels of communication between them and us. We have made a long and fruitless experiment of the gibbet and the hulks; in 1825, we transported 283 persons,but so vast, so rapid was our increase on this darling system of legislation, that three years afterwards (in 1828) we transported as many as 2,449. During the last three years our gaols have been sufficiently filled; we have seen enough of the effects of human ignorance; we have shed sufficient of human blood—is it not time to pause? is it not time to consider whether as Christians, and as men, we have a right to correct before weattempt to instruct? —Lord Althorp, in reply to Mr. Bulwer's motion, employed the hacknied ministerial fallacy of unseasonableness. And this, after the motion had been repeatedly postponed because ministers would not ' make a house' on the nights appointed for it. He professed to agree with much that the eloquent speaker had urged: but, ' under existing circumstances, and at the conclusion of a session, he was not justified in consenting to the investigation of a question which was of the greatest possible importance, and the result of which would affect the whole population of the country.' In conclusion, Lord Althorp observed, ' That had Mr. Bulwer persisted in moving for a committee of the whole house, he should have had no difficulty in negativing it; but he had now dropped that, and moved his first proposition, that all taxes, which impeded the diffusion of knowledge, were inimical to the best interests of the people. This was a proposition which he could not deny; but as no practical good could result from its affirmation, he should meet it by moving the previous question.'"

O'Connell seconded Bulwer's motion, but in vain; and for the time the subject was shelved.

The indifference of the Legislature was not shared by the public. The market for a Newspaper at twopence, appeared to be insatiable, and this ready demand produced an ample supply. In vain the police apprehended hawker after hawker; in vain the Stamp Office gave the informers and detectives additional premiums for vigilance, the trade went on with an exciting degree of activity. As the London gaols became crowded with " victims," the public sympathies were touched, and a fund was raised by subscription to support the families of the men and women (for women were seized and imprisoned) whilst under sentence. One or two extracts from the Newspapers of the period will illustrate the scenes then of daily occurrence, and best show the temper in which the struggle was carried on—a struggle described by those who opposed it as " the conspiracy of the great law officers of the Crown, the justices of the peace, and the Commissioners of Stamps" against the public desire for political information:—

UNION HALL.—PARTIAL PROSECUTION.—The Commissioners of Stamps appear determined, if possible, to stop the circulation of the Poor Man's Guardian, by employing a number of persons to apprehend every one they find selling the same; and upon every conviction, before a magistrate, the informer is entitled to 20s.—On Monday, a young man, named John Williams, was brought before the sitting magistrate, charged with vending the above publication, it being unstamped.—Robert Currie stated that he was employed by the Solicitor of Stamps, and that in the course of that morning he saw the defendant in Union Street, near the office, selling the Poor Man's Guardian. —The magistrate said that the defendant must have been well aware he was committing an offence against the law, by selling a publication containing such matter as the Poor Man's Guardian, without being stamped. " What have you to say in your defence to the charge?" inquired the magistrate.—Defendant: " I have been out of employ, and should have starved, had I not engaged in this business."—The magistrate said that there were many publications now in circulation, by the sale of which, in the streets, he might make out a livelihood, without rumiing the hazard of punishment. For instance, there were The Penny Magazine, The National Omnibus, and several other useful and cheap works, which contained none of the inflammatory trash by which the Poor Man's Guardian was chiefly distinguished.—Currie stated that the defendant had suffered imprisonment before for a similar offence, and that, when taken into custody, he said that he did as well in as out of prison, for he considered himself a martyr to the cause. Currie added, that all men imprisoned for this offence received 5s. a-week each, while in gaol, from the subscribers; but the defendant, he supposed, would have an increase, owing' to his having suffered before.—The magistrate committed the defendant for one month, and regretted that hard labour ivas not annexed to the punishment, as it would soon put a stop to the Poor Man's Guardian, as it was erroneously called.—Defendant: I don't care for what period you send me to prison; I can only say, that when I come out I shall sell the Poor Man's Guardian as usual; and you shall see me come to the very same spot where I was apprehended this day.—The defendant was ordered to be taken off to gaol."

The Paper'which gave this report appended a commentary upon it. The editor says:—

[" This is too bad," indeed! All lovers of justice must agree in reprobating the selection of a particular publication for prosecution, while others are allowed to transgress the same law with impunity. The punishment, in fact, is not for selling an unstamped paper, containing News, but for expressing opinions offensive to Government. The magistrate's recommendation of the Penny Magazine, which is not prosecuted, and which is started by Ministers, and protected by their interest in its success, is vastly significant. Justice requires that all publications contravening the law should be prosecuted, or none. The law, if good, should, in every instance, be rigorously enforced; and if not in every instance enforced, it should be repealed, or its operation is a scandalous injustice. Journalists who obey the law are injured by those who defy it; but we see no reason—though the Solicitor of Stamps and Attorney General, doubtless, do—why the Poor Man's Guardian should be suppressed, while the Penny Magazine is suffered to poach with impunity, and recommended by magistrates on the bench as a better smuggling speculation! We can have no partialities in writing on this subject, and certainly cannot be suspected of any partizanship with the Poor Man's Guardian, who imputes to The Examiner an aristocratical character! We are actuated by neither favour nor prejudice, but a love of the thing most precious on earth—justice.]—Examiner, June 17, 1832.

Here is a second specimen of the police practice of that time:—

BOW STREET.—UNSTAMPED PUBLICATIONS.—John Donovan was charged by George Colly with exposing unstamped penny publications for sale in the Strand. Colly proved that the defendant had the publications in his hand, he had no doubt, for sale, though he did not see him offer them for sale. He admitted that since August he had convicted, by his evidence, about seventy persons of the like offence, and hod received one pound from the Stamp Office for each conviction. He had been in the police, but was not discharged for misconduct—he resigned. The defendant called a witness, who swore that the Papers were not exposed for sale; the defendant carried them under his arm, wrapped in paper.—Mr. Minshull said he disliked informers receiving penalties; but thought there could be no doubt the defendant intended to sell the Papers. He would sentence him to one month's imprisonment, instead of three, which the law allowed.—Morning Chronicle, June 18, 1832.

Mr. Thomas Cooper, the author of The Purgatory of Suicides, afford us a few anecdotes of this struggle, and of the career of the man who commenced it:—

Three convictions (he says) having been obtained against Hetherington, for publishing The Poor Man's Guardian, he was ordered to be taken into custody; but the Bow Street magistrates could not enforce their order for some time. Hetherington, with provoking coolness, sent a note to the magistrates to tell them that " he was going out of town!" Then he printed the note in his Guardian, and commenced a tour through the country. At Manchester, he narrowly escaped being taken by Stevens, the Bow Street " runnerbut he might have continued at large for some time longer, had he not resolved to hasten up to London, in order to see his dying mother. He reached the door of his house on a night in September, knocked hard, but was not answered; the Bow Street spies came upon him before his second knock had been heard; he clung to the knocker, but was dragged away; and none of his family knew anything of the affair till they heard that he had been lodged in Clerkenwell gaol. Here he remained six months. The Guardian, however, was still carried on. At the end of 1832, when he had not been many months at liberty, he was again convicted, and again imprisoned for six months in the same gaol; and now it was that his friend Watson became his fellow-prisoner, also for the same " high crime and misdemeanour" of selling, in " Free" En gland, a penny paper without a taxed stamp! Their treatment during these six months was most cruel. An opening, called " a window," bat which was without a pane of glass, let in the snow upon their food as they ate it; cold and damp filled their bodies with pain; and the Government seemed intent on trying, by these means, whether they could not break their spirits. Cleave and his wife were seized as they were proceeding to Purkiss's, the News-agent in Compton Street, in a cab, with then' Papers. Heywood, of Manchester; Guest, of Birmingham; Hobson and Mrs. Mann, of Leeds, with about five hundred others in town and country, were imprisoned as dealers in the " Unstamped." The spirit displayed by the vendors is worthy of remembrance. They carried the " Unstamped" in their hats, in their pockets: they left them in sure places " to be called for;" and when, for a few weeks, Government actually empowered officers to seize parcels, open them in the streets, and take out any unstamped publications, Hetherington (while at large) made up " dummy" parcels, directed them, sent off a lad with them one way, with instructions to make a noise, attract a crowd, and delay the officers, if they seized him; meanwhile, the real parcel for the country agent was sent off another way! In 1833, Hetherington removed from 13, Kingsgate Street, to his well-known shop 126, Strand. The Destructive, which he issued here, ironically styled The Conservative, was also unstamped. The London Dispatch, which followed, reached at one time 25,000 weekly. In 1834, he defended himself on a trial for publishing The Guardian, and obtained an acquittal; but was condemned for The Conservative. Not having grown fond of prison from his experiences of it, he took a house at Pinner; and, by going out of his house in the Strand at the back, by an outlet into the Savoy, and by entering it the same way, and in the disguise of a Quaker, he contrived to enact the character so well, that he evaded the keen eyes which were on the look-out for him. But the Government revenged themselves by making a seizure for £220 in the name of the Commissioners of Stamps, on the false pretext that he was not a registered printer. They swept his premises; but, undaunted, he resumed his work, rising out of the midst of ruin. Julian Hibbert, from the moment that he learned Hctherington was in danger of another imprisonment, set him down in his will for 450 guineas; nor did he cancel the gift when the proceedings were abandoned. Hetherington then purchased another printing machine—for no printer would undertake his work—and continued to publish The Unstamped, until the Government consented to reduce the Newspaper stamp to one penny, when he issued (stamped) The Twopenny Dispatch."

Dr. Birkbeck, the founder of the Mechanic's Institution, was one of the numerous party sympathising with the people who desired cheap Newspapers; and on the 11th February, 1836, he headed a deputation, composed of thirty members of Parliament and other liberals, who met Lord Melbourne, then prime minister, to request the total repeal of the stamp duty on Newspapers.* Dr. Birkbeck stated the object of the deputation to be not a partial, but the entire repeal of the duty on Newspapers, and went on to remind the premier that "this object was laid before the Chancellor of the Exchequer during the previous session of Parliament, and was then met, as it had on former occasions been, merely as a measure of finance. This he conceived was an erroneous view of the matter; it appeared to him to be a subject of such vast importance, embracing as it did, to a considerable extent, the well-being of so many millions of the people, that there were no financial considerations which ought not to give way, in order that it might at once be settled to the satisfaction of the public and the advantage of every man in the country. The question came before the Government in a form very different indeed from any in which it had hitherto appeared. The increase of unstamped Papers had been so great, the circulation so extensive, the continued demand of the public so irresistible, that in general estimation, and he believed in fact, it became impossible to continue the stamp laws in respect to Newspapers in their then state. There was a general impression abroad, that a considerable reduction of the stamp duty on Newspapers would be proposed to Parliament, and it was on that question, at the present moment, he wished most particularly to address his lordship. He thought he should be able to show the great impolicy of any such measures. If the duty were reduced to one penny, its effect in keeping Newspapers out of the reach of the working classes, would, if the law could be executed, be as certain as it was with the present heavy duty. All access to the understandings of these VOL. II. G persons would be denied by such a measure, and the class most in need of general and particular information would, as far as the law could keep them so, remain in then present uninformed state. He feared that if a penny were retained as a tax, new and more severe laws would be demanded, since it was clearly demonstrated that the present laws, severe as they were, and rigidly as they were attempted to be enforced, were wholly inadequate to prevent the publication and sale of unstamped Papers. Whatever might be said of some of these Papers, and of the manner in which they were conducted, they were of great use in spreading the habit of reading, which was the first great step in human improvement. It was evident to all, that cheap Newspapers were now considered a necessary, by vast numbers of persons in almost every rank of life. This was proved by the countenance the publishers met with, and the sympathy in many ways evinced for the persons who were prosecuted for selling them; this was the inevitable consequence of endeavouring to execute laws which the reason of the public had outgrown. He sincerely regretted that laws should be permitted to remain upon the Statute Book, which could not be enforced, and were therefore as necessarily continually violated, the tendency of which was to bring even the best and most wholesome laws into disrepute, and make those respected who lived bv continual violation of the laws. The Doctor then read part of a letter addressed to him by Hetherington, who, in consequence of proceedings against him for selling unstamped Papers, had absented himself from his family, but still continued his business. He thought the letter would tend to place the chief violators of the Newspaper Stamp Acts in a new light before his lordship. He (Dr.B.) had knownHetherington many years; he was a mild, placid, sensible man, who was incapable of violating any other law; he had commenced a small periodical work, which he believed was not an illegal publication, he was prosecuted, unjustly as he thought, and he then carried it on in defiance of the law. He was again persecuted, and suffered imprisonment; many other persons were also fined and imprisoned at the instance of the Commissioners of Stamps for selling his publications. At length he was sued for penalties in the Court of Exchequer, when the jury found that " the publication was not a Newspaper " consequently did not require a stamp, and they by their verdict condemned all the preceding fines and imprisonments as illegal proceedings of His Majesty's Commissioners of Stamps, and justices of the peace. Mr. Hetherington had been goaded into a disposition which nothing could change; his very virtues led him to think it dishonourable to submit, and he had gone on for several years as he was likely to continue going on, while the tax on Newspapers remained. It appeared to him (Dr. B.) quite certain that they who studied human nature, must conclude that this country abounds with such men as Hetherington, and no well-informed man could doubt for one moment, that now, when the prosecution of persons for selling unstamped Papers has so generally excited the public sympathy, they will appear in large numbers in many parts of the country, as they have already done in several, and that the law will continue to be violated. He G 2 hoped His Majesty's Ministers would give their most serious attention to the subject, and that the result would he, the total repeal of the tax on Newspapers. Mr. Hume said he had been induced in the last session to support, in the House of Commons, a motion for a reduction of the stamp duty on Newspapers to one penny; circumstances had convinced him that the time when such a proposition could be even plausibly maintained had gone by, and that nothing short of the total abolition of the stamp duty ought to be, or could be, advantageously proposed by Government. He was certain that no reduction, that nothing less than the repeal of the whole duty would give satisfaction to the people. He had, on the preceding day, presided at a dinner, given to Mr. Wakley by his constituents. It was held in, perhaps, the largest tavern room in the metropolis, and the room was crowded. When the toast—"Repeal of the Stamp Duty on Newspapers" was given, there was the most enthusiastic applause; so great and so long-continued was the excitation, that it appeared to be, emphatically speaking, the business of the day—the one subject which obscured all others. By a return he had just obtained, he said there had been no less than 728 prosecutions for selling unstamped Papers since the commencement of Earl Grey's administration. Of these 728 prosecutions, 219 occurred in 1835; and the proportionate number was considerably increased in the present year, without affording the least chance of a successful termination. Mr. Hume adverted to the curious fact, that there were no less than nineteen laws, or parts of laws, still in existence, which levied different penalties on printers, publishers, and venders of unstamped Papers; and there were, he thought, as many different modes of administering the law. In some instances justices of the peace were satisfied with seizing the unstamped Papers; in others they levied a fine of £5; and this sum was in other cases carried through almost every intermediate amount, up to £20. In some cases justices of the peace thought the law was satisfied by seven days' imprisonment; in other cases it was extended to any time between seven days and six months, for precisely the same offence. This was a disgraceful state of the law, and one which, once made known, oould not long exist. The shortest and best way to correct all the evil these laws occasioned, was the repeal of the whole of the stamp duty on Newspapers; and he hoped most sincerely, that the very first opportunity would be taken to effect that, on every account, desirable purpose.

Mr. Francis Place said the heavy penalties recovered against some of the printers of unstamped Newspapers amounted to a sentence of imprisonment for life for an offence which brought them into no kind of disrepute. Such, however, was the public feeling, that arrangements were being made to raise the whole amount by small donations in every town in Great Britain; and it could not fail to be a great annoyance to ministers to find that casks and boxes, with slits in them to receive pence, are put up in almost numberless places, with a placard announcing that subscriptions are received to pay the fines of Hetherington and other caterers of cheap News for the people.

Mr. O'Connell* and others also urged the importance of the question on the minister's notice, but Lord Melbourne blandly dismissed the deputation without giving any ministerial promise on the subject; but soon afterwards the act was passed reducing the stamp on Newspapers from fourpence to a penny, and giving at the same time a power to the Government for the seizing and suppression of illegal Newspapers, such as no daring or ingenuity was able to defeat or to deceive. The daily Journals reduced their prices, and the unstamped disappeared.

The reduction of the stamp duty on Newspapers took effect on the 15th of September, 1836; and by a Parliamentary return ordered in April. 1847, we learn the following particulars of the effects produced upon the revenue during the first half-year of the change:—

In the half-year ended 5th April, 1836, the number of Newspapers stamped in Great Britain, was 14,874,652, and the net amount of duty received was £196,909.

In the half-year ended 5th April, 1837, the number of Newspapers stamped in Great Britain, was 21,362,148, and the net amount of duty received was £88,502; showing an increase in the number during the last half-year, as compared with the corresponding half-year before the reduction, of 6,487,496, and a loss of revenue of £108,317. Of the above number of stamps taken out in the half-year ending 5th April, 1837, 11,547,241 stamps had been issued after 1st January, 1837, when the distinctive die came into use; whereas, only 14,784,652 were issued in the six months ending April, 1836.

After the reduction of the duty, and before April 1847, one daily Newspaper, one bi-weekly, twenty-three weekly Newspapers, one published once a fortnight, one occasional, were established in London; of which eight were afterwards discontinued, and two incorporated with other Papers.

Within the same period, thirty-five weekly Newspapers, and one three times a-week, had been established in the country, of which six were discontinued or incorporated with other Papers.

Since that time the number of Newspapers and die consumption of stanrps has greatly increased.

A return to the House of Commons, moved for by Mr. Brotherton, M.P., shows that the aggregate number of penny stamps issued for newspapers in the year 1848, amounted, in England, to 67,470,768, exclusive of 8,704,236 halfpenny stamps; in Scotland, to 7,497,064, exclusive of 176,854 halfpenny stamps; and in Ireland, to 7,028,956, exclusive of 44,702 halfpenny stamps. The amount of stamps issued in England has increased since 1842 from 50,088,175 to 67,476,768. The number of London papers circulating in 1848 amounted to 150, which paid on 863,888 advertisements (at Is. 6d. each) duty to the amount of £64,791. The number of English provincial papers in 1848 was 238, paying advertisement duty to the amount of £60,320. In Scotland the number was 97, paying £ 17,562; and in Ireland, 117, paying £10,342.

During last year, 1849, it has been estimated* that the press sent forth, in the daily Papers alone, a printed surface amounting in the twelve months to 349,308,000 superficial feet, and if to these are added all the papers printed weekly and fortnightly in London and the provinces, the whole amounts to 1,446,150,000 square feet, " upon which the press has left in legible characters the proof of its labours."

A summary of the British Newspaper press, arranged according to locality and to political bias at the end of the year 1849, offers the following results:—In London, 113 papers; in England, 223; in Wales, 11; in Scotland, 85; in Ireland, 101; in the British Islands, 14. General summary: Liberal Papers, 218; Conservative, 174; Neutral, 155. The total number of Journals, of all shades of opinion, being five hundred and forty-seven.

* In an "Address to the Public," annexed by Mr. Peltier to the original report of this trial, he thus expresses himself on the subject mentioned in the text;—" Thanks, above all, to the Government of His Majesty, who, in the very moment when it was thought that my prosecution was necessary to the experiment they were then making of the practicability of a peace with the Republic, have protected me against the fury of the First Consul, who demanded my transportation out of this kingdom; and who have felt that there did not exist a single spot in Europe out of His Majesty's dominions, where, I could set my foot without falling into the tiger's don."

* Lilburne. VOL. II.

•Annual Register and Newspapers, April, 1805.

* The house is now a coffee-shop, and the round window is gone It faced York Street, Covent Garden. VOL II. D

* The following Newspaper notice of Leigh Hunt's younger days, may here form an interesting note:—"Leigh Himt is the son of a clergyman of the Church of England, and was born at Southgate, in Middlesex, October 19, 1784. His father, the Rev. Isaac Hunt, was a "West Indian, hut being in Pennsylvania at the time of the war with America, he manifested his loyalty to the Crown so warmly, that he was forced to leave that country and come to England. Having taken orders, he was for some time tutor to Mr. Leigh, the nephew of Lord Chandos, near Southgate; and his son, the subject of our present sketch, was named Leigh after his pupil. Like Coleridge and Lamb, Leigh Hunt received his early education at Christ's Hospital, where he continued till his fifteenth year. ' I was then,' he says, ' first deputy Grecian, and had the honour of going out of school in the same rank, at the same age, and for the same reason, as my friend Charles Lamb. The reason was, that I hesitated in my speech. It was understood that a Grecian was bound to deliver a public speech before he left D 2 school, and to go into the Church afterwards; and as I could do neither of these things, a Grecian I could not be.' This impediment in his speech, however, he had the good fortune to overcome. At school, as he has been through life, Leigh Hunt was remarkable for great exuberance of animal spirits, and a passionate attachment to his friends; but he evinced little desire for study, except when the exercises were in verse, when he would ' give up' double the quantity demanded of him. He himself has said, that his prose themes were generally so bad, that the master used to crumple them in his hand, and throw them to the boys for their amusement. Even in his schoolboy daya he strove to be a poet, and his father collected his verses into a volume, and published them with a large list of subscribers. He has himself desc ribed this volume as nothing better than imitations, some of them clever enough for a youth of sixteen, but worthless in every other respect."

* The concluding portion of this alleged seditious libel will give a fair idea of its character:—

" The Attorney General ought not to stroke his chin with sueh complacency, when he refers to the manner in which Bonaparte treats his soldiers. "We despise and detest those who would tell us that there is as much liberty now enjoyed in France as there is left in this country. We give all credit to the wishes of some of our great men; yet while anything remains to us in the shape of free discussion, it is impossible that we should sink into the abject slavery in which the French people are plunged. But although we do not envy the general condition of Bonaparte's subjects, we really (and we speak the honest conviction of our hearts) see nothing peculiarly pitiable in the lot of his soldiers, when compared with that of our own. "Were we called upon to make our election between the services, the whipcord would at once decide us. No advantage whatever can compensate for, or render tolerable to a mind but one degree removed from brutality, a liability to be lashed like a beast. It is idle to talk about rendering the situation of a British soldier pleasant to himself, or desirable, far less honourable, in the estimation of others, while the whip is held over his head—and over his head alone, for in no other country in Europe (with the exception, perhaps, of Russia, which is yet in a state of barbarity) is the military character so degraded. "We once heard of an army of slaves, which had bravely withstood the swords of their masters, being defeated and dispersed by the bare shaking of the instrument of flagellation in their faces. This brought so forcibly to their minds their former state of servitude and disgrace, that every honourable impulse at once forsook their bosoms, and they betook themselves to flight and to howling. We entertain no anxiety about the character of our countrymen in Portugal, when we contemplate their meeting the bayonets of Massena's troops, but we must own that we should tremble for the result, were the French general to dispatch against them a few hundred drummers, each brandishing a cat-o'-nine tails."

* Lord Byron and Some of his Contemporaries.

* The return is dated " Crown Office, Temple, 17th March, 1821."

t Frazer's Magazine revives a Newspaper report that gave a personal reason for Mr. Cobbett's change in politics. " His first desertion of the Tory party," says the Tory writer, "has been ascribed to a gratuitous insult offered to him by Mr. Pitt, who, with a superciliousness that clouded his great qualities, affected so much of aristocratic morgue as to decline the introduction of Mr. Wyndham's protege; Mr. Wyndham being a person of higher genealogical rank than Mr. Pitt, and the person proposed to be introduced, Mr. Cobbett, being the man who, after Mr. Burke, had done incomparably the most for preserving the institutions and the honour of England—more, we do not scruple to say than had been done by Mr. Pitt himself, from his unaided exertions."—Freiser's Magazine, Vol. XII., p. 210.

* "Dec. 9, 1812.—The Hunts are convicted; but not without the jury retiring for about ten minutes. Brougham made a powerful speech, unequal, and wanting that unity which is so effective with a jury; some parts rather eloquent, particularly in the conclusion, when he had the address, without giving any advantage, to fasten the words effeminacy and cowardice where everybody could apply them. One very difficult point of Ms case, the conduct of the regent to the princess, he managed with skill and with great effect; and his transition from that subject to the next part of his case was a moment of real eloquence. Lord Ellenborough was more than usually impatient, and indecently violent; he said that Brougham was inoculated with all the poison of the libel, and told the jury the issue they had to try was, whether we were to live for ever under the dominion of libellers."—Horner's Letter to J. A. Murray, Esq.

* Ordered to be printed July 16, 1823. No. 562.

* In Charles Knight's History of England there is a graphic sketch of Hone's Trial, written by an eye-witness. Here are some passages of it:—

" On the morning of the 18th of December there is a crowd round the avenues of Guildhall. An ohscure bookseller, a man of no substance or respectability in worldly eyes, is to be tried for libel. He vends his little wares in a little shop in the Old Bailey, where there are, strangely mingled, twopenny political pamphlets, and old harmless folios that the poor publisher keeps for his especial reading, as he sits in his dingy hack parlour. The door-keepers and officers of the court scarcely know what is going to happen; for the table within the bar has not the usual covering of crimson bags, but ever and anon a dingy boy arrives with an armful of books of all ages and sizes, and the whole table is strewed with dusty and tattered volumes that the ushers are quite sure have no law within their mouldy covers. A middle-aged man—a bland and smiling man, with a half sad half merry twinkle in his eye—a seedy man, to use an expressive word, whose black coat is wondrous brown and threadbare—takes his place at the table, and begins to turn over the books which were his heralds. Sir Samuel Shepherd, the Attorney General, takes his seat, and looks compassionately, as was his nature to do, at the pale man in threadbare black. Mr. Justice Abbott arrives in due time; a special jury is sworn; the pleadings are opened; the Attorney General states the case against "William Hone, for printing and publishing an impious and profane libel upon the Catechism, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments, thereby bringing into contempt the Christian religion. ' It may be said,' argued the Attorney General, ' that the defendant's object was not to produce this effect. I believe that he meant it, in one sense, as a political squib; but his responsibility is not the less.' As the Attorney General proceeded to read passages from the parody upon the Catechism, the crowd in court laughed; the bench was indignant; and the Attorney General said the laugh was the fullest proof of the baneful effects of the defendant's publication. And so the trial went on in the smoothest way, and the case for the prosecution was closed. Then the pale man in black rose, and, with a faltering voice, set forth the difficulty he had in addressing the court, and how his poverty prevented him obtaining counsel. And now he began to warm in the recital of what he thought his wrongs—his commitments—his hurried calls to plead—the expense of the copies of the informations against him;—and as Mr. Justice Abbott, with perfect gentleness, but with his cold formality, interrupted him—the timid man, whom all thought would have mumbled forth a hasty defence, grew bolder and holder, and in a short time had possession of his audience as if he were 'some well-graced actor' who was there to receive the tribute of popular admiration. ' They were not to inquire whether he were a member of the Established Church or a Dissenter; it was enough that he professed himself to he a Christian; and he would be bold to say, that he made that profession with a reverence for the doctrines of Christianity which could not be exceeded by any person in that court. He had his books about him, and it was from them that he must draw his defence. They had been the solace of his life. lie was too much attached to his hooks to part with them. As to parodies, they were as old, at least, as the invention of printing; and he never heard of a prosecution for a parody, either religious or any other. There were two kinds of parodies; one, in which a man might convey ludicrous or ridiculous ideas relative to gome other subject; the other, where it was meant to ridicule the thing parodied. The latter was not the case here, and, therefore, he had not brought religion into contempt.' This was the gist of William Hone's defence. It was in vain that the Attorney General replied. The judge charged the jury in vain. William Hone was acquitted after a quarter of an hour's deliberation.

" But Guildhall ' saw another sight.' With the next morning's fog, the fiery Lord Chief Justice rose from his bed, and with lowering brow took his place in that judgment-seat which he deemed had been too mercifully filled on the previous day. Again Mr. Hone entered the court with his load of books, on Friday, the 19th of December. He was this day indicted for publishing an impious and profane libel, called ' The Litany or General Supplication.' Again the Attorney General affirmed that whatever might be the object of the defendant, the publication had the effect of scoffing at the public service of the Church. Again the defendant essayed to read from his books, which course he contended was essentially necessary for his defence. Then began a contest which is perhaps unparalleled in an English court of justice. Upon Mr. Fox's Libel Bill, upon ex officio informations, upon his right to copies of the indictment without extravagant charges, the defendant battled his judge—imperfect in his law, no doubt, but with a firmness and moderation that rode oyer every attempt to put him down. Parody after parody was again produced, and especially those parodies of the Litany, which the Cavaliers employed so frequently as vehicles of satire upon the Boundheads and Puritans. The Lord Chief Justice at length gathered up his exhausted strength for his charge; and concluded in a strain that left but little hope for the defendant. ' He would deliver the jury his solemn opinion, as he was required by Act of Parliament to do; and under the authority of that act, and still more in obedience to his conscicnce and his God, he pronounced this to be a most impious and profane libel. Believing and hoping that they, the jury, were Christian, he had not any doubt but that they would be of the same opinion.' The jury, in an hour and a half, returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

" It might have been, expected that these prosecutions would have here ended. But the chance of a conviction from a third jury, upon a third indictment, was to be risked. On the 20th of December, Lord Ellenborough again took his seat on the bench, and the exhausted defendant came late into court, pale and agitated. The Attorney General remarked upon his appearance, and offered to postpone the proceedings. The courageous man made his election to go on. After the Attorney General had finished his address, Mr. Hone asked for five minutes' delay, to arrange the few thoughts he had been committing to paper. The Judge refused the small concession; but said he would postpone the proceedings to another day, if the defendant would request the Court so to do. The scene which ensued was thoroughly dramatic. ' No! I make no sueh request. My Lord, I am very glad to see your lordship here to-day, because I feel I sustained an injury from your lordship yesterday—an injury which I did not expcct to sustain. * * * If his lordship should think proper, on this trial to-day, to deliver his opinion, I hope that opinion will be coolly and dispassionately expressed by his lordship. * * * My Lord, I think it necessary to make a stand here. I cannot say what your lordship may consider to be necessary interruption, but your lordship interrupted me a great many times yesterday, and then said you would interrupt me no more, and yet your lordship did interrupt me afterwards ten times as much. * * * Gentlemen, it is you who are trying me to-day. His lordship is no judge of me. You are my judges, and you only are my judges. His lordship sits there to receive your verdict. * * * I hope the jury will not be beseeched into a verdict of guilty.' The triumph of the weak over the powerful was complete. ' The frame of adamant and soul of fire,' as the biographer of Lord Sidmouth terms the Chief Justice, quailed before the indomitable courage of a man who was roused into energies which would seem only to belong to the master-spirits that have swayed the world. Yet this was a man who, in the ordinary business of life, was incapable of enterprise and persevering exertion; who lived in the nooks and corners of his antiquarianism; who was one that even his old political opponents came to regard as a gentle and innocuous hunter after ' all such reading as was never read who in a few years gave up his politics altogether, and, devoting himself to his old poetry and his old divinity, passed a quarter of a century after this conflict in pcace with all mankind, and died the sub-editor of a religious journal. It was towards the close of this remarkable trial, that the judge, who came eager to condemn, sued for pity to his intended victim. The defendant quoted "Warburton and Tillotson, as doubters of the authenticity of the Athanasian Creed. ' Even bis lordship's father, the Bishop of Carlisle, he believed, took a similar view of the Creed.' And then the judge solemnly said, ' Whatever that opinion was, he has gone many years ago, where he has had to account for his belief and his opinions. * * * For common delicacy, forbear.'—' Oh, my Lord, I shall certainly forbear.' Grave and temperate was the charge to the jury this day; and in twenty minutes they had returned a verdict of Not Guilty."

* Ordered to be printed July 6, 1830. No. 608.

* Ordered to be printed, June, 25, 1834. No. 410. F 2

* The deputation included the following members of the House of Commons,—Henry Warburton, Joseph Hume, George Grote, James Oswald, John Bowring, John A. Roebuck, Col. T. P. Thompson, William 'Williams, Benj. IIawes, John Temple Leader, Howard Elphinstone, Bobert Wallace, Thomas Wakley, C. John Hector, T. S. Duncombe, James S. Buckingham, Richard Potter, Joshua Scholefield, Edward Strutt, Charles Hindley, Hemy A. Aglionby, Charles A. Tulk, Henry W. Tancred, D. W. Harvey, William Marshall, Joseph Brotherton, Thomas Attwood, Daniel O'Conxiell, Hon. Pierce Butler, and Sir W. Molesworth. Messieurs Birkbeck, Crawfurd, Hiekson, Chapman. and Francis Place, completed the deputation.

* During this period of Newspaper excitement it was that Mr. O'Connell asked leave to bring in his bill to amend the law of libel, which led to the appointment of the committee on that subject, at the suggestion of the law-officers of the Crown. This was in 1834. In the following year, the Newspaper Printers' Belief Act received the Royal assent (March 20, 1835). The object was to place the press somewhat less at the mercy of informers. The new law was stated to be " to amend the 38 Geo. III., cap. 78, for preventing the mischiefs arising from the printing and publishing Newspapers, and Papers of a like nature, by persons not known, and for regulating the printing and publication of such Papers in other respects, and to discontinue certain actions commenced under the provisions of the said Act." This relief act recites—" 1. That certain penalties were, by the said Act, imposed for any neglect or omission to comply with some of its recited provisions, which might be recovered by action, by any person who should sue for the same; and that the printers, publishers, and proprietors of divers Newspapers had inadvertently neglected to comply with some of the said provisions, many actions had been brought against them, and that it was expedient for all further proceedings to be prevented, enacts, that persons sued, before the passing of this act, for penalties incurred under the recited Act (except as hereafter), may apply to the court, or to a judge, to stay proceedings, upon payment of the costs then incurred; and, if the court shall so order, such actions, &c., shall be forthwith discontinued. 2. and 3. In actions commenced before the 4th March, 1835, and renewed before the passing of this Act, the court, or judge, may order the discontinuance, upon payment of costs; and, in actions commenced since 4th March, without pavment of costs. 4. Not to extend to actions in which judgment shall have been obtained, nor to those by Attorney or Solicitor General. 6. Penalties incurred under the said Act, hereafter to belong wholly to His Majesty. 6. No actions for penalties to be commenced, except in the name of the Attorney or Solicitor General, in England; of the King's Advocate* in Scotland; or of the Solicitor or Officer of Stamps."

* Bentley's Miscellany, January, 1850.

CHAPTER VIII.
THE LONDON DAILY PAPERS.

" The great ensrine—she never sleeps. She has her ambassadors in every quarter of the world—her couriers upon every road."—Pendennti.

The Public Advertiser.—"Woodfall and Junius.—The Public Ledger.—The Morning Chronicle.—Perry.—John Black.—The Morning Post. —Mr. Tattersall.—Rev. Bate Dudley.—Dan Stuart's Descriptions. —Coleridge.—Charles Lamb.—Bate Dudley starts the Morning Herald.—Prospectus of the Taper.—History of the Times.—The Representative.—The Constitutional.—The Daily News.

THE first titles that became very popular as headJL ings for daily Papers in London were Post and Advertiser. The Daily Courant,* the first of daily papers, -was soon followed by a number of Posts and Postboys. These being prepared in a great measure for sale in the country, to which they were despatched by the mails, put the word Post, in one form or other, into their titles. The Journals thus circulating were soon employed by the more shrewd and energetic portion of the traders as a means of making known what they had for sale, and the announcements becoming a source of profit to Newspaper printers, the word Advertiser became another popular heading.

A Mr. Jenour, who in 1724 was the printer of the Flying Post, afterwards started the Daily Advertiser, which long stood first in point of profit and circulation amongst London diurnal Papers. The shares in this speculation were said to have been sold, like freehold lands, by public auction, fetching great prices. This paper, it appears, had its life-blood abstracted* by the establishment of an Advertiser by the publicans of London—the present Morning Advertiser. But though the most profitable of its name, Mr. Jenour'swas not the most celebrated. The first daily Newspaper that gained enduring reputation was not Jenour's Daily, but Woodfall's Public Advertiser, and this literary repute was obtained, as everybody knows, by the Letters of Junius. At the period when these anonymous communications were forwarded to the printer, whose name they have made celebrated, the opinions of a Morning Journal were seldom given in the shape of our modern " leading articles." Indeed, editorial comments appearing punctually, day by day, as we now see them, were unknown, At a much earlier period, as Ave have seen, political writers established political papers to aid the party to which they were attached; but the daily Newspapers, in the time of Junius, though in other respects presenting on a smaller scale many of the features which daily Papers now display, could not boast punctual columns of editorial leading articles. When a writer commented lioldly on political events, he adopted a signature. Crabbe refers to this custom in his sketch of how the Newspapers were "made up."

Now puffs exhausted, advertisements past,
Their correspondents stand exposed at last;
These are a numerous tribe, to fame unknown,
Who for the public good forego their own;
Who volunteers in paper-war engage,
With double portion of their party's rage:
Such are the Bruti, Decii, who appear
Wooing the printer for admission here;
Whose generous souls can condescend to pray
For leave to throw their precious time away.

Junius was an unpaid volunteer, and Crabbe goes on to depict the pangs of the rejected contributor, who, with less talent than the great political unknown, found no place in the printer's regards, and no corner in his Paper. The prominent notice which the poet gives to the printer is accounted for by the fact that in those times the printer, proprietor, and editor were frequently the same person.

Oh! cruel Woodfall! when a patriot draws
His grey-goose quill in his dear country's cause,
To vex and maul a ministerial race,
Can thy stern soul refuse the champion place?
Alas! thou know'st not with what anxious heart
He longs his best-loved labours to impart;
How he has sent them to thy brethren round,
And still the same unkind reception found:
At length indignant will he damn the state,
Turn to his trade, and leave us to our fate.

The writers of the political letters at that period were fond of attacking Crabbe's patrons, and they find no mercy at the hands of the poet, who abuses them, as we see, not for false logic, or distorted facts, but for—poverty. Crabbe by this time had ceased to suffer the miseries of the poor condition to which he was born, and from the snug parlour of a country vicarage, or in the luxurious shelter of Belvoir Castle, made clever jokes at the cost of less talented, or less fortunate writers:—

These Roman souls, like Rome's great sons are known
To live in cells on labours of their own.
Thus Milo, could we see the noble chief,
Feeds, for his country's good, on legs of beef;
Camillus copies deeds for sordid pay,
Yet fights the public battles twice a-day:
E'en now the god-like Brutus views his score
Scroll'd on the bar-board, swinging with the door;
Where, tippling punch, grave Cato's self you'll sec,
And Amor patriae vending smuggled tea.

Poetical abuse was not the only risk these early writing politicians ran. Like still earlier critics of public affairs, they at times found themselves in the pillory, though, as liberty progressed, such instances became more and more rare.*

A writer in the Athenaeum,†—who evidently went to work con amove to examine the editions of Junius, and never left the self-imposed literary task until he had sifted the truth from the manifold blunders by which it had been surrounded,—gives us some curious and interesting particulars of the Public Advertiser, and of the influence which the famous letters had upon the circulation of that Paper.

"Mr.Britton," says this labour-loving critic, "flourishes about the pre-eminent and ' immediate effect and popularity of Junius of course, following Dr. Mason Good, who speaks of the 'almost electric speed' with which the Lettersbecame popular—states, indeed, as if he had the information from Junius himself, that ' from the extraordinary effect produced hij his first letter under the signature of Junius, he resolved to adhere to this signature exclusively.' Now, there can be no question that the letters of Junius excited public-attention:—the when and to what extent are the points under consideration. We know that they were copied into other journals;—but this, our experience enables us to say, may be a proof rather of a dearth of News than of extraordinary popularity or merit. We know that they were collected and piratically published;—but, after all, the meaning of popularity, when translated into the language of a publisher and a newspaper proprietor, is, that such was the demand for the letters of Junius that the sale of The Public Advertiser was thereby greatly increased. This may be a very vulgar test—very shocking to the sensitive and the spiritual; but it was a test by which Junius was not ashamed to be tried. In a jirivate letter to Woodfall be says, speaking of the letter to Mansfield, ' I undertake that it shall sell.' Again,—it ' is, in my opinion, of the highest style of Junius, and cannot fail to sell.' So of the collected edition of 1772, —' I am convinced the book will sell.' Well then, judging by this test—the only one within our reach—Junius had not an ' immediate effect,' as Dr. Good and Mr. Britton assert. Through the liberal kindness of Mr. Henry Woodfal], who acts in the spirit of his father in all that relates to Junius, and is anxious only that the truth should prevail, we have examined the 'Day-book' of the Public Advertiser, in the handwriting of his grandfather, Sampson Woodfall; from which it appears that neither the first, nor the first dozen, nor the first two dozen letters had any effect whatever on the sale of the Paper! Then, indeed, on the 19th December, 1769, came forth the letter to the King. This created an effect, and an extraordinary demand. Dr. Good—who cannot be right, even by accident—states ' that 500 copies of The Advertiser were printed in addition to the usual number;' whereas the evidence before him, this ' Day-book,' to which he might have referred, w'ould have proved that 1,750 additional copies were printed. To meet the demand expected, or which followed, for Junius's next letter (to the Duke of Grafton) published 14th February, 1770, 700 additional copies were printed; for the following, on the 19th March, the additional supply was 350; for the letter in April, 350—but not an additional copy was printed of the letter of the 28th May. There were 100 only on the 22nd August for the letter to Lord North. The letter to Lord Mansfield again awakened public attention, and 600 additional copies were printed. We have no detailed account of the sale in January; but 500 additional copies were printed of The Public Advertiser which contained the letter in April, 1771—100 of the June letter to the Duke of Grafton—250 for the first in July to the same—not one for the second letter to Home Tooke of the 24th of July—200 for the August letter to the same—250 for the letter to the Duke of Grafton in September. With the letter to the Livery of London, in September, the sale fell 250—with the letter of the 5th of October, there was neither rise nor fall—with the letter of the 2nd November to Mansfield, it may have risen 50, but we doubt it—and on the 28th, with that to the Duke of Grafton, it rose 350. And there ends the history of 'the immediate effect' and the total effect, so far as the 'Day-book' has enabled us to carry out our inquiry. We have given these details as curious and interesting in themselves. Generally, we may observe, that beyond the above-mentioned sale of the particular Papers in which they appeared, the Letters of Junius did not effect any of the wonders attributed to them, either immediately or permanently. The Public Advertiser had long been a successful and rising Paper. In the four years that preceded the first certain publication of Junius—that is, from January 1765 to December 1768—the monthly sale rose from 47,515 to 75,450, nearly 60 per cent; whereas, from January, 1769, to December, 1771, during which period the Junius letters appeared, it rose from 74,800 to 83,950, or little more than 12 per cent."

Garrick was one of the shareholders in the Public Advertiser, a fact which has its significance in reference to the Newspaper critiques in those great days of the theatre. At that time dramatic intelligence cost the Journals much more than foreign News, and such was the interest taken in all theatrical events, that the Newspapers had messengers whose duty it was to wait about the theatres to get the earliest possible copy of each new bill of the next day's performance. When these were got the scouts ran off to the offices, and who first delivered the then important sheet was rewarded with a shilling or half-a crown, according to the importance of the News he had secured.

The name of Woodfall has become so identified •with that of Junius, and with the progress of Newspapers, as to possess an interest of its own. Two members of this family are often confounded with each other. Henry Sampson Woodfall was the printer of the letters of Junius, and The Public Advertiser; whilst his brother William it was who gained the name of " Memory Woodfall," by his talent for remembering and writing out reports of Parliamentary debates—notes of which were not then allowed to be taken. This ability for obtaining a very valuable species of "copy" led to his connection with The Morning Chronicle, with one exception the oldest of the existing daily Papers. The oldest still amongst us is The Public Ledger, which started in 1760, and is now (1850) a small Paper of small circulation, and understood to be chiefly kept alive by an ancient advertising connection.*

The present Morning Chronicle started with Whig politics in 1769;* WilliamWoodfall became its printer, reporter, and editor, (for the characters were still joined,) and gained for it, as we have already said, a reputation by his extraordinary memory, and his talent for reporting Parliamentary debates.

Woodfall continued to conduct the Paper till 1789, when he set up a Paper on his own account under the title of The Diary, in which he continued his series of reports. These, however, were not sufficient to support the new project, for other Journals had adopted the plan of dividing the labour of reporting a debate. In this way Woodfall was outstript, and his Paper fell. His successor on The Morning Chronicle was the real architect of that Paper.—James Perry—of whom we have a biographical notice in a Magazine + published during his lifetime, written evidently by a friend of his, and illustrated by a portrait engraved from an original picture by Sir Thomas Lawrence. On this authority we learn that " Perry was a native of Aberdeen, was born on the 30th of October, 1756, and received the first rudiments of education at ' Chapel of Gariock.' The Rev. Dr. Tait, who afterwards rose to a dignified station in the Church of England, was then master of the School of Chapel, and gave it celebrity by his erudition and abilities. From this Mr. Perry was removed to the High School of Aberdeen.

"In the year 1771, he was entered of Marischal College, Aberdeen, (hut appears to have gained no scholastic distinctions,) and was afterwardsplaced under Dr. Fordyce, advocate, to qualify him for the profession of the Scots law; hut his father, who was a huilder, having engaged in some extremely unsuccessful speculations, the young man left Aberdeen in 1774, and proceeded to Edinburgh, in the hope of obtaining a situation in some professional gentleman's chambers, where he might at once pursue his studies, and obtain a livelihood. After long and ineffectual attempts to gain employment, he came to England, and was for two years engaged in Manchester as clerk to Mr. Denwiddie, manufacturer. In this situation he cultivated his mind by the study of the best authors, and gained the friendship and affection of the principal gentlemen of the town, by the talents he displayed in a society which was at that time established by them for philosophical and moral discussions, and by several literary essays which obtained their approbation.

"In the beginning of 1771 he carried with him recommendations from the principal manufacturers to their correspondents, hut they all failed to procure him any suitable introduction; it was, however, the accidental effect of one of them that threw him into the line of life which he from that period persevered in with such invariable constancy. There was at that time an opposition Journal, published under the title of the General Advertiser, and being a new Paper, it was the practice of the proprietors to exhibit the whole contents of it upon boards upon different shop windows and doors, in the same manner as we now see the theatrical placards displayed. Perry, being unemployed, amused himself with writing essays and scraps of poetry for this paper, which he dropped into the editor's box, and which were always inserted. Calling one day at the shop of Messrs. Richardson and Urquhart, booksellers, to whom he had letters of recommendation, he found the latter busily engaged, and apparently enjoying, an article in The General Advertiser. After Mr. Urquhart had finished the perusal, Perry put the usual question to him, whether he had heard of any situation that would suit him? to which he replied in the negative; at the same time holding out the Paper, he said, ' If you could write articles such as this, I could give you immediate employment.' It happened to be a humorous essay written by Perry himself. This he instantly intimated to Mr. Urquhart, and gave him another letter iu the same handwriting, which he had proposed to drop into the letter-box. Mr. Urquhart expressed great satisfaction at the discovery, and informed him that he was one of the principal proprietors of the Paper, that they wanted just such a person, and as there was to be a meeting of the proprietors that same evening, he would propose Perry as a writer. He did so, and the next day he was engaged at a salary of a guinea aweelt, and an additional half-guinea for assistance to the London Evening Post, then printed by the same person. Such was the incident that threw Perry into the profession of a Journalist. He was most assiduous in Lis exertions for The General Advertiser, and during the memorable trials of Admirals Iveppell and Palliser, he, for six weeks together, by his individual efforts, sent up daily from Portsmouth, eight columns of the trials taken by him in court; which, from the interest they excited, raised the Paper to a sale of several thousands a-day. At this time Perry wrote and published several political pamphlets and poems; and, in 1782, he formed the plan, and was the first editor of the European Magazine. He conducted it, however, only for the first twelve months, as, on the death of a Mr. Wall, he was chosen by the proprietors of The Gazetteer to be the editor of that Paper, the proprietors of which consisted of the principal booksellers of London. Perry undertook the editorship of the Paper at a salary of four guineas a-week, on the express condition that he was to be left to the free exercise of his political opinions, which were those asserted by Mr. Fox. On commencing his editorial duties on The Gazeteer, he proposed a most important improvement upon the reporting plans then adopted —a plan which exists to the present day. He suggested to the proprietors the wisdom of employing several reporters to facilitate the publication of debates in Parliament. Up to that time, each Paper had but one reporter in each House of Parliament, and the predecessor of Perry in The Gazetteer had been in the habit of spinning out the debates for weeks, and even months, after the session had closed; while Woodfall, in The Morning Chronicle, used to bring out his hasty sketch of the debate in the evening of the following day. Perry's plan was adopted, and by a succession of reporters, The Gazetteer was published in the morning with as long a debate as Woodfall brought out in the evening, and sometimes at midnight."

Such is the account of his early career given with Perry's sanction, if, indeed, it did not come from his own pen. At the point which this memoir brings us to, Perry had made a great success. To beat "Memory Woodfall" was a great feat; and, when Woodfall set up The Diary, we find Perry, with the help of the friends he had made, becoming one of the proprietors of The Morning Chronicle. Of his further career, I have obtained, by the kindness of a veteran Journalist, some curious and hitherto unpublished particulars, which may be given here.

Perry and a Mr. Gray, a countryman of his own, purchased The Morning Chronicle about the beginning of the French Revolution. The money was furnished by old Bellamy, the housekeeper of the House of Commons, who was also a wine-merchant. At the Christmas dinners afterwards given to the editors and reporters of The Morning Chronicle, some of the port purchased from Bellamy when The Chronicle was bought, continued to be produced till Perry's death.

Gray was a more profound man than Perry, and wrote the serious articles. Perry was volatile and varied, but not profound. Indeed, his education had been rather defective; and he was not the man to make up, by severe application, for early deficiencies. It used to be said that the Paper would succeed, for it carried both sail and ballast. Gray's sister had an annuity from the Paper till Perry's death, and his executors continued to pay it afterwards. Perry went to Paris for The Chronicle, and remained there upwards of a year, during the critical period of the Revolution, before the war.

Though always proprietor of The Chronicle, Perry was not always editor. He became connected with Lord Kinnaird, Hammcrsley, the banker, and some other influential gentlemen, in a speculation for making cloth without weaving or spinning. Perry purchased the mill at Merton, in Surrey, for carrying on the manufacture, and much money was laid out in the concern, when it was suddenly brought to a close by the insanity and death of Mr. Booth, the patentee. For several years the editorship was with Mr. Robert Spankie, afterwards Serjeant Spankie, who went out to India as Attorney General of Bengal, and was member for Finsburv in the first reformed Parliament. Spankie was an able writer; but Perry used to say that he mistook the principle on which a Newspaper ought to be conducted—that of a Miscellany. His essays were elaborate and ingenious. During a great part of Spankie's editorship, he was by no means on good terms with Perry, and would often throw Perry's communications into the fire.

The two informations against Perry have already been noticed: the first was when Sir John Scott (afterwards Lord Elden) was Attorney General. In those days the prosecutor generally knew his jurymen; but sometimes mistakes would be made. Among the jurors on whom the Crown counted was a gentleman who supplied the Dean and Chapter of Westminster with coals. After the jury had withdrawn, the foreman observed, of course the verdict must be for the Crown. On which the coalman observed that he did not think so—that the Attorney General had been very abusive against Perry, but he did not think his arguments worth much. After arguing pro and con for some time, the coalman pulled out his nightcap, and observing that he could stand hunger, but not thirst, said he should speak no more, but take a nap till they came to think better on the subject. The others gave in—" and you may be sure," adds the friend who supplies this anecdote, and many more valuable facts, " that Perry took his coals afterwards from this sturdy juror."

The other trial was in 1807. Spankie was so certain of a conviction, that he thought it folly in Perry to fight the case. The subject of the libel was, as we have seen, that George the Fourth would have a noble opportunity of making himself popular on succeeding to the throne. Perry defended himself, as we have also noticed, with much tact. Lord Ellenborough was not hostile to him; and the legal editor, Spankie, was pleasantly surprised by the result.

Perry and Mr. Lambert, the printer, were confined some months in Newgate, to which they were committed for contempt by the House of Lords, on the motion of the Earl of Minto of that day. The contempt was an observation by Spankie, terming their Lordships, after Lord Chesterfield, an Hospital of Incurables.

The present Lord Campbell commenced his career in London on The Chronicle. In 1810, Campbell was still the theatrical critic of the Paper.

A contemporary of Perry's, writing years after the death of that Journalist, thus sums up his character:—"Perhaps no man connected with the English press ever enjoyed a tithe of the personal popularity of Perry. He was, in the first place, a highly honourable and brave man: confidence reposed in him was never abused. He was the depositary of many most important secrets of high personages. Generous in the extreme, he was ever ready with his purse and his services. His manner was manly, frank, and cordial; and he was the best of proprietors. He was hospitable, too; and it is said that his dinners were positively the best of any at that time in town.

" Though not profound, lie was quick, versatile, and showy. He wrote like a man of the world, and took plain, common-serise views of the subjects on which he treated; and his style was easy and familiar. He was fond of epigrams, and very successful with them. He used to speak at public meetings, and, as a speaker, he was more successful than as a writer. If any one could have taken down exactly his observations on a subject, it would have made a better article than he produced when he took pen in hand.

" Perry had a great deal of the feeling which you find in some of Walter Scott's characters, and -which, in this commercial age, is now rarely met with. You had no doubt or difficulty as to how he would act on a given occasion; but always considered yourself safe with him. Walter, of The Times, was a better man of business; and Daniel Stuart, of The Post and Courier, knew better how to make money; but Perry was a thorough gentleman, who attracted every man to him with whom he was connected.

"Perry had no idea that he was as rich as he actually was. He told me, a year or two before his death, that, after all his bustle in London, he was a poor man. He was greatly in debt, for his purchases at Merton, &c.; but property sold well at the time of his death, and, though his executors had a large sum to pay, there turned out to be a large residue."

Perry was consistent in his politics throughout his career; and though opportunities offered more than once for his admission into Parliament, he seems to have preferred the life of a Journalist to that of a legislator. The European Magazine, that afforded the facts of his earlier days, may be drawn upon for a few more anecdotes illustrative of his career:—

In 1780, 1781, and 1782, there were numerous debating societies in the metropolis, where many persons that have since been conspicuous in Parliament, in the pulpit, and on the bench, distinguished themselves as public speakers. Perry was a speaker in those societies, and is mentioned with great praise in the History of the Westminster Forum. Mr. Pitt used to attend these societies, although he never spoke at any of them; and it is not, perhaps, generally known that the Lyceum was fitted up and received that title, expressly for a superior style of oratory, by John Sheridan, Esq., a barrister, with the view of enabling such young gentlemen as were designed for the senate and bar to practice public speaking before a genteel auditory. It was opened for a few nights at five shillings as the price of admittance. Mr. Pitt and several of his friends frequented it; but the enterprise fell to the ground. We mention these particulars, because we have been credibly informed that afterwards, when Mr. Pitt came to be Chancellor of the Exchequer, having had frequent opportunities of witnessing Perry's talent in public speaking, and particularly in reply, caused a proposal to be made to him of coming into Parliament, which would have, probably, led on to high fortune. Perry, however, thought proper to reject it, as he did afterwards an offer of the same kind from the Earl of Shelbourne; and he uniformly maintained the principles with which he first set out in his political course. Perry was for several years editor of Debrett's Parliamentary Debates.

In private life, Perry had the happiness to maintain his aged parents in comfort, and to bring up the orphan family of his sister by her first marriage. She was afterwards married, for the second time, to the celebrated Professor Porson, and died in 1796.

In 1798, Perry was married to Miss Anne Hull. She brought him eight children, one of whom died young, and the eldest, a daughter of the most promising talents, was carried off at the age of fourteen by the rupture of a blood-vessel, in the arms of her mother, which gave a shock to that lady's constitution from which she never recovered. She sunk into a decline, and took a voyage to Lisbon, in hopes of restoration by a milder climate; on her return she was taken prisoner by an Algerine frigate, and, after suffering much in the voyage, she sunk under her complaint soon after she was landed at Bordeaux.

In Daniel Stuart's letters about Newspapers, which, when speaking of The Morning Post, we shall presently have occasion to quote, we find an anecdote of Coleridge and Perry. " Mr. Gillman," says Stuart, " has described the circumstances attending Coleridge's enlisting into the light horse. At that time in London alone, penniless, he sent a poem of a few lines to Perry, then the proprietor of The Morning Chronicle, soliciting the loan of a guinea for a distressed author. Perry, who was generous with his money, sent it, and Coleridge often mentioned this, when The Morning Chronicle was alluded to, with expressions of a deep gratitude proportioned to the severe distress which that small sum at the moment relieved."*

Campbell was also a contributor to The Chronicle whilst that Paper was in the hands of Perry; but, like Coleridge, was found to be too much of a poet to make a good " Newspaperman." A writer in the New Monthly Magazine,* speaking of Campbell's essay at political writing, says:—"On coming to town it would appear that Campbell commenced writing for the Newspapers under the auspices of Perry of The Morning Chronicle. He was not very successful, nor could it be expected. Experience must have been wanting, a knowledge of the political topics of the time, and the art of rapid composition, those essentials in writing for the mass, were not the qualities with which Campbell was endowed. Great knowledge of literature, care in the choice of words, and slowness in composition, were impediments in concocting the ephemeral articles for a Newspaper; in no department of the multifarious literature of the metropolis could the poet have been employed with less effect. He must have been an utter stranger to the tact which, in the Newspaper contests of that time, (about 1803,) when politics ran high, must have been more than ever demanded; he had none of that positive acquaintance with men and things connected with political affairs which can be obtained at the seat of government alone. Political knowledge was not then diffused as widely as it is at present, and the duties of an adroit writer in a London Newspaper were not to be acquired in the country. It suffices that the poet was unsuccessful, though Perry retained him for some time to aid in filling up the poets' corner of his Paper."

It was daring Perry's connection with The Chronicle that the daily press became a sort of constituted authority in the country. The Government gave up the fight. It was said that to Lord Castlereagh this change was owing. After his many attempts to gag the press, he became conscious of his own defeat, and saw that authority lost instead of gaining by struggles with the daily Newspapers, which irritated without damaging these enemies of irresponsible government. Even when cool judgment disapproved of the course pursued by a particular Paper, it obtained the public sympathy as a martyr when attacked by the authorities. The result proved the soundness of these views. A verdict, too, had become rather a matter of chance than of principle. Special jurymen dreaded a long trial for libel, and it almost always became necessary to fill up its number by talesmen, and one was enough. Thus, while in Scotland the Government required only a majority, and could always attain a verdict; in England, the leading country, prosecutions were a matter of uncertainty. The Scotsman, which was the first Paper that succeeded in an independent career in Scotland, had perhaps greater difficulties to contend with than any English Paper.

In 1810, a young literary aspirant, Mr. John Black, obtained from Perry an engagement as a reporter, a post he fulfilled so well that he was withdrawn, in 1817, from the gallery to actnot exactly as sub-editor—for that was a functionary hardly recognised in those days—but as one of the political writers for the Paper. During the year 1819 there was strong discontent in the manufacturing districts, and the Manchester, or Peterloo, massacre, as it was called, was bitterly denounced by manywho condemned tumultuary meetings, and who by no means liked the conduct of Henry Hunt. Black wrote with much earnestness, and soon had his name spread over the country as the "Dr. Black" and the " Scotch feelosopher" of Cobbett's Register. The Chronicle was at that time the most uncompromising of all the opposition Papers, and its sale was then higher than either before or afterwards, till 1835, when Sir Robert Peel's Tory Ministry was supported by The Times, and a large portion of the readers of that Paper went over to The Chronicle. In 1819, and part of 1820, The Chronicle's sale was at times little short of 4,000. The sale fell greatly off during the Queen's trial, when Perry hung back for some time, and the public were so decided that they would hear of no middle course. Perry died in 1821, when the management of the Paper devolved on Black, and remained under his control for some years. He had been intimate with the late James Mill, a man of a warm disposition, who possessed much of the better part of the Scotch character, namely, strong determination and tenacity of purpose, with as little of the selfishness which has sometimes been charged to the Scotch, as any man could possibly have. The influence of Mr. Mill on the active minds of that time was very great, greater indeed, perhaps, than that of any other man then in London. His great delight was in inspiring young men with elevated views, and in strengthening their resolution to do all the public good in their power. Such was his singleness of purpose, that it is known hee would have resigned his lucrative situation at the head of the Government department of the India House, for the Moral Philosophy chair of Edinburgh, which has hut a small income, if he could have had the least chance of success in a contest for that post, which he found on sounding his friends he had not. Black's intimacy with Mill at one time was so great, that there was hardly a day they did not walk home together from the India House. Mill's opinions thus became promulgated in The Chronicle. Black laboured to break down the oligarchy, to effect a transference of power from the great landowners to the middle classes, and to destroy the system of primogeniture. As the unpaid magistracy were an important link in the chain by which the humbler classes were fettered, he made war fiercely on that body; and as he had thus, at times, to encounter some of the strongest prejudices of Englishmen, it may be doubted whether he took the best means of promoting the sale of the Paper; but he had much influence in the country, through the partizans he obtained in the Provincial Press.

The Chronicle was sold, within little more than a year after Mr. Perry's death, to Mr. Clement, then the proprietor of The Observer, for the large sum of £12,000. Mr. Clement held it till 1834, when it came into the hands of Sir John Easthope, for a very much smaller sum than Clement had paid. The minor shares held by others did not effect Easthope's power, and he took the general control of the Paper.

In 1843, Black, after thirty-three years' labour on The Chronicle, quitted that Journal; Mr. Doyle, who had been foreign editor, and who married Sir J. Easthope's daughter, succeeding to the post of editor. Black, like many a literary man before and since, had to fight his way up. He quitted his native place, Dunse, in Berwickshire, in 1801, to seek his fortune, and contrived to attend the Greek and some other classes in the University of Edinburgh, and to acquire a knowledge of Erench, Italian, German, and enough of Spanish to read it. In 1816, he published a translation from Schlegel, and obtained several engagements in London, to render foreign productions into English; amongst other tasks, translating a work from the Swedish of Berzelius. The language upon which he most prided himself was Greek; in which he had the reputation of being a master.

The Morning Chronicle must not be dismissed without remembering that Sheridan speaks of it in his Critic; that Canning linked it into one of his poems; that Byron honoured it with a Familiar Epistle; that Hazlitt wrote for its columns some of the finest criticisms in our or any other language; and that for it also were the first " Sketches by Boz" prepared.

THE MORNING POST stands next in order of date after The Chronicle; and, like that Paper, it seems to have sprung from one of the " Advertisers" so abundant in 1772, the period of its first appearance. Its original title was, " The Morning Post and Daily Advertiser." Mr. John Bell is spoken of as the projector; but on what authority does not appear. Three years after its establishment, however, we have more definite information. As at that time, the Rev. Henry Bate (afterwards Sir Bate Dudley) was connected with The Morning Post. Of him we find it stated, that he was son of the Bev. Mr. Bate of Worcester; that he was educated at Queen's College, Oxford; and, being ordained at an early age, became vicar of Earnbridge, in Essex. " The gaities of the metropolis." it is said, " inclined him to settle in London; and, about the year 1775, he became concerned in The Morning Post, which was at first published in a peculiar form, to evade the Newspaper tax; but the scheme did not answer, and the shape of the Paper was changed." Bate seems to have continued on The Post till the end of 1780, when he quarrelled with his colleagues, and set up an opposition Paper—The Morning Herald —of which we shall have to speak hereafter. In 1792, we find Mr. Tattersall figuring as the responsible proprietor of The Post, and defendant in an action brought by Lady Elizabeth Lambert for libel, when the proprietors of The Post had a verdict given against them,* damages £4,000. At this period, according to Daniel Stuart, the Paper was famous for its advertisements of carriages and horses; but its owners held but a poor position, and were, in 1795, so ill-pleased with their property, that they sold the entire copyright of The Morning Post, with house and printing materials for,£000. The circulation was then only 350 a-day. These particulars, and many others of much interest, would probably never have been made known had not the friends of Coleridge (and indeed Coleridge himself) boasted of the great service his pen had done The Morning Post. These boasts being coupled with the name of the proprietor of the Paper, drew forth a reply from that gentleman, in which he gives a number of facts illustrative of Morning Newspaper history. Before quoting these, it should be stated that, in the Table-Talk, Coleridge was made to say he had raised the sale of The Morning Post from some small number to 7,000 in one year; that he had received but a small recompense whilst Stuart was riding in a carriage; and, in another passage, " that Stuart was a very knowing person." After some cavilling with Mr. H. N. Coleridge on these points, Stuart, in reply, goes on to say:—

" When Dr. Currie published the works of Burns, upwards of thirty years ago, some one (probably Mr. Southey) applied to me, to explain a charge or insinuation in the work against me or one of my brothers. I did so; and proved that Dr. Currie had been misinformed. My elder brother, Peter, who started the first daily evening Newspaper, The Star, now exactly half a century ago, in consequence of the increased facilities of communication by Palmer's mail-coach plan, then just begun, had written to Burns, offering him terms for communications to the Paper, a small salary, quite as large as his Excise-office emoluments. I forget particulars; but I remember my brother showing Burns's letters, and boasting of the correspondence with so great a genius. Burns refused an engagement. And if, as I believe, the ' Poem written to a Gentleman who had sent him a Newspaper, and offered to continue it free of expense,' was written in reply to my brother, it was a sneering unhandsome return, though Doctor Currie says fifty-two guineas per annum for a communication once a-week was an offer ' which the pride of genius disdained to accept. We hear much of purse-proud insolence; hut poets can sometimes be insolent on the conscious power of talent, as well as vulgar upstarts on the conscious power of purse. In 1795, my brother Peter purchased the copyright of The Oracle Newspaper, then selling 800 daily, for,£80. There was no house or materials; and I joined in purchasing The Morning Post, with house and materials, the circulation being only 350 per day, for £000. What it was that occasioned such a depreciation of Newspaper property at that time, I cannot tell. Then it was my brother again offered Burns an engagement, as appears by the account in Burns's Life, which was again declined. Burns began his style of Scottish poetry on the model of that of Robert Fergusson, the schoolfellow and most intimate companion of my eldest brother Charles, who was also a poet, though of much inferior merit. Now, considering that a slur was cast upon the character of my brother Peter by ill-informed, but honourably-meaning Dr. Currie, I find in that circumstance an apology or a public justification of my own conduct to Coleridge,in explanation of the misstatements of the ill-informed Mr. H. Coleridge and Mr. Gillman. At the time of The Star, in the years 1789 and 1790, my brother Peter en gaged Mr. Macdonald, a Scotch poet, author of the play of' Vimonda,' an accomplished literary gentleman, with a large family, in very distressed circumstances. My brother rendered him important pecuniary services. But his poems attracted so much notice, that The Morning Post tempted him, after a time, by a large salary, to leave my brother. Burns might have had such an engagement. It would surely have been a more honourable one than that of an excise gauger.

" I think I have already shown that with my purse I was liberal to Coleridge to excess. A circumstance has occurred to my mind, which still more conclusively negatives Mr. Henry Coleridge's assertion, on his uncle's authority, that Coleridge raised The Morning Post in one year from a low number to 7,000. The last time Coleridge wrote for The Morning Post was in the autumn of 1802, and it was well known that he wrote for it, and what it was he wrote. I recollect a conversation at that time, with Mr. Perry of The Morning Chronicle, in the smoking-room of the House of Commons, in which Perry described Coleridge's writings as poetry in prose. The Morning Herald and The Times, then leading Papers, were neglected, and The Morning Post by vigilance and activity rose rapidly. Advertisements flowed in beyond bounds. I encouraged the small miscellaneous advertisements in the front page, preferring them to any others, upon the rule that the more numerous the customers, the more independent and permanent the custom. Besides, numerous and various advertisements interest numerous and various readers, looking out for employment, servants, sales, and purchases> &c., &c. Advertisements act and re-act. They attract readers, promote circulation, and circulation attracts advertisements. The Daily Advertiser, which sold to the public for twopence-halfpenny, after paying a stamp-duty of three halfpence, never had more than half a column of News; it never noticed Parliament, but it had the best Foreign Intelligence before the French Revolution. The Daily Advertiser lost by its publication, but it gained largely by its advertisements, with which it was crammed full. Shares in it sold by auction at twenty years' purchase. I recollect my brother Peter saying, that on proposing to a tradesman to take shares in a new Paper, he was answered with a sneer and a shake of the head—' Ah! none of you can touch the Daily.' It was the Paper of business, filled with miscellaneous advertisements, conducted at little expense, very profitable, and taken in by all public-houses, coffee-houses, &c., but by scarcely any private families. It fell in a day by the scheme of Grant, a printer, which made all publicans proprietors of a rival, the Morning Advertiser, the profits going to a publicans' benefit society; and they of course took in their own Paper;—an example of the danger of dependance on any class. Soon after I joined The Morning Post, in the autumn of 1795, Christie, the auctioneer, left it on account of its low sale, and left a blank, a ruinous proclamation of decline. But in 1802, he came to me again, praying for re-admission. At that time particular Newspapers were known to possess particular classes of advertisements:—The Morning Post, horses and carriages; The Public Ledger, shipping and sales of wholesale foreign merchandise; The Morning Herald and Times, auctioneers; The Morning Chronicle, books. All Papers had all sorts of advertisements, it is true, but some were more remarkable than others for a particular class; and Mr. Perry, who aimed at making The Morning Chronicle a very literary Paper, took pains to produce a striking display of book advertisements.

" This display had something more solid for its object than vanity. Sixty or seventy short advertisements, filling three columns, by Longman, one day, by Oadell, &c., another—'Bless me, what an extensive business they must have!' The auctioneers to this day stipulate to have all their advertisements inserted at once, that they may impress the public with great ideas of their extensive business. They will not have them dribbled out, a few at a time, as the days of sale approach. The Journals have of late years adopted the same rule with the same design. They keep back advertisements, fill up with pamphlets, and other stuff unnecessary to a Newspaper, and then come out with a swarm of advertisements in a double sheet to astonish their readers, and strike them with high ideas of the extent of their circulation, which attracts so many advertisers. The meagre days are forgotten; the days of swarm are remembered."

Stuart goes on further to tell some of his personal contests and troubles, and, in so doing, gossips about how The Globe was established:—

"The booksellers and others crowded to The Morning Post, when its circulation and character raised it above all its competitors. Each was desirous of having his cloud of advertisements inserted at once in the front page. I would not drive away the short miscellaneous advertisements by allowing space to be monopolized by any class. When a very long advertisement of a column or two came, I charged enormously high, that it might be taken away without the parties being able to say it was refused admission. I accommodated the booksellers as well I could with a few new and pressing advertisements at a time. That would not do; they would have the cloud; then, said I, there is no place for the cloud hut the last page, where the auctioneers already enjoy that privilege. The booksellers were affronted, indignant. The last page! To obtain the accommodation refused by The Morning Post, they set up a Morning Paper—The British Press; and to oppose The Courier, an evening one—The Globe. Possessed of general influence among literary men, could there be a doubt of success?

" As is common in such cases, they took from me my chief assistant, George Lane; supposing that, having got him, they got The Morning Post, and that I was nobody. Mr. Lane, as he owned, was indebted to me for all he knew of Newspapers. At first he was slow and feeble, but his language was always that of a scholar and a gentleman, rather tame, but free from anything low, scurrilous, or violent. After several years of instruction by me—I may say education—he had become a valuable parliamentary reporter, a judicious theatrical critic, a ready translator, and the best writer of jeux d'esprit—short paragraphs of three or four lines—I ever had. With poetry and light paragraphs I endeavoured to make the Paper cheerfully entertaining, not filled entirely with ferocious politics. One of Lane's paragraphs I well remember. Theatrical ladies and others were publishing their memoirs. Lane said they would not give a portrait, but a bust. Legat, the eminent engraver, came to me in raptures and pointed out the merits of the paragraph during an hour's expressions of admiration. Lane had little knowledge of politics, and little turn for political writing; but he was a valuable assistant. He resided near the office, was ready and willing, at all hours, to go anywhere, and report anything, and he could do everything. Sometimes I even entrusted the last duties of the Paper, the putting it to press, to him; an important and hazardous office, in the discharge of which he was growing more and more into my confidence. Of the corn riots in 1800, he and others gave long accounts in leaded large type, while The Times and Herald had only a few lines in obscure corners, in black. The procession proclaiming peace, the ascent of balloons, a great fire, a boxing match, a law trial—in all such occurrences The Morning Post outstripped its competitors, and its success was rapid. Lane was my chief assistant, and no wonder the booksellers thought they had got The Morning Post when they got Lane. But they never thought of Coleridge! though he, as we are told, raised the Paper in one year from a low number to 7,000 daily! and though it was well known he did write, and what he did write, as Perry's remarks to me in the House of Commons two months before Lane was taken away prove. Coleridge's last writings in The Morning Post appeared in the autumn of 1802; a few months afterwards the booksellers set up a rival Journal, and took from me my chief assistant, but they never thought'' of Coleridge; no offer, or hint of a wish was made to him."

Bearing in mind that Mackintosh was a regular contributor to The Morning Post, and a son-in-law of its proprietor, we may go on with our quotations from the amusing gossip of Mr. Stuart, without any fear of being too much biassed against the poet.

"Mr. (afterwards Sir James) Mackintosh was 011 a visit at Cote House, Bristol, the residence of Mr. Wedgewood, passing the Christmas holidays in 1797. A large party of the Wedgewoods and Allans was assembled, among whom were Coleridge and Mackintosh. Coleridge was not a mere holiday visitor: he had been an inmate for some time, and had so riveted, by his discourse, the attention of the gentlemen, particularly of Mr. Thomas Wedgewood, an infirm bachelor; he had so prevented all general conversation, that several of the party wished him out of the house. I believe the Wedgewoods were at the same time very liberal to him with their purse: he was said to be—his family, at least—starving, and that he had no means of employment. Mackintosh wrote to me, soliciting for him an engagement to write for The Morning Post pieces of poetry, and such trifles. I agreed; and settled him at a small salary. Mackintosh, at the instance of some of the inmates, attacked Coleridge on all subjects, politics, poetry, religion, ethics, &c. Mackintosh was by far the most dexterous disputer. Coleridge overwhelmed listeners in, as he said with reference to Madame de Stael, a monologue; but at sharp cut-and-thrust fencing, by a master like Mackintosh, he was speedily confused and subdued. He felt himself lowered in the eyes of the Wedgewoods: a salary, though small as it was, was provided for him; and Mackintosh drove him out of the house—an offence which Coleridge never forgave. He sent to me three or four pieces of poetry, a Christmas carol, some lines on an unfortunate girl in the boxes of the theatre, and ' Fire, Famine, and slaughter.' This last was much admired, particularly, I recollect, by Mr. Morthland, a Scotch advocate, a gentleman of the best class in all respects, who was cruelly used in Scotland for his connexion with a Whig journal, The Edinburgh Gazetteer. Among other poems, Coleridge sent one attacking Mackintosh, too obviously for me not to understand it, and of course it was not published. Mackintosh had had one of his front teeth broken, and the stump was black. The poem described a hungry, pert Scotchman, with little learning but much brass, with a black tooth in front, indicative of the blackness of his heart. Long afterwards, Coleridge told me how well Mackintosh maintained an argument about Locke, in these conflicts at Cote House; but Coleridge detecting his mistakes, Mackintosh privately owned he had never read Locke.

" Coleridge did not send me much; not even, as 1 thought, to the value of his small salary. By a letter written to him more than twenty years ago, I calculated the whole, in eight months, at ten or twelve short pieces. But, conscious of the deficiency, Southey supplied a most satisfactory quantity, for I believe the small salary went to Mrs. Coleridge. In half a year or thereabouts, Coleridge went to Germany; and Southey continued on the small salary. At this time I do not think Wordsworth sent anything. Coleridge always spoke of him with the highest admiration, as one of the greatest men he had ever known. But, though Coleridge was driven out of Cote House, it appears, by recent publications, he kept up a close intimacy with the Messrs. Wedgewood, particularly with Thomas, a kind, infirm man, who found much pleasure in Coleridge's society. They travelled about the country together, and probably Mr. T. Wedgewood was with Coleridge when he went to preach at Shrewsbury, in 1798; for Coleridge attended not at all to his engagement with me, but went about the country, as it now appears, on other pursuits. During this time I suppose it was, that Thomas Wedgewood settled upon him, by deed, £75 per annum, and that Josiah Wedgewood agreed to allow him the same sum, to enable him to go to Germany. Josiah paid this annuity till Sir James Mackintosh got Coleridge placed on the fund of the Eoyal Society of Literature at £100 per annum. It was represented to George the Fourth that it would be a becoming act of grace to give £1000 per annum to this society, to be distributed among literary men of merit who required pecuniary aid; and, with a spirit becoming a king, he gave that sum annually out of his privy purse. When William came to the throne, his allowances were so pared down, he could not continue this largess; and Coleridge, in his last days, was thrown into embarrassment. Earl Grey offered him two years of the income, as the last payment, which Coleridge refused to accept. He wrote a beautiful letter to Lord Brougham, soliciting his good offices, without success: it should be published. Coleridge could not have had reason to expect that the Whigs would appoint him to any thing new; but it was a hard-hearted act of severity to cut off the bread of such a man, which he had enjoyed for years. There were one or two others on the list fully entitled by their literary services, who were also cut off and thrown into distress; but most of those annuities of £100 had been settled on men less entitled either by their merits or poverty. And yet, by the returns to Parliament, the Whigs have settled annuities, double, treble the amount, on other persons of science and literature. Who could have expected that Godwin would die in a place in the Exchequer?

" In September, 1798, Coleridge went to Germany, and returned about Christmas, 1799. He came to me, and offered to give up his whole time and services to The Morning Post. Whether he made any stipulations about the politics or tone of the Paper, I cannot now say; but it would be unnecessary for him to do so, as these were already to his mind, and it was not likely I would make great changes to please any one, or wholly give the conduct of the Paper out of my own power. I agreed to allow him my largest salary. I took a first floor for him in King Street, Covent Garden, at my tailor's, Howell's, whose wife was a cheerful good housewife, of middle age, who I knew would nurse Coleridge as kindly as if he were her son; and he owned he was comfortably taken care of. My practice was to call on him in the middle of the day, talk over the News, and project a leading paragraph for the next morning. In conversation he would make a brilliant display. This reminds me of a story he often told with glee:—At a dinner party, Sir Richard Phillips, the bookseller, being present, Coleridge held forth with his usual splendour, when Sir Richard, who had been listening with delight, came round behind his chair, and tapping him on the shoulder, said, ' I wish I had you in a garret without a coat to your back.' In something like this state I had Coleridge; but though he would talk over everything so well, I soon found he could not write daily on the occurrences of the day."

The next passage will call to mind many a scene witnessed by the Journalist, when clever people have offered to lend assistance in his labours. Coleridge could write books, but not a Newspaper.

" Having arranged with him the matter of a leading paragraph one day, I went about six o'clock for it; I found him stretched on the sofa groaning with pain. He had not written a word; nor could he write. The subject was one of a temporary, an important, and a pressing nature. I returned to The Morning Post office, wrote it out myself, and then I went to Coleridge, at Howell's, read it over, begged he would correct it, and decorate it a little with some of his graceful touches. When I had done reading, he exclaimed, ' Me correct that? It is as well written as I or any other man could write it.' And so I was obliged to content myself with my own works.

" I did not suppose Coleridge's illness to be of the permanently disabling kind which it proved years afterwards to be; I expected his health to be restored soon, and that I should have an ample supply, on paper, of the brilliant things he said in conversation. I did not complain, or in any way betray impatience or discontent. I took him to the gallery of the House of Commons, in hopes he would assist me in parliamentary reporting, and that a near view of men and things would bring up new topics in his mind. But he never could write a thing that was immediately required of him. The thought of compulsion disarmed him. I could name other able literary men in this unfortunate plight. The only occasions, I recollect, on which this general rule was contradicted, were his observations, as a leading paragraph in The Morning Post, on Lord Grenville's state paper, haughtily rejecting Bonaparte's overtures of peace in January 1800. I remember Coleridge's sneers at his Lordship's using the double phrase, 'the result of experience, and the evidence of facts.'"

Stuart next takes up the assertions relative to Coleridge's attempt to become a parliamentary reporter, and in so doing gives us a glimpse of the gallery in 1800:—

" Mr. Gillman says, Coleridge went very early to the House of Commons, was much pressed in getting in, and obliged to remain so many hours before the debate began, that he was exhausted, fell asleep, and wrote a brilliant speech for Pitt mostly out of his own imagination, he having heard it but by starts when his slumbers were broken. I remember the occurrence perfectly, though I do not recollect all the circumstances. On considering the overtures for peace byBonaparte, in January 1800, Parliament had voted by large majorities to support a continuance of the war; and some time after this, on the 17 th of February, Mr. Pitt moved for half a million to be sent to Germany, to assist our different allies. In two separate speeches, he said, that after the strong votes to support the war, he did not suppose there would be any opposition to this vote of money; and hence, I think, there was no crowd at the gallery, do early hour for seats, as no debate was expected. But Mr. Tierney rose and made a speech in opposition to the vote, to which Mr. Pitt made a powerful, a brilliant, a triumphant reply, quite unexpectedly. Coleridge, who was with me in the gallery, certainly reported a part, if not all of that speech, which was not a very long one. On one occasion, a short-hand writer reporting for me, enfeebled and lowered the style of the speaker, on which Coleridge said it was passing the speech through the ' flatting mills.' If I doubt whether it was not on the occasion of this speech he said so, it is because, to have written the whole of it immediately, was an effort unlike Coleridge's habits. But that he did report all or part, I well remember. It was in that speech that Pitt called Bonaparte the Child and Champion of Jacobinism. Coleridge reported this the Child and Nurse ling of Jacobinism, and it was with difficulty I could prevail on him to adopt my reading. Again, Coleridge reported Pitt to have said, England had ' breasted the tide of Jacobinism.' I recollect objecting that Pitt did not say so, but it passed as Coleridge wished. I knew the speech would be well reported next day in The True Briton by Mr. Clarke, now conductor of The London Gazette, and so it was. I have that speech, and the proceedings of the day, as reported in Debrett's Debates, now before me, and I think no one who reads the two will deny that Mr. Clarke's report is not only the most faithful but the most splendid, and that the story of Mr. Canning's call at The Morning Post office, where the name of the reporter was refused to his inquiries, as if I wished to deprive Coleridge of the merit—the account of the great sensation the report made in the town, and the demand for the Paper—the statement that Canning said, in the office, the report did more credit to the head than the memory of the reporter—is altogether a romance; though not of Mr. Gillman's* creation, I am sure. The two reports are so alike in substance, Mr. Canning never could have said any such thing; and, for my part, I never spoke to Mr. Canning till after I had left The Morning Post.

It could not be to establish a character for Coleridge as an able parliamentary reporter that this fiction has been put forth, but to strengthen his assertion that he wasted the prime and manhood of his intellect in writing for The Morning Post and Courier; the fortunes of which Pajjers, it is said, he made. Of The Courier, anon; and first of The Morning Post. He wrote nothing that I remember, and consequently nothing that is worth remembering in The Morning Post during the first six or eight months of his engagement, except the paragraph on Lord Grenville's state paper already mentioned, and the Character of Pitt. I may add the poem of ' The Devil's Thoughts,' which I think came by post from Dorsetshire. I never knew two pieces of writing, so wholly disconnected with daily occurrences, produce so lively a sensation. Several hundred sheets extra were sold by them, and the Paper was in demand for days and weeks afterwards. Mr. Gillman has republished in his volume the Character of Pitt; and, as a masterly production, the perusal will delight any and every class of men. Coleridge promised a pair of portraits, Pitt and Bonaparte. He gave Pitt; but to this day Bonaparte has not appeared. I could not walk a hundred yards in the streets but I was stopped by inquiries, ' when shall we have Bonaparte?' One of the most eager of these inquirers, daily, was Dr. Moore (Zelucco); and, for ten or twelve years afterwards, whenever Coleridge required a favour from me, he promised Bonaparte, though then it would have been for The Courier, as I sold and finally left The Morning Post in August, 1803. I did not conceal who was the author of the Character of Pitt; I told it everywhere, though it seems I refused to disclose who reported Pitt's speech, a much humbler effort of literary composition."

Stuart does not hesitate to give various letters from Coleridge, in which various matters relative to the poet's private affairs are somewhat abruptly exhibited, the object being to show how difficult it was to get "copy" from him, and how impossible it was that Mr. Stuart owed any obligation to Mr. Coleridge. On this point the public are to judge; and perhaps the truth would be found to be, that Coleridge claims too much merit, whilst Stuart accords too little. Stuart sold The Morning Post in 1803, when it was enjoying a circulation of 4,500; the highest point it attained whilst in his hands, no other Paper at that time selling more than 3,000.

In one of Coleridge's letters to Stuart, we find the name of another contributor to The Morning Post. The date of the epistle is believed to be about 1800, and it runs as follows:—

DEAR STUART,—I am very unwell; if you are pressed for the paragraph, to-day, I will write it, but I cannot come out. If it will do as well to-morrow, so much the better, for in truth my head is shockingly giddy. If you want matter, Lamb has got plenty of ' my great aunt's manuscriptI would advise you, by all means, to make it an article in The Morning Post. Please send me the (the wafer defaces this).

Yours very sincerely,

S. T. COLERIDGE.

P. S. I will send you by Lamb, this evening, three or four paragraphs of seven or eight lines each.

Charles Lamb has left us an account of what was meant by "paragraphs of seven or eight lines each," in his pleasant recollections of "Newspapers thirty-live years ago:—

" Dan Stuart once told us, that he did not remember that he ever deliberately walked into the Exhibition at Somerset House in his life. He might occasionally have escorted a party of ladies across the way that were going in; but he never went in of his own head. Yet the office of the Morning Post Newspaper stood then just where it does now—we are carrying you back, reader, some thirty years or more—with its gilt-globe-topt front facing that emporium of our artist's grand Annual Exposure. We sometimes wish that we had observed the same abstinence with Daniel.

" A word or two of D. S. He ever appeared to us one of the finest tempered of editors. Perry, of The Morning Chronicle, was equally pleasant, with a dash, no slight one either, of the courtier. S. was frank, plain, and English all over. We have worked for both these gentlemen.

" It is soothing to contemplate the head of the Ganges; to trace the first little bubblings of a mighty river—

With holy reverence to approach the rocks,
Whence glide the streams renowned in ancient song.

" Fired with a perusal of the Abyssinian Pilgrim's exploratory rambles after the cradle of the infant Nilus, we well remember on one fine summer holydav (a ' whole day's leave ' we called it at Christ's Hospital) sallying forth at rise of sun, not very well provisioned either for such an undertaking, to trace the current of the New Paver—Middletonian stream!—to its scaturient source, as we had read, in meadows by fair Amwell. Gallantly did we commence our solitary quest—for it was essential to the dignity of a Discovery, that no eye of schoolboy, save our own, should beam on the detection. By flowery spots, and verdant lanes skirting Hornsey, Hope trained us on in many a baffling turn; endless, hopeless meanders, as it seemed; or as if the jealous waters had dodged us, reluctant to have the humble spot of their nativity revealed; till spent, and nigh famished, before set of the same sun, we sate down somewhere by Bowe's Farm, near Tottenham, with a tithe of our proposed labours only yet accomplished; sorely convinced in spirit, that that Brucian enterprise was as yet too arduous for our young shoulders.

"Not more refreshing to the thirsty curiosity of the traveller is the tracing of some mighty waters up to their shallow fontlet, than it is to a pleased and candid reader to go back to the inexperienced essays, the first callow flights in authorship, of some established name in literature; from the Gnat which preluded to the Æneid, to the Duck which Samuel Johnson trod on.

" In those days every Morning Paper, as an essential retainer to its establishment, kept an author, who was bound to furnish daily a quantum of witty paragraphs. Sixpence a joke—and it was thought pretty high too—was Dan Stuart's settled remuneration in these cases. The chat of the day, scandal, but, above all, dress, furnished the material. The length of no paragraph was to exceed seven lines. Shorter they might be, but they must be poignant.

" A fashion of flesh, or rather pink-coloured hose for the ladies, luckily coming up at the juncture when we were on our probation for the place of Chief Jester to S.'s Paper, established our reputation in that line. We were pronounced a ' capital hand.' O the conceits which we varied upon red in all its prismatic differences! from the trite and obvious flower of Cytherea, to the flaming costume of the lady that has her sitting upon ' many waters.' Then there was the collateral topic of ankles. What an occasion to a truly chaste writer, like ourself, of touching that nice brink, and yet never tumbling over it, of a seemingly ever approximating something ' not quite proper;' while, like a skilful posture-master, balancing betwixt decorums and their opposites, he keeps the line, from which a hair's breadth deviation is destruction; hovering in the confines of light and darkness, or where ' both seem either;' a hazy uncertain delicacy; Autolycus-like in the play, still putting off his expectant auditory with ' Whoop, do me no harm, good man!' But, above all, that conceit arrided us most at that time, and still tickles our midriff to remember, where, allusively to the flight of Astreea—ultima Cœlestum terras reliquit—we pronounced—in reference to the stockings still — that "Modesty, taking her final leave of mortals, her last Blush was visible in her ascent to the Heavens by the tract of the glowing instep." This might be called the crowning conceit; and was esteemed tolerable writing in those days.

" But the fashion of jokes, -with all other things, passes away; as did the transient mode which had so favoured us. The ankles of our fair friends in a few weeks began to reassume their whiteness, and left us scarce a leg to stand upon. Other female whims followed, but none methought so pregnant, so invitatory of shrewd conceits, and more than single meanings.

" Somebody has said, that to swallow six cross-buns daily, consecutively for a fortnight, would surfeit the stoutest digestion. But to have to furnish as many jokes daily, and that not for a fortnight, but for a long twelvemonth, as we were constrained to do, was a little harder exaction. ' Man goeth forth to his work until the evening'—from a reasonable hour in the morning, we presume it was meant. Now, as our main occupation took us up from eight till five every day in the City, and as our evening hours, at that time of life, had generally to do with anything rather than business, it follows, that the only time we could spare for this manufactory of jokes—our supplementary livelihood, that supjilied us in every want beyond mere bread and cheese—was exactly that part of the day which (as we have heard of No Man's Land) may be fitly denominated No Man's Time; that is, no time in which a man ought to be up and awake in. To speak more plainly, it is that time of an hour, or an hour and a half's duration, in which a man whose occasions call him up so preposterously, has to wait for his breakfast.

" O those headaches at dawn of day, when at live or half-past five in summer, and not much later in the dark seasons, we were compelled to rise, having been perhaps not above four hours in bed—(for we were not go-to-beds with the lamb, though we anticipated the lark oft-times in her rising—we like a parting cup at midnight, as all young men did before these effeminate times, and to have our friends about us—we were not constellated under Aquarius, that watery sign, and therefore incapable of Bacchus, cold, washy, bloodless — we were none of your Basilian water-sponges, nor had taken our degrees at Mount Ague—we were right toping Capulets, jolly companions, we and they). But to have to get up, as we said before, curtailed of half our fair sleep, fasting, with only a dim vista of refreshing bohea in the distance; to be necessitated to rouse ourselves at the detestible rap of an old hag of a domestic, who seemed to take a diabolical pleasure in her announcement that it was ' time to rise and whose chappy knuckles we have often yearned to amputate, and string them up at our chamber door, to be a terror to all such unseasonable rest-breakers in future.

"' Facil' and sweet, as Virgil sings, had been the 'descending' of the over-night, balmy the first sinking of the heavy head upon the pillow; but to get up, as he goes on to say,

—revocare gradus, superasque evadere ad auras—

and to get up, moreover to make jokes with malice prepended—there was the 'labour,' there the 'work.'

"No Egyptian taskmaster ever devised a slavery like to that, our slavery. No fractious operants ever turned out for half the tyranny which this necessity exercised upon us. Half a dozen jests in a day (hating Sundays too), why, it seems nothing! We make twice the number every day in our lives as a matter of course, and claim no Sabbatical exemptions. But tben they come into our head. But when the head has to go out to them—when the mountain must go to Mahomet—

"Reader, try it for once, only for one short twelvemonth.

" It was not every week that a fashion of pink stockings came up; but mostly, instead of it, some rugged, untractable subject; some topic impossible to be contorted into the risible; some feature, upon which no smile could play; some flint, from which no process of ingenuity could procure a scintillation. There they lay; there your appointed tale of brick-making was set before you, which you must finish with or without straw, as it happened. The craving dragon—the Public—like him in Bel's temple—must be fed; it expected its daily rations; and Daniel, and ourselves, to do us justice, did the best we could on this side bursting him.

" While we were ringing out coy sprightlinesses for The Post, and writhing under the toil of what is called ' easy writing,' Bob Allen, our quondam schoolfellow, was tapping his impracticable brains in a like service for The Oracle. Not that Robert troubled himself much about wit. If his paragraphs had a sprightly air about them, it was sufficient. He carried this nonchalance so far at last, that a matter of intelligence, and that no very important one, was not seldom palmed upon his employers for a good jest; for example sake—' Walking yesterday morning casually down Snow Hill, who should we meet but Mr. Deputy Humphreys! we rejoice to add, that the worthy Deputy appeared to enjoy a good state of health. We do not ever remember to have seen him look better.' This gentleman so surprisingly met upon Snow Hill, from some peculiarities in gait or gesture, was a constant butt for mirth to the small paragraph-mongers of the day; and our friend thought that he might have his fling at him with the rest. We met A. in Holborn shortly after this extraordinary rencounter, which he told with tears of satisfaction in his eyes, and chuckling at the anticipated effects of its announcement next day in the Paper. We did not quite comprehend where the wit of it lay at the time; nor was it easy to be detected, when the thing came out advantaged by type and letter-press. He had better have met anything that morning than a Common Council Man. His services were shortly after dispensed with, on the plea that his paragraphs of late had been deficient in point. The one in question, it must be owned, had an air, in the opening especially, proper to awaken curiosity; and the sentiment, or moral, wears the aspect of humanity and good neighbourly feeling. But somehow the conclusion was not judged altogether to answer to the magnificent promise of the premises. We traced our friend's pen afterwards in The True Briton, The Star, The Traveller—from all which he was successively dismissed, the Proprietors having ' no further occasion for his services.' Nothing was easier than to detect him. When wit failed, or topics ran low, there constantly appeared the following—" It is not generally known that the three Slue Balls at the pawnbrokers' shops are the ancient arms of Lombardy. The Lombards were the first money-brokers in Europe." Bob has done more to set the public right on this important point of blazonry, than the whole College of Heralds.

" The appointment of a regular wit has long ceased to be a part of the economy of a Morning Paper. Editors find their own jokes, or do as well without them. Parson Este, and Topham, brought up the set custom of ' witty paragraphs' first in The World. Boaden was a reigning paragraphist in his day, and succeeded poor Allen in The Oracle. But, as we said, the fashion of jokes passes away; and it would be difficult to discover in the biographer of Mrs. Siddons, any traces of that vivacity and fancy which charmed the whole town at the commencement of the present century. Even the prelusive delicacies of the present writer — the curt ' Astrsean allusion' —would be thought pedantic and out of date, in these days.

" From the office of The Morning Post (for we may as well exhaust our Newspaper Keminiscences at once) by change of property in the Paper, we were transferred, mortifying exchange! to the office of The Albion Newspaper, late Rackstrow's Museum, in Fleet Street. What a transition—from a handsome apartment, from rosewood desks, and silver inkstands, to an office—no office, but a den rather, but just redeemed from the occupation "of dead monsters, of which it seemed redolent—from the centre of loyalty and fashion, to a focus of vulgarity and sedition! Here in murky closet, inadequate from its square contents to the receipt of the two bodies of Editor and humble paragraph maker, together at one time, sat in the discharge of his new editorial functions (the " Bigod' of Elia) the redoubted John Fenwick.

" F., without a guinea in his pocket, and having left not many in the pockets of his friends whom he might command, had purchased (on tick doubtless) the whole and sole editorship, proprietorship, with all the rights and titles (such as they were worth) of the Albion, from one Lovell; of whom we know nothing, save that he had stood in the pillory for a libel on the Prince of Wales. With this hopeless concern—for it had been sinking ever since its commencement, and could now reckon upon not more than a hundred subscribers—F. resolutely determined upon pulling down the Government in the first instance, and making both our fortunes by way of corollary. For seven weeks and more did this infatuated democrat go about borrowing seven-shilling pieces, and lesser coin, to meet the daily demands of the Stamp-office, which allowed no credit to publications of that side in politics. An outcast from politer bread, we attached our small talents to the forlorn fortunes of our friend. Our occupation now was to write treason.

" Recollections of feelings—which were all that now remained from our first boyish heats kindled by the French Revolution, when, if we were misled, we erred in the company of some who are accounted very good men now—rather than any tendency at this time to republican doctrines—assisted us in assuming a style of writing, while the Paper lasted, consonant in no very under tone—to the right earnest fanaticism of F. Our cue was now to insinuate, rather than recommend, possible abdications. Blocks, axes, Whitehall tribunals, were covered with flowers of so cunning a periphrasis—as Mr. Bayes says, never naming the thing directly—that the keen eye of an Attorney General was insufficient to detect the lurking snake among them. There were times, indeed, when we sighed for our more gentleman-like occupation under Stuart. But with change of masters it is ever change of service. Already one paragraph, and another, as we learned afterwards from a gentleman at the Treasury, had begun to be marked at that office, with a view of its being submitted at least to the attention of the proper Law Officers—when an unlucky, or rather lucky epigram from our pen, aimed at Sir J s M h, who was on the eve of departing for India to reap the fruits of his apostacy, as F. pronounced it, (it is hardly worth particularizing,) happening to offend the nice sense of Lord, or, as he then delighted to be called, Citizen Stanhope, deprived F. at once of the last hopes of a guinea from the last patron that had stuck by us; and breaking up our establishment, left us to the safe, but somewhat mortifying, neglect of the Crown lawyers. It was about this time, or a little earlier, that Dan Stuart made that curious confession to us, that he had ' never deliberately walked into an exhibition at Somerset House in his life.'"

Amongst the minor literary labourers engaged on this Paper, was Mr. John Vint, who, for some time acted as sub-editor of The Morning Post, a duty he had also fulfilled on The Courier. He subsequently edited the Manchester Mercury, and finally settled down as conductor of a Newspaper in the Isle of Man, where he died in 1814.

The parson Este spoken of by Charles Lamb, was the Rev. Charles Este, for many years one of the readers at the Chapel Royal, Whitehall. He was connected with two or three Newspapers, and amongst them were The Morning Post and World. The latter he edited in conjunction with Captain Topham. Este published a work under the title of " My Life;" and also a Journey through Flanders, Brabant, Germany, and Switzerland.

Stuart tells us that he sold The Post in 1803, and since that time it appears to have had several proprietors and editors, and to have become the representative of aristocratic politics. In the days of Mackintosh, and Coleridge, and Charles Lamb, it was a liberal opposition Paper, and as such was abused by Canning, who talks of

Couriers and Stars, seditious Evening Posts,
Ye morning Chronicles, and Morning Posts;
Whether you make the rights of man your theme,
Your country libel, or your God blaspheme.

Byron was fond also of having a fling at Coleridge and The Morning Post, as every reader of his verses and his notes will remember.*

In the New Monthly Magazine* we find a strange story told. John Taylor, who was connected with several Newspapers, and who was at one time editor of the Journal here spoken of, relates the anecdote as showing the method of silencing a Newspaper in the time of a late royal personage. It had been stated in a paragraph in The Morning Post, that a lady (Mrs. Fitzherbert) in great favour in high quarters, had demanded a peerage, and £0,000 a-year to suppress certain facts. " Permanently to silence such ill-timed paragraphs, Taylor was requested by a confidential servant of the ' high personage' to inquire whether the person who farmed the Paper, and who was also part proprietor, would dispose of his share, and also of the term for which he was authorized to conduct it." " The party in question," writes Taylor, " struck while the iron was hot, received a large sum for his share of the Paper, another for the time he was to hold a control over it, and an annuity for life. The Morning Post was purchased for the allotted period, and I was vested with the editorship."

Amongst the notable names connected with the Morning Post we find that of James Stephen, who was for a time a reporter on that Paper. Stephen was a native of the West Indies. He entered as a student of Lincoln's Inn, but being in narrow circumstances, and having little practice, he acted as reporter to The Morning Post until he got an appointment in the Admiralty Court of St. Christopher's. During his residence there he acquired a handsome fortune. He was related by marriage to Mr. Wilberforce, and on his return to England obtained a seat in Parliament, whicli he held until he obtained legal advancement. Whilst in Parliament he was a strong supporter of the ministry, and his pen was frequently employed in their defence.* In 1816 he obtained the appointment of a mastership in Chancery, and that in opposition to a rule the Chancellor had laid down, to make no one master who had not been a barrister of that court. Stephen appeared to great advantage when it was proposed by the benchers of Lincoln's Inn to exclude from the bar all persons connected with Newspapers. When this question was being debated, Stephens candidly confessed that he had in his youth been glad of the assistance afforded to him by engagements on the public Journals.

Mr. Eugenius Eoclie, the projector and editor of Literary Recreations, a magazine to which Byron contributed in 1807, was subsequently one of the editors of The Morning Post; and from the introduction to a volume of poems by Roche, published after his death, we glean the following particulars of his Newspaper career:—

"In the beginning of the year 1809, Roche became connected with a Newspaper called The Day, first as a parliamentary reporter, and subsequently as editor. His prospects were soon overcast. Politics ran high, and the disturbances which occurred in 1810, when Sir Francis Burdett was committed to the Tower by order of the House of Commons, gave rise to angry comment in the Newspapers of that time. The soldiers, called ont to restrain the turbulence of the populace, were said to have misconducted themselves, and some very severe animadversions on the subject appeared in The Day. These were prosecuted by the Government, and the editor, printer, and publisher, were severally convicted of libel, and sentenced each to a year's imprisonment, the two latter in Newgate, the first in the King's Bench Prison."

After suffering imprisonment for an article which it appears he never saw till it appeared in print, and losing much labour and money upon an unsuccessful Journal called The National Register, Roche obtained, in 1813, an engagement on The Morning Post, and shortly afterwards became one of its editors, retaining the post for fourteen years; when, in 1827, he left this Paper to take the editorship of The New Times, formerly The Day, and afterwards metamorphosed into The Morning Journal.

Mackworth Praed was for a time the editor of The Morning Post, but his early years of promise were closed by a premature death. He wanted the sturdy frame of his contemporary Macaulay, and fell prematurely under the weight of literary and political conflict.

THE MORNING HERALD arose, as we have seen, in consequence of a disagreement among the conductors of The Morning Post—the Rev. Mr. Bate seceding from that Paper, and starting an opposition Journal, under the title of " The Morning Herald and Daily Advertiser;" No. 1 being dated Wednesday, November 1, 1780. In the Paper of that date, the editor published the following address:—

Nov. 1, 1780.

TO THE PUBLIC.—It can require but little apology for introducing a political publication to the 'world, that is meant to be conducted upon liberal principles. If The Morning Herald does not owe its general complexion to such principles, it cannot be entitled to public support. The editor flatters himself it will appear early in the course of his arduous undertaking that he has been attentive to every arrangement from -whence his readers could derive information or entertainment. His power now being equal to the suppression of obscene trash and low invective, he trusts such articles will never stray from their natural channel to defile a single column of The Morning Herald! To whatever system of politics he may individually be inclined, no prejudices arising from thence shall induce him to sacrifice at any time the sensible and dispassionate correspondence of either party. Never wishing to conceal a syllable of his own writing, he flatters himself that an open avowal of such, and holding himself accountable for it on every occasion, will prove all that can reasonably be required of him;—yet, should any individual find himself really injured, either by the accidental oversight of the printer, or the concealed arrow of an anonymous detractor—he trusts a temperate application for redress will never be made in vain!

Having thus candidly pledged himself to the world, he boldly lays The Morning Herald before them, convinced that a due observance of these declarations cannot fail to secure it the honourable and lasting patronage of the Public!

The new Paper gained considerable success, although it had at first to encounter the difficulties that usually assail such undertakings. Bate, though a clergyman, entered on secular disputes, and his Paper felt the weight of more than one verdict. In 1781, when the new Journal was barely a year old, it suffered in company with several of its contemporaries who had printed an offensive paragraph. Thus the printer of The London Courant was sentenced to stand in the pillory for an hour, to be imprisoned for a year, and to pay a line of £100: the printer of The Noon Gazette, who had copied the paragraph, was fined £50, and ordered to be imprisoned for a year; and as he had put in another paragraph, justifying his conduct in reference to the first statement, he was further sentenced to an additional six months' imprisonment, and to stand in the pillory: the publisher of The Morning Herald came in also for a year's imprisonment, and a £100 fine; whilst the printer of The Gazetteer (being a woman) escaped the pillory, but was mulcted in £50, and laid six months in gaol,—all these sentences being inflicted for a " libel on the Russian ambassador."

A few years later, Mr. Perryinan, of The Morning Herald, was convicted of publishing a libel on the House of Commons respecting the trial of Warren Hastings. In 1809, another legal blow was struck at the Paper; the Earl of Leicester obtaining a verdict against it for libel, with no less than £1,000 damages. The Herald was for a long time the organ of the Prince of Wales's party; and its editor, whilst thus engaged in politics and journalism, became also rather notorious as a " man of the world," after the fashion of those days. Though a clergyman, he did not hesitate to engage in three duels. " In justice to him," urges the chronicler of these encounters, " it must be observed that, in one of these instances, his having afforded protection to a female from the insults of a ruffian, was the cause of his being called into the field."*

The Gentleman's Magazinef preserves some particulars of one of Bate's earlier personal contests, in which a lady was concerned:—"January 13, 1777, a rencontre happened at the Adelphi tavern in the Strand, between Captain Stoney and Mr. Bate, editor of The Morning Post. The cause of quarrel arose from some offensive paragraphs that had appeared in The Morning Post, highly reflecting on the character of a lady for whom Captain Stoney had a particular regard. Mr. Bate had taken every possible method, consistent with honour, to convince Mr. Stoney that the insertion of the paragraphs was wholly without his knowledge, to which Mr. Stoney gave no credit, and insisted on the satisfaction of a gentleman or the discovery of the author. This happened some days before, but meeting as it were by accident on the day here mentioned, they adjourned to the Adelphi, called for a room, shut the door, and being furnished with pistols, discharged them at each other without effect. They then drew swords, and Mr. Stoney received a wound in the breast and arm, and Mr. Bate one in the thigh. Mr. Bate's sword bent and slanted against the Captain's breastbone, which Mr. Bate apprising him of, Captain Stoney called to him to straighten it—and in the interim, while the sword was under his foot for that purpose, the door was broken open, or the death of one of the parties would most certainly have been the issue. On the Saturday following, Captain Stoney was married to the lady in whose behalf he had thus hazarded his life." Editors then had to maintain the point of a paragraph with the point of the sword.

Bate assumed the name of Dudley, in compliance with the will of a friend who left him an estate. In 1781 the advowson of Bradwell-juxta-mare in Essex was bought in trust for him, subject to the life of the incumbent. Here, it is said, he laid out nearly twenty-eight thousand pounds in restoring the church, rebuilding the school and parsonage houses, and draining the glebe lands. When the incumbent died, the Bishop of London refused to induct Bate Dudley, and a legal contest took place which ended in a compromise. It is said,* that from the day 011 which Bate Dudley was deprived of Bradwell, up to the day on which he was collated to the rectory of Kilcoran, seven years had elapsed, and his loss of property during that interval, including his disbursements for improvements, amounted to £50,820.

The subject of the severe treatment to which Bate Dudlev had been subjected, was brought forward in a debate 'which had for its subject the residence of the clergy,* when " Mr. Sheridan," in a strain of overpowering eloquence, " addressed the House of Commons on the severe measures which had been directed against Mr. Dudley, and he conclusively commented on the proceedings as entirely at variance with that mild spirit which was the characteristic of the English Church." The Prince Regent and the Duke of Clarence appear to have taken great interest in his welfare, and hence his subsequent good fortune. In 1805, Bate Dudley was made chancellor of the diocese of Ferns, with the valuable rectory of Kilcoran attached, and in 1812 he obtained a baronetcy. The new baronet did not exhaust his valorous propensities simply by displaying somewhat doubtful acts of courage in single combat; as a county magistrate, assisted by a troop of yeomanry, a small number of dragoons and militia, he defeated a body of insurgents at Littleport, near Ely, on the 24th May, 1816, and secured several of the party with his own hands. The conflict while it lasted was sharply contested, the rioters firing upon the troops and magistrates from barricaded houses near the river. For this gallant service he was complimented by the grand jury, and received a vote of thanks from the magistrates and Lord Lieutenant of the county, and was presented with a beautiful silver vase, modelled after a highly enriched antique brought from Home by Sir W. Hamilton.* Hedied in 1824 at Cheltenham. He was the author of works on the Poor Laws and on Tythes; and of the following dramatic publications—Henry and Emma, an interlude, 1774; The Rival Candidates, a comic opera, 1775; The Blackamoor Washed White, a comic opera, 1776; The .Flitch of Bacon, a comic opera, 1179; Dramatic Puffers, a prelude, 1782; The Magic Picture, 1783; The Woodman, a comic opera, 1791; Travellers in Switzerland, a comic opera, 1794. He also contributed to the Probationary Odes, and the Rolliad, and was likewise the author of a satirical work entitled, Yortigern and Bowena.f

Once the Blackamoor Washed White was being played, at a time when party spirit ran very high, and the audience differed so completely, that "a contest took place with drawn swords upon the stage itself;"—a fine illustration of the manners and customs of the English in those days.‡

Bate Dudley made The Herald|| successful, and sold it for a considerable sum. Mr. Thwaites, who was connected with a wealthy Lancashire manufacturing family, afterwards became the manager of the Paper, and under his direction, great efforts were made, and great expenses incurred, in the race for priority of intelligence.

Gœde,* a German, whose work on England was translated and published in London in 1821, says, when speaking of the English Newspapers:—" These journalists are no famished authors, who pawn their civil honour for a piece of gold. Most of them are possessed of considerable property, no less a capital than £18,000 being required in order to bring a Newspaper into circulation; and their revenues, therefore, often exceed those of a minister of state. The yearly income of the proprietor of The Morning Herald, exceeds, as I am well assured, the sum of £8,000; and the clear profits of The Star, I have been informed by one of its co-owners, amounts to about three-fourths of that sum. The property of a Paper, however, is sometimes vested in fifty different persons, who have advanced the capital requisite for this undertaking, divide the annual profits among themselves, and from their joint stock deduct a certain stipend to the writer of the Paper, who is generally a respectable author. But it may easily he conceived that they proceed with great caution in appointing any one to this office, and that they keep a strict and jealous eye over all his motions. Such a writer is under the immediate inspection of the public, of the proprietors, of the opposite party, and of his brother editors, who eagerly detect his failings, and are his professional rivals. They live, indeed, in a perpetual warfare with each other: all the artifices usual with authors, are devised and put in practice amongst them; and their mutual jealousies sometimes give birth to scenes of an extraordinary nature."

THE TIMES is still in the hands of the family of its founder, and in this respect stands alone amongst the Morning Papers. It was commenced by John Walter, of Printing House Square, and its first number (as we have already seen) was published on the first of January, 1788, and was a continuation of The Daily Universal Register, of which 939 numbers had previously appeared. Both The Times and its forerunner are described in the heading as being " printed Logographically." This strange-looking term was applied to a patent which Walter had obtained, for casting in metal whole words, instead of single letters in the usual mode, these words being placed side by side by the working printer, instead of leaving him to compose with single letters. In short, Walter used stereotyped words, and parts of words, instead of separate metal letters. This new mode is described in a pamphlet,* printed by this process, and published in 1783 by a compositor named H. Johnson, one of its inventors. Walter, who is spoken of as " part contriver of this new method," patented it, and then went to work to bring the plan into use. He evidently worked with great energy and perseverance, and like all projectors was sanguine of success. The advantages expected to be gained by the logographic mode were, that the orthographical errors would be far less than by ordinary jointing; indeed, that they must be almost impossible in the majority of cases; that less time and labour would be required; and, consequently, that printing would be cheaper. But practical difficulties arose, and many jokes were made at the expense of the new plan. It was said that the orders to the type-founder ran after this fashion:—" Send me a hundred weight, made up in separate pounds, of heat, cold, icet, dry, murder, fire, dreadful robbery, atrocious outrage, fearful calamity, and alarming explosion!' Another hundred would be made up of honourable gentlemen, loud cheers, gracious majesty, interesting female, and so on. But neither jokes nor difficulties were regarded by Walter. He brought out, on the first of January, 1785, The Dailv Universal Register, printed in the new manner. This had four pages, had a halfpenny stamp, and was sold for twopence-halfpenny; and in it Mr. Walter issued a long address to the public, on introducing his new Paper to their notice, and, in an advertisement, returns thanks for the patronage bestowed on his "new improvements in printing." It would seem also that the founder of The Times cultivated the acquaintance of literary aspirants, for this first number of his new Paper refers to a Literary Society, established for the purpose of publishing works which their authors found it difficult to bring before the public. The first number of The Daily Register displays no less than fifty seven advertisements; some of them, however, relating to books, and other speculations of its projector, who was evidently a man of active and energetic mind. In No. 510* we find the following notice of the logograpliic art, from the pen of its promoter himself. It may be called a passage from the autobiography of the founder of The Times:—

TO THE PUBLIC.—The indispensable duty I owe to the public, and gratitude to those noble and generous persons from whom I have received encouragement, call upon me to lay before them the improvements I have accomplished in printing, by the introduction of logographic types, formed out of letters cemented into syllables and words, and substituted instead of single letters.

The history of arts and sciences evince, that every invention, however rational in appearance, laudable in motive, or useful in its end, becomes obnoxious to a variety of impediments, from the prejudice of custom, the envy of the dull, and the avarice of interested individuals. Such impediments I have experienced; but they have stimulated, not damped my endeavours: philosophy, like religion, has always flourished under persecution; and, as the established truth of an existing Deity, and the axioms of science have been denied by the disciples of impiety, and the slaves to superstition, it is no wonder that arts should suffer from the dogmatical opposition of folly and dulness.

My enemies have not only openly attacked my plan, hut have insidiously attempted to undermine it; hut, it being founded on a firm basis, I have stood the test unshaken, while my assailants have been defeated with an exposition of their ignorance, malevolence, and envy.

The end I proposed has been held forth as impracticable; the means I have adopted for its perfection has been described to be the ebullition of an enthusiastic speculator; but I am now able to contradict both. I have the power to convince the world that my ideas were not visionary, but founded on reason; for the justness of my theory is fully proved by practice.

Ignorance and malice, however, have not totally failed in their intent; they have not only produced many obstacles, but have been a means of considerably encreasing my expenses, which have by far exceeded my original calculations; but a persevering and sedulous attention has supported me, and the logographic press is now in a state of improvement that insures the ultimate object of public benefit.

Embarked in a business, into which I entered a mere novice, consisting of several departments, want of experience laid me open to many and gross impositions, and I have been severely injured by the inattention, neglect, and ignorance of others. These reasons, though they will not excuse, will palliate and account for the errors which have appeared in several of the books published at the first working of the logographic press; for, in fact, these errors were not owing to any defect in the art of printing logographically, but to the readers and editors, whose duty is was to correct the proof sheets. Complaints, however, will now subside, the cause having been removed, and every branch of the business being at present superintended by men on whose skill, industry, and integrity I can implicitly rely. I shall lay my plan before the public in The Universal Register of to-morrow. JOHN WALTER.

On red letter days, the title of The Daily Register was printed with red ink, and the character of the day stated under the date line. The publication of Friday, the 11th August, 1786, No. 511, is a specimen. It has a red heading; and, underneath the date, the words, " Princess of Brunswick born. Holiday at the Stamp and Excise Offices, and the Exchequer." In this number is published the promised Letter II.

In the first letter which I took the liberty of submitting to the public, I slightly touched upon the opposition given to the logographic press, by individuals, and I shall now point out several of the impediments and difficulties which I had to encounter in the arrangement and regulation of the system.

The whole English language lay before me in a confused arrangement; it consisted of above 90,000 words. This multitudinous mass I reduced to about 5,000, by separating the particles, and removing the obsolete words, technical terms, and common terminations.

Considering, and being advised, that this reduction and arrangement was sufficiently simple for a first experiment, I had cases formed for different-sized founts, and printed the English Dictionary, on that plan; but, after severe labour, unremitting attention, and a heavy expense to compositors, whom I was obliged to pay by the week, instead of by the quantity printed, I discovered many serious objections to this essay, particularly that a great number of the words distributed through the founts were useless, being seldom called for in printing, that, by the rejection of them, the founts might be lessened, and the cells for the types increased in space, the narrowness of which was found extremely inconvenient.

In consequence of these observations, I resolved to alter the whole system, after having incurred a considerable loss, as the cases became useless, and it was necessary to separate again most of the cemented letters from the types of the rejected words, which is done with much ease, and obviates a principal objection thrown out by the trade, that if a single letter was battered, it destroyed the whole word.

The cases upon which I made my first experiments, were eight in number—their dimensions, six feet and a-half, by four feet and a-half. I afterwards reduced them to six cases, and have now brought the fount in four cases, by reducing the number of words, though I have enlarged the cells so far as to answer every purpose of convenience, and facilitate the work of the compositor. In one of those cases is deposited the common Roman letter, and it is surrounded by the common particles. A second contains the capitals, and common terminations, with a part of the alphabet in words, the remainder of which, are contained in the third and fourth cases.

The first general arrangement was so far conducive to the end of perfection proposed, that every simple word and root of the language might be joined with facility to the termination required to form the necessary compound, and would answer, with very little variation, not only for English, but for the Latin and French languages (accents excepted), which, to a speculative mind, would have been a fund of amusement. This acquisition, though short of expectation, inspired encouragement, it expanded hope, and opened a prospect of honour and profit, though shorter of expectatiou, than my expectation had led me to believe; but the disappointments I have experienced, and which, in my next letter, I shall explain more fully, has protracted the progress of my endeavours, though they could not sufficiently arrest them, and I am now enabled to assure those patrons, from whom I received encouragement, that I have so far improved the art of printing, as not to retain a doubt of fulfilling my wishes in a very short time.

JOHN WALTER.

In the number for 12th August, 1786, we have another display of red ink, it being the birthday of the Prince of Wales; and also—a subject of more interest to us—Walter's third letter:—

The use of the logographic press may be divided into two heads—saving of time, and saving of labour.

The opposition I have met with could have originated but in two motives, envy and avarice; but I have the satisfaction to say, that those who have acted against me, under the influence of either, have been disappointed. The first printer in the country pronounced my plan impracticable; the critical reviewers attempted to turn it into ridicule; but the prophecy of the one has failed, and the ridicule of the others I could now retort upon themselves. Mr. Caslon (the founder), whom I at first employed to cast my types, calumniated my plan—he censured what he did not understand, wantonly disappointed me in the work he engaged to execute, and would meanly have sacrificed me to establish the fallacious opinion he had promulgated. How contrary this mercenary conduct to the liberality of Mr. Jackson, who, comprehending the utility of the plan, exerted his acknowledged abilities in its promotion. Thus attacked and traduced on all sides, and by every branch of the trade, I resolved to cement the materials myself, and, for that purpose, erected a foundry adjoining my printing-house, where I have, with much success, carried on that business, and from which I am able to supply any gentleman with logographic types, who may have reasons for executing any work of secrecy or amusement, as the types of the words are so easily used in preference to single letters, and, consequently, the knowledge of printing may be acquired with facility. The experiment already made by a nobleman of the first rank and abilities, both in station and knowledge, fully evinces the truth of what is asserted.

I had scarcely extricated myself from the trouble of one opponent, when another arose. Mr. Caslon was succeeded in the generous service of opposing my plan, by one Bell, who has the modesty to style himself a representative of Apollo. Having a pecuniary dispute with this man, respecting a catchpenny publication which I printed, he attacked the logographic press, through the dull medium of The Morning Post, of which he was then a proprietor; but the Court of King's Bench determined his demands upon me, and a Court of Conscience decided my claims against him, for I recovered in the Court of Conscience, and he lost his suit in the Court of King's Bench.

These disappointed champions have had many successors, who have been equally unfortunate in their attacks.

Thus, through a series of difficulties, naturally arising from the pursuit of a new undertaking, and a succession of impediments artfully raised against me, I have nearly brought to perfection, an undertaking which has long been an object of contemplation among the greatest men, and the most eminent modern philosophers. Whatever I have already suffered in the execution of a plan so liberal and useful, my country must ultimately reap honour and profit, as it lies open to the inspection of all mankind;* and, on the expiration of my patent, will become common property. I still, however, confide in the generosity of my country, and trust, that a native, who has dedicated the fragments of a fortune, wrecked in the service of his fellow-subjects, and his time and labour in the pursuit of an art salutary to the public at large, will not suffer the crash of disappointment in the very moment he arrives at the goal, where he has long expected reward to crown his toil.

I beg leave now to lay before the public a catalogue of the books (among a variety of other publications) printed at the logographic press, and also a list of those who are subscribers to a series of works printing at the logographic press by subscription.

JOHN WALTER.

To this letter is appended a catalogue of books published at the logographic press, and a list of subscribers.

The first number of The Times is not so large as the sheets of The Morning Herald and Morning Chronicle of the same date, hut is larger than The London Chronicle, and of the same dimensions and appearance as The Public Advertiser; which, however, it surpassed in the number of its advertisements.*

* Any gentlemen who chooses may inspect the logographic founts and types, at the printing-office, or at the British Museum, to which place, a fount has been ordered to be removed from the Queen's Palace. Here is the original prospectus of the Paper, which exjilains the reasons why the title had been changed from The Daily Universal Register to The Times. The italics and capital letters are given exactly as in the original:

THE TIMES.

Why change the head?

This question will naturally come from the Public—and we, the Times, being the Public's most humble and most obedient Servants, think ourselves bound to answer:—

All things have heads—and all heads are liable to change.

Every sentence and opinion advanced by Mr. Shandy on the influence and utility of a well-chosen surname, may be properly applied in shewing the recommendations and advantages which result from placing a striking title-page before a book, or an inviting Head on the front page of a NEWSPAPER.

A HEAD so placed, like those heads which once ornamented Temple-Bar, or those of the great Attorney, or great Contractor, which, not long since, were conspicuously elevated for their great actions, and were exhibited in wooden frames, at the East and West ends of this metropolis, never fails of attracting the eyes of passengers—though indeed we do not expect to experience the lenity shown to these great exhibitors, for probably the Times will be pelted without mercy.

But then a head with a good face is a harbinger, a gentleman-usher, that often strongly recommends even Dulness, FOLLY, IMMORALITY, or VICE. The immortal Locke gives evidence to the truth of this observation. That great philosopher has declared that, though repeatedly taken in, he never could withstand the solicitations of a well-drawn title-page—authority sufficient to justify us in assuming a new head, and a new set of features, but not with a design to impose, for we flatter ourselves the HEAD of the TIMES will not be found deficient in intellects, but by putting a new face on affairs, will be admired for the light of its countenance, wherever it appears.

To advert to our first position.

The UNIVERSAL REGISTER has been a name as injurious to the Logographic-News-Paper as Tristram was to MR. SHANDY'S SON. But OLD SHANDY forgot he might have rectified by confirmation the mistake of the parson at baptism—with the touch of a Bishop, have TRISTRAM to TRISMEGESTUS.

The Universal Register, from the day of its first appearance, to the day of its confirmation, has, like Tristram, suffered from unusual casualties, both laughable and serious, arising from its name, which, on its introduction, was immediately curtailed of its fair proportion by all who called for it—the word Universal being universally omitted, and the word Register being only retained. "Boy, bring me the Register." The waiter answers—" Sir, we have not a library—but you may see it at the New-Exchange Coffee-house."—" Then I'll see it there," answers the disappointed politician, and he goes to the New-Exchange, and calls for the Register; upon which the waiter tells him that he cannot have it, as he is not a subscriber, and presents him with the Court and City Register; the Old Annual Register, or the New Annual Register; or, if the coffeehouse be within the purlieus of Covent Garden, or the hundreds of Drury, slips into the politician's hand—Harris's Register of Ladies. For these and other reasons, the parents of the UNIVERSAL REGISTER have added to its original name that of the

TIMES;

which, being a monosyliable, bids defiance to corrupters and mutilators of the language.

The TIMES! what a monstrous name! Granted—for the Times is a many-headed monster, that speaks with an hundred tongues, and displays a thousand characters: and in the course of its transformations in life, assumes innumerable shapes and humours.

The critical reader will observe, we personify our new name, but as we will give it uo distinction or sex, and though it will be active in its vocations, yet we apply to it the neuter gender.

The TIMES being formed of materials, and possessing qualities of opposite and heterogeneous natures, cannot be classed either in the animal or vegetable genus, but, like the Polypus, is doubtful, and in the discussion, description, dissection, and illustration, will employ the pens of the most celebrated among the literati.

THE HEADS OF THE TIMES, as has been said, are many; they will, however, not always appear at the same time, but casually, as public or private affairs may call them forth.

The principal, or leading heads, are:— The Literary.—Political.—Commercial.—Philosophical.—Critical.—Theatrical. —Fashionable.—Humourous.—Witty, &c. Each of which are supplied with a competent share of intellects, for the pursuit of their several functions, an endowment which is not in all time to be found even in the Heads of the State—the heads of the Church—the heads of the Law—the heads of the Navy—the heads of the Army—and, though last, not least—the great heads of the Universities.

The Political Head of THE TIMES, like that of Janus, the Roman Deity, is double-faced; with one countenance it will smile continually on the friends of Old England, and with the other, will frown incessantly on her enemies.

The alteration we have made in our head is not without precedents. The WORLD has parted with half its CAPUT MORTUUM, and a moiety of its brains. The HERALD has cut off half of its head, and has lost its original humour. The POST, it is true, retains its whole head, and its old features, and as to the other public prints, they appear as having neither heads nor tails.

On the PARLIAMENTARY HEAD, every communication, that ability and industry can produce, may be expected. To this great National object, THE TIMES will be most sedulously attentive—most accurately correct—and strictly impartial in its reports.

Though probably a successful Paper whilst in the hands of the first Walter, the logographic printer, The Times did not begin to rise towards the eminence it afterwards attained until its management devolved upon the late Mr. Walter.* He it was who laid the broad foundations of its future prosperity; the first steps towards which were taken shortly after his first connection with the Journal in 1803, when a bold front was shown to the Pitt ministry, and when the delinquencies of Lord Melville were exposed in its columns. In defending himself against the attack of Wyndham, Mr. Walter described these early days of his connection with The Times, and gave an account, in the columns of that Journal, of the principles he adopted when called upon to assume the editorial management of a Morning Paper.* He says, " The joint proprietor and exclusive manager of this Paper became so in the beginning of the year 1803, and from that date it is that he undertakes to justify the independent spirit with which it has been conducted. On his commencing the business, he gave his conscientious,and disinterested support to the existing Administration—that of Lord Sidmouth. The Paper continued that support of the men in power, but without suffering them to repay its partiality by contributions calculated to produce any reduction whatsoever in the expense of managing the concern; because, by such admission, the editor was conscious he should have sacrificed the right of condemning any act which he might esteem detrimental to the public welfare. That Administration, therefore, had, as he before stated, his disinterested support, because he believed it then, as he believes it now, to have been a virtuous and upright Administration; but not knowing how long it might continue so, he did not choose to surrender his right of free judgment by accepting of obligations, though offered in the most unexceptionable manner.

" This Ministry was dissolved in the spring 1804, when the places of Lord Sidmouth, Lord St. Vincent, &c., were supplied by Mr. Pitt, Lord Melville, &c. It was not long before the Catamaran expedition was undertaken by Lord Melville; and again, at a subsequent period, his Lordship's practices in the Navy Department were brought to light by the 10th Report of the Commissioners of Naval Inquiry. The editor's father held at that time, and had held for eighteen years before, the situation of printer to the Customs. The editor knew the disposition of the man whose conduct he found himself obliged to condemn; yet he never refrained a moment, on that account, from speaking of the Catamaran expedition as it merited, or from bestowing on the practices disclosed in the Tenth Report the terms of reprobation with which they were greeted by the general sense of the country. The result was as he had apprehended. Without the allegation of a single complaint, his family was deprived of the business, which had been so long discharged by it, of printing for the Customs—a business which was performed by contract, and which, he will venture to say, was executed with an economy and a precision that have not since been exceeded. The Government advertisements were at the same time withdrawn."

Walter then goes on to describe the further history of his Paper. " On the death of Mr. Pitt, in January, 1806, an Administration was formed, containing a portion of that preceding Ministry which the editor had so disinterestedly supported on his undertaking the management of the Paper. It was by one of these that he was directed to state the injustice that had been sustained in the loss of the Customhouse business. Various plans were proposed for the recovery of it; at last, in the following July, a copy of a memorial, to be presented to the Treasury, was submitted to the editor for his signature; but believing for certain reasons, that this bare reparation of an injury was likely to be considered as a favour entitling those who granted it to a certain degree of influence over the politics of the Journal, the editor refused to sign, or to have any concern in presenting the memorial. But he did more than even this; for, finding that a memorial was still likely to be presented, he wrote to those from whom the restoration of the employment was to spring, disavowing on his part (with whom the sole conducting of the Paper remained) all share in an application which he conceived was meant to fetter the freedom of that Paper. The printing business to the Customs, has, as may perhaps be anticipated, never been restored."

This spirit of independence—the very life-blood of a Journal—brought down upon the man who had the courage to manifest it the anger of the Government, whose officials did not hesitate to throw various impediments in the way of his obtaining early information. Let him tell the story in his own words:—" The editor will now speak of the oppression which he has sustained while pursuing this independent line of conduct. Since the war of 1805, between Austria and France, his arrangements to obtain foreign intelligence were of a magnitude to create no ordinary anxiety in his mind respecting their result; yet from the period of the Sidmouth Administration, Government from time to time employed every means in its power to counteract his designs, and he is indebted for his success only to professional exertion, and the private friendship of persons unconnected with politics. First, in relation to the war of 1805, the editor's packages from abroad were always stopped by Government at the outports, while those for the Ministerial Journals were allowed to pass. The foreign captains were always asked by a Government officer at Gravesend, if they had papers for The Times. These, when acknowledged, were as regularly stopped. The Gravesend officer, on being spoken to on the subject, replied, that he would transmit to the editor his papers with the same punctuality as he did those belonging to the publishers of the Journals just alluded to, but that he was not allowed. This led to a complaint at the Home Secretary's office, where the editor, after repeated delays, was informed by the Under Secretary that the matter did not rest with him, but that it was even then in discussion, whether Government should throw the whole open, or reserve an exclusive channel for the favoured Journals; yet was the editor informed that he might receive his foreign papers as a favour from Government. This, of course, implying the expectation of a corresponding favour from him in the spirit and tone of his publication, was firmly rejected; and he, in consequence, suffered for a time (by the loss or delay of important packets) for this resolution to maintain, at all hazards, his independence.

" The same practices were resorted to at a subsequent period. They produced the same complaints on the part of the editor; and a redress was then offered to his grievances, provided it could be known what party in politics he meant to support. This, too, was again declined, as pledging the independence of his Paper. And, be it observed, respecting the whole period during which the present conductor has now spoken, that it was from no determinate spirit of opposition to Government that he rejected the proposals made to him, On the contrary, he has on several, and those very important occasions, afforded those men his best support, whose offers, nevertheless, at any time, to purchase, or whose attempts to compel that support, he has deemed himself obliged to reject and resist. Nay, he can with great truth add, that advantages in the most desirable forms have been offered him, and that he has refused them.

" Having thus established his independence during the several Administrations whose measures it has been his office to record, he will not omit the occasion which offers to declare that he equally disclaims all and any individual influence; and that, when he offers individual praise, it is from a sense of its being particularly due to the character which calls it forth."

To the courage that could brave a Government, was added sagacity, enterprise, and unflagging zeal. It was evidently the object of Walter's life to rear up The Times, and year by year he went on laboriously, working out various plans for its improvement. The Government having interfered with his despatches from abroad, he arranged a system which, in spite of the authorities, procured him information of events abroad, often before the Ministry themselves were acquainted with them. " Amongst other acts of his early exertions for the press," says the writer who contributed a notice of his career to The Times, " let us mention his successful competition for priority of intelligence with the Government during the European war, which (to give a single instance) enabled his Journal to announce the capitulation of Flushing forty-eight hours before the News had arrived through any other channel; and the extinction of what, before his time, had been ail invariable practice with the General Post Office, strange as it may now appear—the systematic retardation of foreign intelligence, and the public sale of foreign News for the benefit of the Lombard Street officials."

Walter's greatest merit, however, was that, undaunted by difficulties and disappointments, he first brought the steam-engine to the assistance of the Newspaper press. "Familiar as this discovery is now," says his biographer in The Times,* "there was a time when it seemed fraught with difficulties as great as those which Fulton has overcome on one element, and Stephenson on another. To take off 5,000 impressions in an hour was once as ridiculous a conception as to paddle a ship fifteen miles against wind and tide, or to drag in that time a train of carriages weighing a hundred tons fifty miles. Mr. Walter, who, without being a visionary, may be said to have thought nothing impossible that was useful and good, was early resolved that there should be no impossibility in printing by steam. It took a long time in those days to strike off the 3,000 or 4,000 copies of The Times. Mr. Walter could not brook the tedium of the manual process. As early as the year 1804, an ingenious compositor, named Thomas Martyn, had invented a self-acting machine for working the press, and had produced a model which satisfied Mr. Walter of the feasibility of the scheme. Being assisted bv Mr. Walter with the necessary funds, he made considerable progress towards the completion of his work, in the course of which he was exposed to much personal danger from the hostility of the pressmen, who vowed vengeance against the man whose innovations threatened destruction to their craft. To such a length was their opposition carried, that it was found necessary to introduce the various pieces of the machine into the premises with the utmost possible secrecy, while Martyn himself was obliged to shelter himself under various disguises in order to escape their fury. Mr. Walter, however, was not yet permitted to reap the fruits of his enterprise. On the very eve of success he was doomed to bitter disappointment. He had exhausted his own funds in the attempt, and his father, who had hitherto assisted him, became disheartened, and refused him any further aid. The project was therefore for the time abandoned.

" Mr. Walter, however, was not the man to be deterred from what he had once resolved to do. He gave his mind incessantly to the subject, and courted aid from all quarters, with his usual munificence. In the year 1814 he was induced by a clerical friend, in whose judgment he confided, to make a fresh experiment; and accordingly the machinery of the amiable and ingenious Kcenig, assisted by his young friend Bauer, was introduced—not, indeed, at first into The Times office, but into the adjoining premises, such caution being thought necessary from the threatened violence of the pressmen. Here the work advanced, under the frequent inspection and advice of the friend alluded to. At one period these two able mechanics suspended their anxious toil, and left the premises in disgust. After the lapse, however, of about three davs, the same gentleman discovered their retreat, induced them to return, showed them to their surprise their difficulty conquered, and the work still in progress. The night on which this curious machine was first brought into use in its new abode was one of great anxiety, and even alarm. The suspicious pressmen had threatened destruction to any one whose inventions might suspend their employment—' destruction to him and his traps.' They were directed to wait for expected News from the Continent. It was about six o'clock in the morning when Mr. Walter went into the press-room, and astonished its occupants by telling them that ' The Times was already printed by steam! That if they attempted violence, there was a force ready to suppress it; but that if they were peaceable, their wages should be continued to every one of them till similar employment could be procured —a promise which was, no doubt, faithfully performed; and having so said, he distributed several copies among them. Thus was this most hazardous enterprise undertaken and successfully carried through, and printing by steam, on an almost gigantic scale, given to the world. On that memorable day, the 20th of November, 1814, the following announcement appeared in The Times:—

Our journal of this day presents to the public the practical result of the greatest improvement connected with printing, since the discovery of the art itself. The reader of this paragraph now holds in his hand one of the many thousand impressions of The Times Newspaper, which were taken off last night by a mechanical apparatus. A system of machinery, almost organic, has been devised and arranged, which, while it relieves the human frame of its most laborious efforts in printing, far exceeds all human powers in rapidity and despatch. That the magnitude of the invention may be justly appreciated by its effects, we shall inform the public, that, after the letters are placed by the compositors, and enclosed in what is called the form, little more remains for man to do, than to attend upon and watch this unconscious agent in its operations. The machine is then merely supplied with paper—itself places the form, inks it, adjusts the paper to the form newly inked, stamps the sheet, and gives it forth to the hands of the attendant, at the same time withdrawingtlie form for a fresh coat of ink, which itself again distributes, to meet the ensuing sheet, now advancing for impression; and the whole of these complicated acts is performed with such a velocity and simultaneousness of movement, that no less than 1,100 sheets are impressed in one hour.

That the completion of an invention of this kind, not the effect of chance, but the result of mechanical combinations, methodically arranged in the mind of the artist, should be attended with many obstructions, and much delay, may be readily admitted. Our share in the event has, indeed, only been the application of the discovery, under an agreement with the patentees, to our own particular business; yet few can conceive, even with this limited interest, the various disappointments and deep anxiety to which we have, for a long course of time, been subjected.

From that day to the end of his life, Mr. Walter never ceased to improve on the original plan; and his successor following in his footsteps, a machine was ultimately perfected, which produces 8,000 copies in an hour—the machine with which The Times is now printed.

Whilst Walter was perfecting a steam-press to produce a rapid supply of Papers, lie was equally energetic and successful in securing literary talent, without which his Journal could never have required such means for satisfying the public demand. In the early days of the Paper, he threw his columns open to contributions, and encouraged a supply of " Letters to the Editor." By these means he now and then found a writer of more than average excellence, and when he did so he sought the name of his correspondent, and secured his help to supply a few articles on the subject he was best acquainted with. The copy thus obtained, was subjected to very careful and judicious editing; and to the talent and tact with which this was done, may be ascribed one element of the success ultimately secured. His plan seems to have been not so much to secure a writing-editor, as an editor who could write when called upon, but whose chief duty was a sagacious selection of contributors, and a prompt and laborious editing of the articles they supplied.

Dr. Stoddart, whose name will long live in the satirical verses of Moore, and others, as Dr. Slop, was an editor of The Times, but differed from Walter so completely in his opinions on the subject of Napoleon and his character, that an explanation became requisite between them. Dr. Stoddart seems to have laboured under a perfect mania as regarded Bonaparte, who, to his mind, was the real " Corsican fiend." In spite of all suggestions, Stoddart continued to pour out his ultra opinions, and for a while the articles were printed. Still, however, on, on, he went with a relentless force, which no suggestions, no remonstrances, no proprietorial directions, could check, and the articles were put aside unpublished. A crisis ensued, and Walter, with the liberality which is described as one of the marked features of his character and another element of his success, proposed that Stoddart should cease to be connected with the Paper, receiving a handsome retiring compensation. The sum was left to be settled by two mutual friends, and they proceeded to deliberate on the matter. Their decision had not been arrived at, when, one day, Stoddart wrote to them and to Walter, to say that the affair need not trouble them any further, as, on the following Monday, No. 1 of The New Times would appear.

The successor to Stoddart was Thomas Barnes, who remained for many years at the head of The Times' literary corps. We are informed by a member of that body that Barnes had been a Blue Coat Boy, and from Christ's Hosjrital went to Cambridge, where he was the college contemporary and rival of the present Bishop of London, Dr. Blomfield. The latter succeeded in carrying off the honours of three years, Mr. Barnes holding the second place, though the on dit of the members of the University at the time was, that though Blomfield surpassed as a Greek scholar, Barnes was unrivalled in his general acquirements. After graduating, Barnes entered as a student at the Temple, intending to prepare himself for the Bar. While thus engaged as a law student, he acquired the friendship of the late Hon. George Lamb (brother of the late Lord Melbourne), then also a student occupying chambers in the same building as those held by Barnes. As a relief from the monotonous routine of Coke and Littleton, and the other solid works which should form the basis of a law student's reading, Barnes wrote a series of letters after the manner of Junius, on the leading political characters and events of the day. These letters were addressed to and published in the columns of The Times. Attracting some attention, the author of the articles was sought and found by Walter, and an engagement was concluded between them, which first introduced Barnes as a reporter into the Parliamentary galleries, and subsequently placed him in the editorial chair of a powerful daily Paper.

It was during his editorship, and Walter's management, that the Paper gained its great circulation. Many eminent men became contributors, but their names never appeared. When they wrote for the Paper their voices became its voice, and their talents swelled the fame of The Times. Perhaps a dozen well paid men were at one time in the receipt of handsome stipends on the Journal, and when any one was " written out," he made way for another. Printing House Square has " used up many a crack writerbut it is said that none of them ever complained of want of liberality on the part of the man in whose aid they had lent a pen. One of these was a Captain Stirling, who was considered the author of many of the clever, reckless, torrent-like leaders that gained the Paper its cognomen of The Thunderer. He seemed to write exactly to the temper of the English public of his day. He lived at Brompton; had a stipend, it is stated, of nearly £2,000 a-year; and when he did visit the office, which was seldom, it is said great secrecy was observed; and it seems that Walter was fond of preserving a degree of mystery as to the authorship of what appeared in thePaper. Stirling is declared to have been a man rather deficient in information of most kinds. When he was to write, it was necessary to cram him with the facts and points, but when he had once got them, he clothed his case so admirably in its garment of words, that all the world—except those he hit at—were charmed. Barnes is said to have written very few leaders, hnt of course this is a point not known; certain it is he had the credit of very many, and now and then was threatened by wrathful politicians who had felt the weight of a severe leader. It is said that more than one minister had sought to fix a personal quarrel upon him; but, unlike some of his brother journalists, we have no record of any hostile meeting. Lord Brougham, who has figured in so many characters, had also the credit of an occasional leader. A Newspaper tradition says, that Barnes went one day to Brougham, then Chancellor, and, waiting for him in his private room at the court, took up The Morning Chronicle, in which there was that morning a denunciation of an article Brougham had the day before written in The Times. Barnes suspected the authorship from the style, and when the legal dignitary left the judgment-seat to speak to the editor, the latter saluted the Chancellor with "Well, this is almost too bad to demolish yourself in this way!" Brougham was taken aback. Barnes saw at once that the random guess was a hit, pursued his advantage, followed up the attack, and Brougham admitted that he was the writer of the reply to his own onslaught.

Though Barnes wrote very few leaders* he had the power to shape the contributions of others, so as to avoid the strong contradictions that sometimes after his death appeared in the columns of The Times. Probably his successor had not the power to touch the copy of certain writers. Hence much disrepute.

A life of incessant labour was unhappily closed by a death of pain. After long suffering from an attack of stone, Barnes resolved to submit to an operation; which, though performed most skilfully by Liston, gave a shock to his system, worn down by mental work and bodily pain, which it never recovered. His death occurred on the 7th of May, 1841, in his 56th year, and his remains rest in the cemetery at Kensall Green.

We have spoken only of Mr. Walter the journalist, of Mr. Walter the Member of Parliament, we have, in this volume, little to say. The fact, however, must not pass unnamed that he sat iD the House of Commons for many years, and that his last appearance there was in the session of 1843. He had earned distinction and wealth, and closed a long and active life on the 28th of July, 1847.*

When the reports of the Parliamentary debates in the daily Papers had swelled to such unwieldy length, that few found leisure to read them through, an ingenious plan was adopted. A summary was written by a gentleman who sat through the whole debate; and this, being printed in large type as the first leading article, gave those who had no relish or time to read long columns of debates, a complete idea of all the points that had arisen during the previous night's discussion, with the names of the chief speakers and the positions they took up. The first person who wrote these articles for The Times was Horace Twiss, afterwards the biographer of Lord Eldon. Twiss was a clever barrister, who, towards the close of the rotten borough system, joined the Tory camp, and spoke and wrote, cleverly and most diligently, in favour of the cause he had espoused. Had he lived thirty years earlier he might have reached the House of Lords, through one of the many avenues open to legal talent. The ultra party whom he had joined, were, however, left behind by the advancing tide of public opinion, and Twiss zealously and honourably worked on in an equally useful, if less distinguished sphere. He satin the House of Commons for some years before the Reform Bill passed; but, after that measure had become law, he was only once more elected, though he stood several contests. Out of Parliament, as a member, he took his seat as a representative of the press, and certainly instructed and gratified the public much more by his summaries in The Times than he could have done had he sat for all the boroughs heevercontested.* Twiss died on the 25 th of April, 1848.

With one other incident in the history of The Times, we may close this notice of that Journal. It is now about ten years ago that the then Paris correspondent of the Paper, Mr. O'Keilly, received secret information of an enormous fraud that was said to he in course of perpetration on the Continent. The author of the plot was described to be an old officer who had been a personal favourite of Napoleon, and who, by the aid of talent, great knowledge of the continental world, and a most polished exterior, had put in operation a mode by which the European bankers were to be robbed of a million, and which bad, when 0 Reilly was informed of it, fleeced them of £10,700. The position of the accused parties, the great skill and secrecy with which the plot had been contrived, rendered it a hazardous experiment for private individuals to attempt the crushing of such a formidable conspiracy. But neither correspondent abroad nor editor at home hesitated in their duty. The whole plan was exposed; but to throw the swindlers on the wrong scent, the expose was dated Brussels, instead of Paris. This is believed to have saved O'Reilly from assassination, for the French swindling genius who presided over this gigantic fraud, had, it was said, seen enough of blood not to let a single life stand between himself and the realization of his plans. The Times exposed the robbery, and saved the bankers from farther loss, but were not allowed to pass scot free. An action was brought by a Mr. Bogle, who declared himself injured by the statements in The Times; and on the 16th of Aug., 1841, the case Bogle v. Lawson, came on for trial at Croydon. Then the whole story came out; the great exertions made, and the heavy expenses incurred by the Paper, in unravelling the schemes of the conspirators, and exposing their enormous system of intended robbery, came to light.* A verdict for the defendant followed, and the public voice again declared unanimously, that a public service had been done by the press. A subscription was proposed and commenced for the purpose of paying the expenses incurred by The Times in this transaction, but the proprietors of the Journal declining such assistance, on the high plea that they did not wish to be paid for doing what they regarded as their duty, a public meeting was called to decide upon a mode of testifying the public approbation of the Paper. No less than £2,025 had been subscribed by the mercantile men of London, and the question was—how it could be best expended in perpetuating the memory of a great service done to the commercial world by a daily Newspaper. The Lord Mayor presided over the discussion of the knotty point, and, eventually (Feb. 9, 1842), the following resolutions were adopted:—

1. " That with permission of the Gresham Committee, a Tablet, not exceeding one hundred guineas in value, with suitable inscription, be placed in the new Eoyal Exchange, and that a similar Tablet, not exceeding fifty guineas in value, be placed in some conspicuous part of The Times printing establishment.

2. " That the surplus of the fund raised be invested in Government securities, in the names of the following trustees:—the Lord Mayor of London, the Lord Bishop of London, the Governor of the Bank of England, and the Chamberlain of London, all for the time being; the dividends to be applied to the support of two scholarships, to be called The Times' Scholarships.

3. " That The Times' Scholarships be established in connexion with Christ's Hospital, and the City of London School, for the benefit of pupils proceeding from those institutions respectively to the universities of Oxford or Cambridge.

4. " That Christ's Hospital, and the City of London School be required to place in their respective institutions a tablet commemorative of the establishment of such scholarships."

These resolutions were carried into effect, as those who like to visit Christ's Hospital or the City School in Milk Street may learn, and many a youthful scholars heart has since beat high as he entered on the competition for the Times' Scholarship.

Between 1788, when The Times was founded, and 1846, when the first number of The Daily News appeared—a space of fifty-eight years—several attempts were made to establish daily Papers, the only successful effort being that already alluded to, by which the publicans set up The Morning Advertiser, as an organ of their body, a representative at once of the interests and the charities of the licensed victuallers. Appearing with so large a body of proprietorial supporters—for every publican who subscribes to the Paper receives back a portion of the profits realized by the concern—The Morning Advertiser became successful. Until The Daily News appeared, however, it was the only successful attempt since the days of the first Walter. Dr. Stoddart started The New Times with great expectations, but the "leaders" in his first number gave a character to the new Journal which it never survived. " Dr. Slop" became almost the only name by which he was ever spoken of. It is said, that £20,000 were lost upon the project, and then Stoddart left Journalism for the law, and became a judge at Malta. The New Times was combined with The Day, a Paper that seems to have lingered on for many years, until both were merged into The Morning Journal, which, in its turn, disappeared. A passage from the memoir of Mr. Eugenius Roche,* will help to show how these Papers struggled on.

In the year 1827, Mr. Roche was selected to be the editor of The New Times, formerly The Day, and subsequently metamorphosed into The Morning Journal. It is rather a strange circumstance in the history of the press, that after twenty years Mr. R. should have returned to the editorship of that Paper on account of which he had so severely suffered. It was made a condition of his appointment to The New Times that he should purchase shares in the property, upon the plea, that the interest he would thus acquire in the Paper, would be to his co-proprietors the best guarantee for the assiduous application of his talents in the management of it. Here again he suffered through his unsuspicious nature. He found too late that by indiscreetly purchasing what were termed shares, he had, in fact, rendered himself liable for the debts of a losing concern; and that instead of possessing himself, as he confidently imagined, of that which would yield provision for his children in case of his death, he had mortgaged their inheritancef in exchange for a purchase, which not only swallowed up the amount of his editorial stipend, but also subjected him to a heavy claim. It needs not to be told that he was unconscious of the embarrassments he was about to bring upon himself, in taking the step in question. It was part of the understanding between him and those with whom he dealt upon the occasion, that in case of a vacancy upon The Courier, which was then contemplated, he should be elected the editor of that print. When he became fully sensible of the loss he was sustaining by his connexion with The New Times, he felt anxious to have his services transferred to a concern which he considered would at least afford to pay the stipends of its conductors, without first drawing the amount out of their own pockets. By often and strenuously representing to his co-proprietors the hardship of his situation, observing, that however their ample means (for they were all wealthy individuals) might enable them to bear the burden, it was neither possible for him to pay, nor just that he, who had never shared the profits, should be taxed to sustain the losses, he was at length allowed to escape from the toils in which he had become entangled. It was arranged that he should give his services for the benefit of The Courier, in which his co-proprietors of The New Times were also embarked. It was still thought necessary to attach the new editor more closely to the interests of the Paper, by inducing him to become the holder of a share in it. Accordingly an influential proprietor agreed to transfer a twenty-fourth share to Mr. Roche; and a contract was actually signed and sealed for the purchase at the price of five thousand guineas.

It is fit, however, to state that he expected to obtain the editorship of The Courier from thus connecting himself with that Journal; and to this he eventually succeeded, though not to all the emoluments enjoyed by his predecessors. Had his life been spared, he might have been able to fulfil all his engagements, and to have provided for his family. Unhappily, the distressing embarrassments consequent on the losses he had previously sustained, and on his becoming bail for " a public character" who fled to America, threw him into greater difficulties. His efforts to extricate himself from these, committed him with other parties; and trembling for the ruin which impended over his family, and expecting each day to be consigned to the grasp of the myrmidons of the law, his constitution sunk beneath the struggle, and his poor broken heart found relief and repose in death.

Another attempt to establish a Morning Journal was madeby the late John Murray, the publisher, who, having succeeded so well with books, and being surrounded by some of the most eminent writers of the day, thought lie could make a Newspaper succeed. After a great flourish, The Representative made its appearance, B. D'Israeli being, it is said, one of the shareholders. It displayed no lack of talent, and no scarcity of money; but the public soon found out it was not what they wanted—in fact, that it was not a good Newspaper; and the end of the experiment was, that Mr. Murray lost a very large sum of money to gain experience of the fact that successful authors of books are not always the people able to answer the incessant demand on the mental fund required to keep up a Newspaper.

About fourteen years ago, a speculation was set a-foot under the title of the Metropolitan Newspaper Company, and from this scheme emerged The Constitutional, an Ultra-Liberal Daily Paper. The promoters of this new project had purchased from Mr. J. L. Stevens his interest as lessee of The Public Ledger, and, incorporating that old Paper on their new plan, the sanguine politicians thought fortune was in their hands. Their literary staff included Laman Blanchard as editor, Thornton Hunt as sub., Douglas Jerrold as dramatic critic, and Thackeray, who became the Paris correspondent, and afterwards foreign editor. Great liberality of sentiment, great zeal, and much talent were displayed; but the funds were wanting, and after six or seven thousand pounds had been lost, The Constitutional stopped, and The Public Ledger, emerging from the unfortunate partnership, jogged on alone in its former quiet way.

The Daily News is the youngest, and certainly most vigorous, member of the Newspaper family that has appeared since The Times came into the field. It started with the prestige of a highly popular literary name, and with a staff of writers such as no previous Paper had ever mustered to prepare a first number. The name of Charles Dickens was, in itself, a host; and not only in England, but on the Continent and in America, both literary and political readers were on the qui vive to welcome the new adventurer in the honourable but dangerous field. Mistakes were no doubt made, and great expenses incurred; but the errors were corrected, and the losses most gallantly borne. To give a greater impetus to the sale, the price was afterwards lowered to the minimum point, and a Daily Paper, complete at all points, with a full corps of writers at home, and of correspondents abroad, offered an admirably prepared broad-sheet to the public, first at 2½d. and afterwards at 3c?. This experiment was continued with great courage and a sale seemed, at one time, of 23,000 a-day; but the tax on the paper, and the tax on the advertisements, and the red penny stamp in the corner, were found to press too heavily to render a continuance of low charges advisable, and The Daily News again took the same price as its competitors. Through abundant difficulties and perilous experiments, by force of talent, of capital, of strong will and high purpose, it has fought its way to an elevated and honourable position amongst the daily Journals, not of England alone but of Europe.

* The first number of the Daily Courant contains an address to the public, excusing its small size, in which the writer says:—" This Courant (as the title shows) will be published daily; being designed to give all the material News as soon as every post arrives, and is confined to half the compass, to save the public at least half the impertinence of ordinary Newspapers." Its original smallness (one page only) was quickly changed; before long it gave two pages, and contained English News as well as Foreign, and had a display of advertisements.

* " The Daily Advertiser sold to the proprietors of the Oracle."—Annual Register, vol. 40, p. 78. We find in the list of Papers, The London Daily Advertiser, The Public Advertiser, The General Advertiser, and " The London Advertiser and Literary Gazette." One of the editors of The General Advertiser was "William Cooke, an Irishman. He was educated at the Grammar School at Cork, and acted as private tutor, hut came to London, entered himself at the Temple, and was called to the Bar in 1766. He was long engaged with Newspapers, one of his occupations being the editing of The General Advertiser. His second wife was the sister of Major Gammage, Commander of Trichinopoly, by whose death he succeeded to a handsome fortune. Cooke wrote The Elements of Dramatic Criticism, 1775; The Art of Living in London; Memoirs of Charles Macklin; and Memoirs of Samuel Foote.

* One of the later sufferers of this ignominious punishment, was Dr. Shehbeare, and in his case it was shown, that the officials charged with the execution of such sentences, influenced, doubtless, by the progress of more enlightened opinion, regarded such reflections as unjust. In one of Almon's books (Biographical, Literary, and Political Anecdotes, 1797) the story is thus told:—In 1758, Shehbeare was prosecuted for " A eighth letter to the people of England," convicted, and sentenced to stand in the pillory at Charing Cross. " Mr. Arthur Beardmore, attorney, in Wallbank, being under-sheriff at that time, attended the execution of this part of the sentence—he was in a house opposite to the pillory. Dr Shehbeare was greatly favoured; instead of putting his head in the hole of the pillory, in the usual mode, the upper board was raised as high as possible, and then fastened. Shehbeare stood upright, without even bending his neck in the least; looking through the wide opening between the upper and lower boards. The Attorney General was exceedingly incensed by this indulgence shown to Shehbeare; he obtained a writ of attachment against Beardmore for his contempt, in not executing the sentence properly. Beaidmore, in his defence upon oath, said, that he attended the execution of the sentence, and saw Shebbeare's head through the pillory. Lord Mansfield observed, that this was the most ingenious evasion of perjury he had ever met with. Beardmore was fined fifty pounds for his contempt." This liberal under-sheriff differed totally in politics from Shehbeare, and his conduct was, therefore, all the more generous. Shehbeare afterwards got a pension from George the Third.

† Athenaeum, Nog. 1082, 1083, and 1132, July 1848, and July 1849.

* The original title was, " The Public Ledger, or Daily Register of Commerce and Intelligence."

The first number is dated Saturday, January 12,1760, and was issued gratis—subsequent copies being charged 2½d. No. 1 contains a long address of the proprietors to the public.

Amongst the weekly and other Papers dating antecedent to The Public Ledger, we find some curious titles. Thus, we have, under date 1755, The World, The Devil, Man, Old Maid, and Monitor. In 1756, Schofield's Middlewich Journal, Test, Prater, Con-test, Humanist. In 1757, Centinel, Crab Tree. In 1759, The Busy Body.

* The earliest copy of the Morning Chronicle I have been able to find, is dated December 29, 1770, and numbered 493; and its title then (and long afterwards) was " The Morning Chronicle, and London Advertiser." There had previously been a " London Chronicle," which was regularly read by George the Third, whose copy of it may be seen in the "King's Library," British Museum.

† European Mag., September, 1818. 2

* Gentleman's Mag., Aug. 1838.

* New Monthly Mag., Vol. LXXVII, p. 404.

* July 9, 1792.

* Mr. Gillman's version of the story is as follows:—" Coleridge was requested by the proprietor and editor to report a speech of Pitt's, which at this time was expected to be one of great eclat. Accordingly, early in the morning, off Coleridge set, carrying with him his supplies for the campaign. Those who are acquainted with the gallery of the House on a press night, when a man can scarcely find elbow room, will better understand how incompetent Coleridge was for such an undertaking. He, however, started by seven in the morning, but was exhausted long before night. Mr. Pitt, for the first quarter of an hour, spoke fluently, and in his usual manner, and sufficiently to give a notion of his best style; this was followed by a repetition of words, and words only; he appeared to ¹ talk against time,' as the phrase is. Coleridge fell asleep, and listened occasionally only to the speeches that followed. On his return, the proprietor being anxious for the report, Coleridge informed him of the result, and finding his anxiety great, immediately volunteered a speech for Mr. Pitt, which he wrote off-hand, and which answered the purpose exceedingly well. The following day, and for days after publication, the proprietor received complimentary letters announcing the pleasure received at the report, and wishing to know who was the reporter. The sceret was, however, kept, and the real author of the speech concealed; but one day Mr. Canning, calling on business, made similar inquiries, and received the same answer. Canning replied, ' It does more credit to the author"s head than to his memory.' "—Life of Coleridge.

* Sec Don Juan, stanzas xcii., xciii., and cov:—

" Or Coleridge long before bis flighty pen Let to The Morning Post its aristocracy. When he and Southey, following the same path, Espoused two sisters (milliners at Bath).

One of The Morning Post contributors, Stott, is named in English Bards and Scotch Reviewers.

* New Monthly Magazine, Vol. LXXXII., p. 19.

* He published "War in Disguise, 1806;" " The Dangers of the Country, 1807;" and " Speech in the House of Commons on the Overtures of the American Government, 1808."

* Crokcr, in his edition of lios well's Johnson, mentions Bate, whereupon Maeaulay, in his review of that hook, indulges in a savage note. " Mr. Croker," says Maeaulay, " states that Mr. Henry Bate, who afterwards assumed the name of Dudley, was proprietor of The Morning Herald, and fought a duel with George Robinson Stoncy, in consequence of some attacks on Lady Strathmore, which appeared in that Paper. Now, Mr. Bate was then connected not with The Morning Herald, hut with The Morning Post; and the dispute took place before The Morning Herald was in existence. The duel was fought in January, 1777. The chronicle of The Annual Register for that year contains an account of the transaction, and distinctly states that Mr. Bate was editor of The Morning Post. The Morning Herald, as any person may see by looking at any number of it, was not established till some time after this affair. For this blunder there is, we must acknowledge, some excuse; for it certainly seems almost incredible to a person living in our time that any human being should ever have stooped to fight with a writer in The Morning Post,"

† Gent. Mag., Vol. XLVII., p. 43.

* Gent. Mag., Vol. XCIV., 1824, p. 275.

* Gent, Mag., Vol. XCIV., p. 275.

* Gent. Mag., 1817, 1824.

† Annual Register, Vol. XXIV., 1824, p. 297.

‡ Annual Register, 1824, p. 297.

|| An anecdote, given in the notes to Jon Bee's edition of Foote, refers to the Herald, whilst under the control of Bate Dudley, the public supporter of the Prince and of Sheridan. Jon Bee is speaking of the authors of Newspaper critiques, and other paragraphs of those days, and states how they often gave the credit of saying good things to those perfectly innocent of the authorship. " I remember," says Jon Bee, " one of these collectors of scraps of intelligence for a certain Morning Herald, thirty years ago and more, always gave the credit to Sheridan for all fathered jokes and for some -witticisms that he knew were manufactured by others. Example:—A person who had been admitted to one of the convivial parties of the Prince, reported to that collector a certain good thing which had dropped from some gentleman at table, whose name he did not know. Onr collector inquired whether Sheridan was present-Being answered in the affirmative—' Ay, aye, I know how it was; it's Sheridan all over.' Dick Brinsley sat next to, or opposite the little gentleman, and so the little one caught it up. ' I know, I know, how these things go,' hastily observed the News-collector; and so it was Heralded about next morning, and now appears in the Sheridaniana. The same cunning fox, I have reason for believing, gave to Sheridan in this manner several more good things that belonged to others, and I think I can myself recollect one score instances at least."—Life of Foote

* A Foreigner's Opinion of England. By C. A. Gottlieb Gœde. London, 1821.

* An Introduction to Logographr. By Henry Johnson. London: Printed LogographicaUy. 8vo. "Walter.

* No. 510, August 10, 1786. Its price had by this time been raised to threepence.

* The first number of The Times, in the British Museum Collection, has no stamp, showing that sheets sometimes escaped the eye and mark of the Stamp Office in those days.

* The first Walter endured his share of persecution, having been more than onee imprisoned for articles which appeared in his Paper. It lias been asserted that he stood in the pillory; hut though sentenced to such punishment, for telling what was no doubt the truth about one of George the Third's sons, he appears to have escaped that portion of the sentence. Here arc some notices of the affair from the publications of the time:

February 3, 1790.—The printer of The Times was brought up from Newgate to the King's Bench, to receive judgment for two libels of which he had been convicted. He was sentenced for the first, which was on the Prince of "Wales and the Duke of York (charging their Royal Highnesses with having so demeaned themselves as to incur the just disapprobation of His Majesty), to pay a fine of £100, and to be imprisoned in Newgate for one year, after the expiration of his present confinement; and for the second, which was on the Duke of Clarence, he was fined £100. The libel against the Duke of Clarence asserted, that His Royal Highness returned from his station without authority from the Admiralty, or the Commanding Officer.—(Ann. Reg., 1790, p. 195.) The printer was at that time undergoing his sentence of imprisonment in Newgate, for a libel on the Duke of York, for which he had been sentenced to pay a fine of £50, a year's imprisonment in Newgate, to stand in the pillory for one hour between twelve and three, and to enter into recognizances for his good behaviour for seven years, himself in £500, and two securities in £100 each.—(Ann. Reg., 1789, p. 229.) On the 9th of March, 1791, Mr. Walter was liberated from his confinement in Newgate, after sixteen months' imprisonment, at the intercession of the Prince of Wales.—(Ann. Reg., 1791, p. 16.) Thus it would appear that the whole sentences were not carried out.

* Times, February 11, 1810.

* Times, July 29, 1847.

* Barnes wrote other things besides political " leaders." A contributor to the New Monthly Magazine says:—" While I was part proprietor of The Champion weekly Newspaper, Barnes was engaged to write a series of critical essays on our leading poets and novelists, which he did under the appropriate signature of ' Strada,' with whose ' Prolmioncs' the scholastic reader will not be unfamiliar. The series embraced most of the eminent bards, living and dead, from Campbell and Rogers, back to Milton, Shakspeare, and Spenser; but of the novelists the list was scanty, beginning and ending, if I mistake not, with Mrs. Opic and Miss Edgeworth. These Papers displayed great acumen, as well as a delicate taste; and though the writer, entertaining a very decided opinion as to the merits of the different authors, expressed them with a correspondent frankness, his unfavourable verdicts were free from the rude dogmatism and scurrility that disgraced his angry ebullitions when he became 'the thunderer.' As these papers excited a great deal of attention, and were deemed highly advantageous to the Paper, it became a matter of importance to secure their regular appearance, an object not easily attained with a writer whose habits were rarely temperate, and never methodical. After several complaints of his irregularity, he himself suggested a scheme by which he might be guaranteed against future disappointment; and it proved successful, though it did not, at first, present a very promising appearance. Writing materials were placed upon a table by his bed-side, together with some volumes of the author whom he was to review, for the purpose of quotations, for he was already fully imbued with the characteristics, and conversant with the works of all our great writers. At his customary hour he retired to rest, sober or not, as the case might be, leaving orders to be called at four o'clock in the morning, when he arose with a bright, clear, and vigorous intellect, and, immediately applying himself to his task, achieved it with a completeness and rapidity that few could equal, and which none, perhaps, could have surpassed. Be it recorded, to his infinite praise, that in later life he must have totally conquered all the bad habits to which I have alluded, for perhaps there is no human occupation which requires more incessant industry and rigorous temperance than that of the cditorof The Times."

* The following paragraph " went the round" of the Newspapers:— "The will of the late John Walter, Esq., of Bearwood Hall, Berks, and Printing-house Square, London, was executed by him on the 19th of Feb., 1847, and he died on the 28th of July. He has devised to his son, John Walter, Esq., M.P. for Nottingham, the entire freehold premises and warehouses belonging to the establishment of The Times, in Printing-house Square, and leaves him all his interest in the business. The freehold and copyhold estates which he possessed in the counties of Berks and Wilts, together with the right of presentation to St. Catharine's Church, Bearwood, he leaves to the trustees under the terms of the settlement on the marriage of his said son. The residue of his real and personal estate to his wife, Mrs. Mary Walter, for her own absolute use, and has appointed her sole executrix. The personality was valued for probate duty at £90,000."

* A biographic sketch, which appeared in The Morning Chronicle immediately after his death, states that Twiss was the son of " a highly accomplished and learned person. His mother was a sister of John Philip Kemhle and Mrs. Siddons, and was every way qualified to do honour to her gifted family. Mr. Twiss, after receiving an excellent education, was placed for two or three years in an attorney's office, and then became a member of the Inner Temple, and in due time was called to the bar. He travelled the Oxford circuit for some years, and became one of its most distinguished leaders; but during the latter period of his professional career, ho attached himself exclusively to the Equity Courts. No ono can doubt that his legal abilities and knowledge very far exceeded those of many of his competitors, who have obtained forensic, or even judicial eminence. But his chances of success were materially lessened by his social, literary, and political celebrity; for the world are slow to believe that any man can be first-rate in more than one walk at a time. Mr. Twiss's Vers de Societe, and other light compositions, were sufficiently popular in their day to earn their author a place among the wits. But his chosen field of ambition was the House of Commons. At the conclusion of his first speech on Catholic Emancipation, the Duke of Norfolk, who had been seated under the gallery, requested to be introduced to him, and thanked him in the warmest and most flattering terms for his advocacy; and the late Lord Londonderry, an excellent judge, shook him cordially by the hand, and said, ' You may speak as often as you like now, for the House are sure to listen to you.' His speech on the bill for allowing counsel to address the jury for the defence in cases of felony was another highly successful effort; and a speech in the Court of Chancery is generally understood to have led, by the powers of arrangement and reasoning displayed in it, to his appointment as Under-Secretary for the Colonies, on the formation of the Duke of "Wellington's administration in 1828. But Mr. Twiss's Parliamentary career was interrupted by the Reform Bill. Wootton Basset, the borough which he had represented for many years, was placed in Schedule A; and although he subsequently succeeded in getting returned for Bridport during one Parliament, he found it impossible to establish a durable hold on the constituency. Nor was he more fortunate at Nottingham, Bury, and two or three other places at which he subsequently became a candidate. His energies, however, were inexhaustible. Aide toi et Dieu f aidera, was his motto. His fortune was limited; he had a large family to provide for; and finding his forensic gains inadequate, he devoted his talents to the press. He hit upon the plan, now generally adopted, of giving a summary of the speeches in the Houses of Parliament in addition to the reports, and for many years lie ably supplied the House of Commons' summary for our contemporary, The Times. He was also an occasional contributor of leading articles to the same Journal. He continued to employ himself in this manner until he received (on the nomination, we believe, of the late Lord Granville Somerset) the appointment of Yice-Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. But the literary effort which does his name most honour, is undoubtedly his ' Life of Lord Eldon'—one of the best specimens of biography which we possess. It silenced at once and for ever the doubts and cavils of those who, misled by the varied and somewhat desultory nature of Mr. Twiss's career, had judged him incapable of producing a sterling work, involving a great number of important topics, which, for lucidity of style, fulness of information, and comprehensiveness of view, should stand the severest test of criticism. Had life and health been spared to him, he might have earned still higher distinctions, literary and professional. But we are, at all events, justified in commemorating him as a kind- hearted, honourable, and estimable man, of undoubted ability, who has left a host of friends to lament his loss, and not a single ill-wisher to dispute his claim to the esteem and admiration of his contemporaries."

Twiss died very suddenly. The Times, in noticing the event, says:—" lie left home on Friday morning at about ten o'clock, and having spent the intervening hours in the transaction of other business, attended at two o'clock a meeting of the Hock Assurance Society, at Radley's Hotel, Bridge Street. The discussion had begun, and he had risen to address the meeting, when, after speaking for some minutes with his usual clearness and force, he suddenly sank back into his chair, as if in a fainting fit. He was immediately carried by the friends about him into an adjoining room, and several medical gentlemen were instantly in attendance. Cordials were promptly administered, and every other means which science could suggest were taken to restore the action of the heart, but it had ceased to beat, and, after one or two convulsive sobs, Mr. Twiss had ceased to exist."

* Report of the action Bogle v. Lawson, tried at Croydon, Aug. 16, 1841; edited by W. Hughes Hughes, Esq.

* See memoir attached to " London in a Thousand Years, -with Other Poems; hy the late Eugenius Roche, Esq., Editor of The Courier, &e." London: 1830.

† He actually mortgaged the freehold house in which he lived, to raise funds for the purchase of two twenty-fourth shares, as the stipulated condition of his appointment as editor, at a salary which did not covcr the quarterly demands upon him as a share of the losses.

CHAPTER IX.
THE MECHANISM OF A MORNING PAPER.

" Her officers march along with armies, and her envoys walk into statesmen's cabinets. They are ubiquitous. Yonder Journal has an agent at this minute giving bribes at Madrid; and another inspecting the price of potatoes in Covent-Garden.—PENDENNIS.

The growth of Newspaper arrangements and expenses.—The accounts of The Public Advertiser and of The Morning Chronicle.—Increased Expenses caused by growing Competition.—Staff of a Daily Paper in 1850.—Editors.—Reporters.—Foreign and Home Correspondents.—Printers.—Overland Mail.—Waghorn.—Arrival of a Mail.—Twenty-four hours in a Newspaper Office.

WHAT Thackeray says of daily Papers, though true enough now, would not have applied in Dan Stuart's days. Their growth in importance and power, until dingy printing-offices are fed with copy from literary ambassadors at foreign courts, and literary followers of invading armies, has been a very gradual affair; and before speaking of the staff of a Daily Paper in 1850, it will be well to see what the arrangements of such establishments were in former times. Mr. H. G. Woodfall having kindly lent the ledgers of The Public Advertiser for the years 1772-6 for quotation, we shall be able to see how strong the contrast is between Newspaper mechanism, in past and present days.

Here is a transcript of the statement of the expenses (omitting paper, printing, and stamps, the amount for which varies, of course, with the number produced, and is returned in like proportion) of The Public Advertiser for 1773—the year after Junius had ceased to write for the paper:—

The total expenses are thus under £800 a-year, exclusive of the before-mentioned charges. No Parliamentary or law-court reporters, no paid foreign correspondents, are to be found in these Newspaper charges for a successful daily Paper in 1773. Sir John Fielding's name appears for several years; but whether he wrote letters, or reported cases," or edited the Paper for his £50 a-year, is not clear.* The penny-a-liner of those days was evidently known as a " News-collector."*

At this period the Paper was receiving, on an average, about a £100 a-week for advertisements, about half of which went to pay the duty (then 2s. on each advertisement), leaving about £50 a-week towards the expenses and profits. The sale at the same period averaged 3,000 a-day. The profits varied. In 1774, they were £87 on each twentieth share, or £1,740 in the whole. The list of proprietors includes, Thomas Longman, as owner of one-twentieth; John Rivington, two-twentieths; H. S. Woodfall, two-twentieths; Thomas Cadell, one-twentieth; William Strahan, one-twentieth; James Dodsley, two-twentieths. Garrick, as we have already said, had a share in the Paper, but his name does not appear in the list of those who signed the book of accounts—nor, indeed, do the names of many other shareholders.

In other portions of these accounts we find entries which do not at all explain themselves. They appear amongst the payments, and simply run thus—"Playhouses, £100;" "Drury Lane advertisements, £64 8s. 6d.;" "Covent Garden ditto, £66 11s." Did the theatres in those grand days for the drama sell early and exclusive copies of their play-bills to the Newspapers? If so, things have greatly changed since then. The cost of the paper for the Public Advertiser averaged about 25s. a ream; there were charges for waste; and they issued some copies on sale or return: thus, in Feb., 1773, the returned Papers were 1,400, and in March of that year 1,000, or 400 a-week.

Half a century after these days of Junius the daily Papers still continued to be far more humble in character, and far behind what we find them now in size; and they were consequently less expensive than at present. At that time (I am now repeating what was told me by a Journalist who flourished at the time he speaks of), the Newspaper sheet was much smaller in the vacation than during the Parliamentary session—in the one case, four columns, in the other, five, to the page; and the length of the sheet was far shorter than at present.

Daniel Stuart, in the Gentleman's Magazine, for July, 1833, stated that The Morning Post's " circulation and character raised it above all its competitors and what that circulation was we learn from the same gentleman:—"The Morning Post never sold more than 4,500; that was in August, 1803, when I sold it; and then no other daily morning Paper sold so much as 3,000."

From the accounts of The Morning Chronicle, it appears that in March, 1797 (its best season), the sale was 1,148 a-day. In March of the following year, the sale was 1,537 a-day. At that time Liberal principles were at a very low ebb. Mr. Perry filled for some time, chning the Whig Administration of 1806-7, the office of Secretary to the Stamp Office, which acted injuriously on the sale of the Paper. The sale was highest (say 3,500) about the time of the Manchester massacre, as it was called (1819). It fell greatly during the excitement about Queen Caroline, when that Journal took neither one side nor another, and exemplified the old adage of two stools. On Mr. Perry's death, in 1821, the sale was about 2,800. And yet, with these low sales, the net profit of a morning Paper greatly exceeded what it sometimes now is. Perry's private banking-book for 1820 showed his income from the Paper was nearly £12,000. This difference of profits between past and present, doubtless arises from the enormous expenditure of a morning Paper in the present day. The monopoly is nearly complete; but whatever the income, the expenditure of all Papers is nearly alike. Mr. Thwaites had much to do with raising the expenditure, by sending correspondents to all quarters for The Herald. The Times and Herald ran a most expensive race for some years. The Herald sent a correspondent to Spain, followed George the Fourth to Hanover, and took other equally spirited but expensive steps. Thwaites's object was, by devoting all the receipts to expenditure, not merely to raise the sale, but to compel Glassington, a Newsman, who held a share, to sell out from want of income.

The following copy of a printer's account for The Morning Chronicle, just before the great revolution of printing by steam, will show how low the expenditure was in that department:—

Every other branch was proportionately low. The Chronicle had, in 1810, five House of Commons reporters, one of whom attended the King's Bench besides; one House of Lords' reporter, who digested the Police reports as well. The reports of the other courts were seldom given. The leading articles were in general very brief. But there was much more light and satirical writing in proportion than at present.

The Paper was obliged to keep accounts with advertising customers then as well as now, and as the advertisement duty was then high, much money was invested, which only came back after a considerable period. Had it not been for the duty on advertisements, the morning Papers would have had little outlay that was not covered by the daily receipts. The salaries of reporters rose gradually during the war irom two guineas a-week to five guineas. There was an understanding among the proprietors not to give beyond that sum, and the understanding was nominally adhered to; but Walter, of The Times, made presents to some of his best hands, which amounted, in fact, to an additional salary. There was a continual jealousy among the proprietors on that subject.

Perry was the first proprietor who gave annual engagements to reporters, which was good policy, as a poor man was, during the vacation, compelled to seek out some less precarious occupation, and thus a Paper was crippled at the opening of the session. The Chronicle at that time depended greatly on its Parliamentary reports, and was looked up to as the best authority. The expenditure of morning Papers, coupled with the heavy burthen of treble taxation—tax on paper, tax on advertisements, and tax on the perfect Journal itself—has had the effect of reducing the number.

STAFF, AND NEWSPAPER EXPENSES, OF A DAILY PAPER IN 1850;

WITH AVERAGE RATE OF COST, AND STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF WEEKLY STIPENDS.

In addition to these, it is requisite to have paid correspondents at the following points:—

When circumstances render the News from any other spot more than usually interesting, additional foreign assistance, or a change in the above staff becomes requisite.

After the Foreign Correspondents we must reckon those at the ports, who facilitate the transmission of late News to London; and next the Reporters in the provinces. Of these, the first twelve on the following list are necessarily stipendiaries; the others being usually paid in proportion to their contributions:—PROVINCIAL—

Dover (agent)—For Continental News, and Overland Mail.

Southampton—For West India, Peninsular, and American mails, and local.

Liverpool—For American, Irish, and local, also shipping and share markets.

Manchester—Important commercial, local, and share markets.

Leeds—Commercial, local, and share markets.

Birmingham—Commercial, local, and share markets.

Bristol—Commercial, local, share markets, and shipping, and occasional early Irish News.

Dublin.

Plymouth—Naval, military, and local.

Pembroke—Naval.

Falmouth—Naval.

Portsmouth—Naval, military, and local.

York—Share markets.

Wakefield—Corn markets.

Chatham—Naval.

Sheerness—Naval.

Woolwich—Naval and military.

Gravesend—Important shipping.

Glasgow.

Cambridge—University and local.

Oxford—University and local.

Returning again to arrangements for London News, we take the next most costly item:—

CIRCUITS.—Home, Western, Oxford, Midland, Northern, Norfolk, Welsh. These cost from £20 to £30 a circuit; except the Home, say £300 a-year, or average of £6 a-week.

These salaries to law reporters are usually not paid during the Long Vacation; which, of course, reduces their annual amount considerably.

Next come the Police reports. Separate reporters attend at the following Courts:—

POLICE.—Bow Street; Clerkenwell; Marylebone; Worship Street; Thames; Marlborough Street; Guildhall; Mansion House; Wandsworth; Lambeth; Southwark; Greenwich; Woolwich; Ilford Petty Sessions.

Salaries are paid to some of the reporters at these Courts; others being remunerated according to the quantity of their " copy" used by the Paper. The average cost of the Police Reports may be stated at £10 a-week; of general " penny-a-liners'" copy, £10.

Next we may note the arrangements for the City contributions to the general stock of News, and its cost:—

In addition to these chief sources of " copy," smaller salaries are paid for reports of the following:—

MARKETS:—Smithfield, Hay; Smithfield, Cattle; Leadenhall, Hides; Newgate and Leadenhall, Meat; Billingsgate, Fish; Southwark, Hops; Thames Street, Coals.

For City use it is requisite also to subscribe to the Stock Exchange Lists, to Lloyd's, and the Jerusalem Coffee House.

But we have not done yet. The Court, the Fine Arts, and the Turf require notice. News of these is supplied by—

The Court Circular, Sporting Reporter, Theatrical and Musical Reporter, Fine Arts Reporter.

It is very desirable to have a man on the establishment acquainted with medical affairs, and with the collateral sciences that enter into medical education, to keep the Paper clear of the absurd mistakes constantly made in reports of medical evidence and legal investigations, where physiological, chemical, or botanical knowledge is required.

A staff thus arranged, leaves many points unmatched, as Public Meetings, Parliamentary Committees, Masters in Chancery, Railways, and other sources of News. Some of these can be attended, on special occasions, by members of the Parliamentary corps; for others, it is requisite to have an additional stipendiary reporter—the rest being left to that active body the " penny-a-liners."

In addition to all these paid sources of information, it is most desirable to have communicative friends in the public offices—in Downing Street (where deputations have to be reported); at the Horse Guards, for Military News and rumours; at the Admiralty; the Treasury; and Board of Trade. The Clubs must also be looked to, especially the Reform, and the Carlton or Conservative.

It is requisite also to subscribe for

Hansard's Debates; Acts of Parliament; Votes of the House, and other Parliamentary papers; The London Gazette; the Coal Market List; and Packet List.

A large number of Foreign, Colonial, and Provincial Papers, are likewise required. These vary in number according to the exigencies of the time. When France, or Germany, or Italy, or America, are in a turmoil, these printed voices from abroad are desirable in larger numbers than when things are quiescent. The English local Papers are always requisite, and the average number of Papers from abroad and from the country, required by a Daily Paper, cannot be put down at less than one hundred and fifty. In many cases these are exchanges; if not, they have to be paid for. Their examination, and the preparation of the News they contain, is one of the most laborious of the sub-editorial duties.

The collecting the mass of News abroad and at home, is not the only cost attending it. When clever correspondents have been found (and they are by no means too abundant), their exjjenses to the scene of action have of course to be paid; and, when there, the cost of the transmission of their communications becomes, in the course of a year, a very heavy item. The post does only a portion of this duty—the post being too slow—and hence a he^vy item for railway parcels, and occasionally still heavier charges for special railway engines to bring up News express. The electric telegraph is another very costly mode of bringing intelligence to town, but one that must be constantly employed. The charges are very severe. The postage account for a Daily Paper is always very heavy, and the cost of ordinary railway parcels and porterage to the office, will average £5 to £7 a-week. It is a rule on the railways that when a special engine has been engaged, any person may travel by it who is ready to pay his share of the cost. Hence, when one Paper orders an engine to bring up an express, its rivals have the opportunity of joining it. When this is done, the cost is of course lightened; but when the express is exclusive, the charge falls very heavily. To bring up an exclusive report from Liverpool or Manchester will cost £50, for the engine alone, to say nothing of the expense of the report.

The office which is the centre of all this activity is another expensive item. To accommodate editors, reporters, and from fifty to seventy printers and machine-men, and assistants, and publishers, and clerks, and porters, and errand-hoys requires spacious premises; and indeed an establishment yet to be mentioned under the headings:—

PRINTING:—

NUMBER OF MEN EMPLOYED.—A printer, assistant printer, maker-up of advertisements, three readers, three assistant readers, or " reading boys," and about forty-five to fifty compositors regularly employed; also about eight or ten " Grass" men not regularly employed, but who wait for engagement work from the regular hands who may be absent from illness or otherwise. These men, or " Grass," are not recognised by the printer in his official capacity—a regular hand being always supposed to be at his frame either by himself or " Grass."

TIME OF WORKING.—Copy is given out by the printer from about half-past seven to eight in session or Parliament time; and from eight to nine during the recess, except on special occasions. The compositors are obliged to attend about three hours before copy is given out, for the purpose of distributing the types used in the previous day's Paper, which are required for the night's work. Composition is usually closed about three o'clock; the men are usually occupied about ten hours in the office.

RATE OF WAGES.—The printer from £5 to £6 per week, the assistant printer and advertisement man, £3 10s. to £4; reader, £3; assistant ditto, £1 Is. to £1 10s. The compositors, from £2 10s. to £3., averaging the whole year. About four or six men are generally employed by the printer after composition is closed to assist in putting the Paper to press. These men average from £3 10s., to £4 per week.*

MACHINE-ROOM:—

Machinist and Assistant Machinist.

Chief Engineer and Assistant Engineer.

Sixteen men and boys to feed the machine, and take out Papers.

One "wetter-down," to prepare the paper.

PUBLISHING:—

Publisher, at Five Guineas a-week.

Assistant.

Four or five Errand Boys.

BUSINESS MANAGEMENT.

Secretary.

Cashier and Accountant.

Three Advertisement Clerks.

Night Porter.

Day Porter.

Errand Boy.

The items,—rent, gas, wear and tear of plant, and interest on outlay, may come, with the other charges, into the following

GENERAL SUMMARY OF WEEKLY EXPENSES.

Out of the Parliamentary Session the cost is less; but the charges for a year, of an ordinary daily Paper, at the present time, cannot be estimated under £25,000; and this, be it remembered, after it has been got well on foot. The first year of a new Paper would cost a sum larger and larger in exact proportion to the ignorance of its promoters of the practical details of such an undertaking. Thus, the profits on the sale of the Paper, and on advertisements, must be about £500 a-week, before the proprietors can calculate upon a profit.

Paper and stamps are not brought into this account, because the expenses we have been estimating are just the same whether two thousand or twenty thousand Papers are produced; and because the quantity of paper and stamps varies with the number printed, and their cost is returned at once over the counter.

The Overland Mail is a costly impediment to a new Paper, unless it be allowed to share the expense with its contemporaries. It averages nearly £4,000 a-year, that is, about £20 each a-week, when divided between four Papers.* This route may be called the modern race-ground of the English Journals. In old times, they were content to test each other's speed in an express with post-horses from the borders of Scotland to London; as in the case of the Grey dinner. Lately, they have found a far more ambitious field; the starting point being India, and the goal the City of London, the course being the Red Sea, Egypt, the Mediterranean, Marseilles, across France, over the Channel, and by special engine up the South-Eastern Railway. This has been varied by the Trieste route, when the Adriatic, Austria, the Tyrol, the Rhine, Cologne, Belgium, and Ostend, were the variations on the previous chase. The author and hero of all this rapid work from India was poor Waghorn,* who by virtue of a strong frame, and a stronger will, and helped by an idiosyncrasy which seemed never to let either his temper or body be placid or still, kept kicking and fighting with difficulties till they were all overcome. Waghorn started in life as a naval officer, and served not only in the Royal Navy, but in that of the East India Company. Whilst in India he conceived the plan of establishing steam communication between England and India, and after talking, writing, and lecturing for some years, he gained great notice and raised many objectors to his plan. Two friends, however, were found in Lord Ellenborough and Mr. Loch, of the India Board, and in 1829 the opportunity offered and Waghorn gave the world assurance of his quality. Here is the story as told in the Papers:—

In October, 1829, he was called on by Lord Ellenborough, President of the India Board, and Mr. Loch, Chairman of the Court of Directors, to go to India through Egypt, with despatches for Sir J. Malcolm, Governor of Bombay, &c.; and to report upon the practicability of the Bed Sea navigation for the Overland route. On that trip he got to Alexandria in twenty-six days. Indeed, so rapidly had his journey to Trieste been accomplished (in nine and a half days, through five kingdoms), that an inquiry was then made by the Foreign Office respecting it. Lieutenant Waghorn's orders were, to join the Enterprise, first steamer from England to India, at Suez, on the 6th of December, 1829. Owing to an accident she did not appear, and as he had important Government despatches, Lieutenant Waghorn had no resource except to return to England, or go on in an open boat down the Bed Sea. He preferred the latter, as a matter of duty, and sailed down the centre of that sea without chart or compass, the north star being- his guide by night, and the sun by day. He arrived at Juddah, 620 miles, in six and a half days, and there first learned that the Enterprise steamer had broken her machinery on the way from Bengal to Bombay, and was not coming. From what Lieutenant Waghorn observed in this trip, he felt convinced, for every purpose of interest, politically, morally, and commercially, between England and the East, that this was the route; and it were a waste of time to say with what ardour, perseverance, and firmness, he worked it to completion.

Lieutenant Waghorn received the thanks of the three quarters of the globe—namely, Europe, Asia, and Africa—besides numberless commendations from mercantile communities at every port where Eastern trade is concerned. Unaided and alone (except by the assistance of the Bombay Steam Company), he built the eight halting places on the desert between Cairo and Suez, established the three hotels above them, in which luxuries are provided and stored for the passing traveller, and rendered that hitherto waste the wonder of every traveller. When LicutenantWaghorn left Egypt, inl841, he had established English carriages, vans, and horses, for the passengers' conveyance across the desert (instead of camels), and placed small steamers from England on the Nile and the Canal of Alexandria. The " Overland Mails" to and from India for two years (from 1831 to 1834), were worked by himself, and he summed up his labours by putting letters to England from Bombay in forty-seven days, in Feb., 1834, without any steam from Alexandria to London.

While making a fortune by the traffic on the route he had laid down, he was overwhelmed by the Peninsular and Oriental Company getting a charter giving them a monopoly of the carrying trade on the line, and Waghorn had to commence the world—or rather, his search for fortune—afresh. Though defeated, he was not disheartened; and, in 184.7, he made some great and expensive experiments, by which he endeavoured to establish what he regarded as a still more rapid route to India, via Trieste. The Augsburg Gazette, which naturally took great interest in these trial trips, thus reported the results:—

The first moiety of the six trial journeys arranged by the British Government for the conveyance of the Indian despatches through Germany is now completed. As regards England, the object is nothing less than the securing of a second route—one at least equal in point of celerity to that through France, in the event of a political quarrel with the latter country; as regards Germany, the restoration of the old middle-age, Venetian-Hanseatic commcreial-road—the construction of a new public road along the banks of the Rhine, over the Alps, to the Adriatic Sea and the East, and also the freedom from useless intermediate traders; as regards Holland, a more direct and rapid connection with its East Indian colonics; and as regards Belgium. and the western and southern part of Germany in particular, a most important conveyance of goods, passengers, and letters, which is already increasing in importance. Here is a summary of the trials made:—

PRELIMINARY TRIALS.

France.—From Alexandria to Marseilles, 190 hours; from Marseilles to London, 85 hours; total, 275 hours.

Germany.—From Alexandria to Trieste, 156 hours; from Trieste to London, 99¾ hours—total, 255¾ hours.

FIRST TRIAL TRIP.

France.—From Alexandria to Marseilles, 196 hours; from Marseilles to London, 79 hours—total, 275 hours.

Germany.—From Alexandria to Trieste, 130 hours; from Trieste to London, 107 hours—total, 237 hours.

SECOND TRIAL TRIP.

France.—From Alexandria to Marseilles, 152 hours; from Marseilles to London, 77½ hours—total, 229½ hours.

Germany.—From Alexandria to Trieste, 133 hours; from Trieste to London, 120½ hours—total, 253½ hours.

THIRD TRIAL TRIP.

France.—From Alexandria to Marseilles, and from Marseilles to London, 246 hours.

Germany.—From Alexandria to Trieste, 156 hours; from Trieste to London, 97 hours—total, 253 hours.

Totals of the above Trips.—France, 1,025½ hours; Germany, 999¼ hours.

The average gives, for one journey, 256¾ hours on the French, and 249¾ on the German line; and if the preliminary trips are excluded, 250 1-6 for the first, and 247 5-6 for the second. If it be farther considered that the Ariel (the Marseilles boat) sailed twelve knots an hour, and the Ardent (the Trieste boat) seldom upwards of ten, and very often only three knots—which will be taken into due consideration by those acquainted with the subject—as the object is not a competition between two wholly unequal vessels, the superiority of the German route cannot remain doubtful another moment.

Waghorn got more reputation than money by his share of the experiments; indeed, he involved himself seriously in debt, and political events soon afterwards combined with other circumstances to check any further attempts by the German route. Marseilles came out of the contest successful if not triumphant. Poor Waghorn lived in difficulties and died poor.

The Overland Mail is not the only arrival that is watched with eagerness, and affords opportunities for the agents of opposition Papers to display their zeal. When American News of importance arrives off Liverpool—a President's Message, for example—a chase often takes place; the English Channel, too, has frequently been the seat of rival operations, from the days when the late Mr. Alsager crossed it in an open boat, with news that anticipated the Government despatches, to the advent of the late French Revolution, when The Times, Herald, and Chronicle were pitted against The Daily News. Of late years, Southampton has also been an important point whence early intelligence may come, and, when well looked after, does come. An illustration of this may be told in the words of a writer in a Paper (The Hants Advertiser) published on the spot where the scene he describes was enacted:—

"The success of English Newspaper proprietors in attaining pre-eminence over their foreign rivals," he says, " has been greatly assisted by the extent and perfection of our mail-packet arrangements. We have now nearly 150 steamers, most of them of the greatest power and speed, engaged specially in bringing political and commercial intelligence from all parts of the world. They are never delayed at any port at which they may touch, but for the purpose of coaling, and landing and embarking mails; and their rapid and punctual arrival in this country, after, in some instances, running a distance of 3,000 miles, without stopping, is one of the wonders of this remarkable age.

"The Newspaper agents at the outports must be well acquainted with, the necessities, as far as information is concerned, of British commerce, and its peculiar ramifications and connexions in different parts of the world; they must also have a knowledge of the politics of different countries, and of the latest foreign News which has been published in the English Journals. The foreign News collected at Southampton is principally from the cities and seaports of the Peninsula, from the British, Spanish, Dutch, French, and Danish West India Islands, the Gulf of Mexico, the United States, and the Spanish Main; occasionally, also, important News reaches Southampton from Havre and the Cape of Good Hope.

"It is a well-known fact that oftentimes before a foreign mail packet comes alongside the Southampton dock wall hundreds of persons in London, eighty miles distant, are reading from the public Journals with breathless interest the News she has brought; that while the packet is coming up Itchen creek, the intelligence of which she is the bearer has been transmitted to the metropolis, and printed and published; that during that short interval of time her News has affected the public funds, and induced numbers to risk the acquisition and loss of whole fortunes by speculations in trade and in the public securities.

"When a mail packet is due at Southampton, watchmen are employed day and night by Newspaper proprietors to look out for her. In the day-time, when the weather is clear, and there is not much wind stirring, the smoke of a large mail packet in the Solent may be seen by looking from the quay over Cadlands; but homeward-bound steamers are generally made out by means of powerful telescopes after they have passed Eaglehurst Castle, by looking over the flat tongue of land which terminates where Calshot Castle stands. When she rounds Calshot Castle a rocket is thrown up from her, which is a mail-packet signal. As soon as the rocket is observed, the watchmen are in motion running in different directions up the town. In a few minutes may be seen stealthily gliding towards the quay a few persons who, if it be a winter night, would scarcely be recognisable, disguised as they appear to be in greatcoats, comforters, and every kind of waterproof covering for the head, feet, and body. These persons are the outport Newspaper agents. They make for the head of the quay, and each jumps into a small yacht, which instantly darts from the shore.

" Cold, dark, and cheerless as it may be, the excitement on board the yachts is very great in calculating which will reach the steamer first, and at no regatta is there more nautical science displayed, or the contention more keen and earnest. Let us suppose the time to be about six o'clock of a dark winter's morning, the yachts reaching the steamer just as " ease her" has been hoarsely bawled by the pilot off Netley Abbey. As soon as pratique has been granted, the Newspaper agents climb up the side of the steamer, oftentimes by a single rope, and at the risk of their lives, and jump on board. A bundle of foreign Journals is handed to each of them, and they immediately return to their yachts, and make for the shore. The excitement and contention now to reach the shore is far more intense than was the case daring the attempt to reach the ship. While making for the shore sometimes in the most tempestuous weather, perhaps the rain peppering down, and the wind blowing great guns, or thunder and lightning over head, the foreign Journals are hastily examined by means of a lantern, similar to that used by policemen, the most important items of foreign News which they contain are immediately detected, and the form in which they must be transmitted to London arranged in the mind. The agents are landed as near as possible to the electric telegraph office, sometimes on the shoulders of their boatmen through the surf or mud. They arrive at the telegraph office, and to write down their messages is the work of a few minutes only.

" The rule in writing down telegraphic messages is truly Benthamic, viz., to convey the greatest quantity of News in the fewest possible words. That is done to save time and expense. Perhaps the message is as follows:—Great Western. Jamaica, 2. Cruz, 26. Million dollars. Dividends fifty thousand. Mosquito war ended. Antilles healthy. Havana hurricane. Hundred ships lost. Crops good. Jamaica, rains. Sea covered, wreck plantations.' While the agents are writing these messages, the telegraph is at work, and by the time the messages are written in Southampton, they have been almost communicated to Lothbury. A cab conveys written copies of them with the utmost despatch to the Newspaper offices. They are immediately in the hands of the foreign editors, or subeditors, who comprehend the purport of them immediately. In a few minutes they have been elaborated and made intelligible, and they shortly appear in a conspicuous part of the Morning Papers in the following shape:—

"'ARRIVAL OF THE WEST INDIA AND MEXICAN MAIL—IMPORTANT NEWS FROM THE WEST INDIES—DREADFUL HURRICANE AT HAVANA —AWFUL DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY IN JAMAICA.

"'The Royal Mail Steam-packet Company's steamer Great Western has arrived at Southampton. She brings News from Jamaica up to the 2nd inst., and from Vera Cruz up to the 26th ult.; she has on board freight to the amount of 1,000,000 of dollars on merchant's account, and 50,000 dollars on account of Mexican dividends. The miserable " little war" unfortunately entered into by this country on behalf of the black King of Mosquito has terminated. We regret to learn that a most destructive hurricane has happened at Havana, and that a hundred ships have been wrecked in consequence. The weather, we are happy to say, has been fine in the West Indies, and the Islands are healthy. The crops of West India produce are progressing favourably. The May rains at Jamaica have been very heavy, and have done considerable damage. The rivers have swollen enormously, overflown their banks, and done great damage to the plantations. The sea, at the mouths of the rivers, was covered with the wrecks of the plantations.'

" It is a singular fact that the inhabitants of Southampton generally first learn of the arrival of the mail-packets in our docks from the Morning Papers. Persons go to Southampton to meet friends or relatives from abroad; they lodge near the water, to be certain of knowing when the packets arrive, and it often happens that the Morning Papers on the breakfast table give them the first intimation of the arrival of those they are anxious to meet. Two or three years ago Paredes escaped from Mexico, and came to Southampton in a West India steamer. He arrived almost incog., and was scarcely aware that he was known on board. Some slight delay took place before the steamer could get into the dock, owing to the tide, and Paredes had no idea that any communication had been made with the shore. To his utter astonishment, the first sound he heard on landing was his own name; for a News-boy was bawling to the passengers from a Morning Paper—'Second edition of the Daily News. Important news from Mexico. Arrival of Paredes in Southampton.'

"The Mexican monarchist has since travelled all over Europe, and is now in his own country; and he has been heard to declare, that the greatest wonder he knew in this quarter of the globe was the rapidity with which News was obtained and circulated in England."

A sketch of twenty-four hours of Newspaper life will give some idea of how the complex and expensive machinery moves for the collection, preparation, and publication of a daily Paper. Perhaps the earliest contributor at work is the Dublin Corresjioudent. By the present Post Office arrangements, via Holyhead, a steamer leaves Kingston harbour, soon after eight in the morning, for Holyhead, and special despatches sent by that conveyance reach London the same day. By this mode we have News at night in London dated Dublin the same morning. To prepare this, the Correspondent must be up betimes, get early copies of the Morning Papers, write his despatch, and be off by railway to meet the steamer by breakfast hour. He is then free till evening, whilst his copy is making its way across the Channel towards the London Office. The French Correspondent, meanwhile, has risen, dressed, and is deeply immersed in The Debats, The Constitutionnel, and The Moniteur. Flimsy paper and rapid translators are in requisition; a brisk drive to the Hotel de Ville, or to the house of a brother Journalist, or a call at some other point where additional information, or a confirmation, or contradiction of current rumours may be gained, and then " Our Paris Correspondent" sits down to complete his despatch. Quick pens and quicker thoughts speed on the work, and when all has been said, a capacious envelope receives the slips; it is sealed, and away to the post-office in the Rue J. J. Rousseau before eleven. The day is yet early, and a stroll through the city, a call upon friends, a gossip at some public office, and in a café, another glance through the Newspapers, an overhaul of the letters from Rome, from Naples, from Turin, from Madrid, which the post has brought, and the Correspondent is ready to prepare his more elaborate despatch for the five o'clock post. This is a matter of importance, and takes time. If the Chambers are sitting, a reporter has been placed there to give the proceedings, and, as the hour of five draws near, the " copy" accumulates. The despatch is written; extracts from the leading Parisian Papers have been made; Galignani has been laid under contribution; some digests of French statistical papers have been summarised into readable and valuable pars; the report of the Paris Bourse, and of the Madrid Bolsa, come in, followed quickly by that from the Chambers, delayed till the last half-minute, that the proceedings might be brought up till the latest possible moment before the words " left sitting" closed the copy. Again the capacious envelope, with its printed address, is ready, and the abundant contributions of Paris towards the London stock of News finds its way to the post just two seconds and a quarter before the bureau closes. Whilst these French and Irish ambassadors of the Fourth Estate are thus employed, their brethren at Berlin, Vienna, Madrid, and elsewhere are occupied much in the same way, each collecting his batch of News and commentary in time for the mails. Special Correspondents, meanwhile, are less systematic. One, it may be, is vibrating between contending armies, as in the recent cases of Eadetsky and Charles Albert, or of Bern and Windischgratz; another is an attache to the fallen fortunes of Kossuth at Widdin; another hovers about the Golden Horn, to learn where the English fleet will really make a warlike demonstration against Russia; another is gathering News of California amongst the Wall Street speculators of the western world; whilst another chronicles the doings of the Sooloo pirates in the suffocating atmosphere of the East.

The reporters at home are as busy as the correspondents abroad. Amongst the earliest afoot in the morning, is one noting at Smithfield the prices of cattle; otliers, at Wakefield and Mark Lane, the price of corn; another, in Southwark, the prices of hops; and in Mincing Lane, the qualities and rates of coffees and sugars. At Liverpool, the cotton; at Manchester, the yarns; and at Leeds, the woollens, are being watched, their prices jotted down, and the tone of the markets noted. Stocks and shares, also, are being inquired about in all these and many other towns; whilst corn prices, and supplies, are equally attended to. Where large local meetings occur, there also the reporters are to be seen taking up their places on the platform to note the thrice-told tales of agricultural distress; and the equally familiar promises of prosperity to come from free trade. In one part of the country, a railway collision is being reported; in another, an inquest on a mine explosion; in a third, an assemblage of persons favourable to church extension; in a fourth, a lecture on separation of church and state; in a fifth, some terrible accident or appalling murder,—be it where it may, there is a busy pen at work for the London Paper. Post hour has less importance for the Newspaper man in England than abroad. The last train is the point of interest here. As the hour for that approaches, the names of the sufferers by the collision, of the speakers for church extension and for church disruption; the described horrors of the fatal choke damp; an equal account of the murderous looks and deeds are all quietly packed up together in little brown paper parcels, and steam-power is bearing them away towards the sub-editor's table. Before this London is contributing its quota. In each law court there is a pencil busy in a note-book, or on the back of a brief; in each police court the reporter's box is occupied; in each coroner's court the "highly respectable jury" look with surprise upon the often tattered habiliments of the penny-a-line representatives of "The Papers." Does an engine rattle through the alarmed streets? there goes a reporter with it; does a gentleman fall down in an apoplectic fit? a surgeon and a reporter are sure to be ready,—the one to " use every means that medical skill could afford," and the other to earnafew shillings by writingaparagraph. TheCourt Circular is chronicling the Queen's proceedings; The Morning Post has its fashionable friend buzzing about Gunter's to hear of fashionable routs, or about Banting's to learn full particulars of a fashionable funeral. Every district has its penny-a-liner; every disaster its historian.

These minor contributors are not more active than their superior officers. The editor has been reading over the Morning Papers of London and Paris; has glanced at the debates; and mentally arranged many of his topics for the night's leaders. He has written to some of his literary aids, and received an article from one, a review from another, a suggestion from a third, and he finishes his breakfast, and goes off to call at his club or on a political friend—his mind the while shadowing forth the arguments to be employed ; the illustrations to be used; and the points to be made, in the Paper of to-night. The sub-editor, if any remarkable meetings, or other reports, are expected to come, has been to the office to consult with the editor, secretary, or other executive daylight officer of the Paper, about expresses or telegraphs; to talk over the character and usefulness of candidates for employment; to discuss suggestions; to decide who shall attend various meetings in London and the provinces, and settle the various points which constantly arise in the progress of working a daily Journal.

If Parliament is sitting, another large mass of manuscript is now growing up under the pens of the reporters. Fourteen or sixteen of these gentlemen each in his " turn" sits in the gallery of the House, and for three-quarters of an hour, or an hour, according to arrangement, takes his note of the debate. When the time of one is up, and his seat at St. Stephen's has been occupied by a successor, he hastens to write out in extenso the speeches he has been listening to. If the debate is prolonged, by the time his first notes have been prepared he must be ready to go into the House again, and it sometimes happens that a third turn is taken on the same night. When the speakers are good, or the debate important, this combined labour of so many pens completes a formidable mass of "copy."

By nine o'clock the editor, the sub-editor, the foreign editor are all busy; the editor with his leaders, the foreign editor with his German and French, and the sub-editor with the mass of multifarious things that now load his table. The law reports being on matters of fact, and usually prepared by barristers, give little trouble; but with this exception, scarcely a line comes to the sub-editor which does not require preparation at his hands. Meetings reported to please speakers instead of the public, railway and commercial statements full of long tabular accounts to be summarized and made readable; letters from indignant "con stant readers," in which libels lurk in the midst of long statements of wrongs endured, or reforms demanded; reports of police courts, of inquests, of disasters, all written on flimsy paper, and requiring great quickness of eye and mind to decipher at all; papers from all quarters of the kingdom; statements of markets, of shipping, of births, deaths, and all other conceivable and inconceivable things, demand attention and preparation for the printers, who by this time are ready for the six hours rapid and skilful labour that shall convert this mass of contributions of all sizes, characters, and qualities into a shapely morning Paper. With the help of an assistant or two, the load rapidly diminishes, and by midnight there is a tolerably clear table, preparatory to the arrival of the late railway despatches. These received, a new labour has often to be commenced. Although the troublesome search through fifty country Papers has afforded a great quantity of local News, the late despatches often bring up much more; the Irish and Scotch advices come to hand, and with this addition of home News very often comes a file of Papers from America; from the West Indies; from Brazil; from France, Germany, or Hamburgh. An hour or two clears off all these new accumulations, and then the proof sheets having been attended to, and the place and arrangement of the articles been decided upon;—the number of leaders, and the number of advertisements settled, the columns calculated, and the decision made as to what shall appear, and what stand over, the editorial work of one day is done. By half-past four the Paper is at press, and News-boys and morning mails distribute the Papers to all parts of the country to meet their " constant readers" at breakfast tables in counting-houses, and at country fire-sides.

Just as the wet Newspaper, fresh from the Newsboy, is being opened at the eight o'clock breakfast table of the early-rising city merchant, the Dublin correspondent is again handing his despatch on board the steamer at Kingston for to-morrow's Journal—and so the twenty-four hours of Newspaper life are up.

* In the accounts for other years we find the expenses greatly increased by law costs in defending actions for libel. Thus, in 1774 we have, "Expenses, King's Bench Prison, and fine, £200 14s. 9d.;" " Law Expenses attending Alexander Kennet, £3 7s.; Compter, £52 10s."

* Gentleman's Magazine, May, 1838.

* The mortality among compositors employed on the morning press, taking the average of the last ten years, is about three and a half to four per cent.

There are about 460 compositors regularly employed on the daily press in London; three-quarters of whom are men of superior intelligence and habits, and respectability; a great improvement having taken place within the last eight or ten years.

* The Parisian Newspapers, which attach only a secondary importance to News—second editions being comparatively unknown—were greatly astonished when a trial revealed the enormous expense incurred by the London Journals to obtain the News which they treat with so much indifference. The Times had an action brought against it by one of its couriers, who complained of having been unjustly dismissed; and in one of the preliminary stages of the cause it was made public that The Times agreed to pay this man £100 a-year as fixed salary, £60 for every journey he should make in sixty hours from Marseilles to Paris, £14 for going from Paris to Boulogne in fourteen and a half hours, and £16 for going from Paris to Calais in sixteen and three-quarters hours, with an additional allowance of £2 for every hour which he should be able to save in the specified time. And all these disbursements made, being only a portion of the total cost, to obtain a summary of the Indian News a few hours in advance of the regular mail. The Parisian editors were astounded.

* Thomas Waghorn was born at Chatham in the early part of the year 1800. At twelve years of age he was appointed a midshipman in the Royal Navy, and sixteen days before he had attained seventeen he passed in navigation for lieutenant—the youngest midshipman that had ever done so. At the end of 1817 he was paid off, and went third mate of a free-trader to Calcutta. Returning home in 1819, he got appointed to the Bengal marine (pilot service) of India, where he served till 1824, when he volunteered for the Arracan war, and received the command of the East India Company's cutter Matchless, and a division of gun-boats, in connection with that army and flotilla. He was five times engaged, and saw much service by land and by sea, and was once wounded in the right thigh. He returned to Calcutta in 1827, having received the thanks of all the authorities, with a constitution then undermined from the baneful fever of Arracan, where so many thousands died. Pestilence reduced the forces, in six months, to one-fifth of their original number; but Lieutenant Waghorn rallied, and when completely restored to health, commenced the great project he had at heart.

CHAPTER X.
THE EVENING PAPERS.

"News! News! Great news! Great news! Evening Paper!"—OLD LONDON STREET CRY.

Evening Paper in 1727.—The Evening Posts.—The Courier and Coleridge.—Pereival. — Second Editions. — James Stuart. — Laman Blanchard.—The Globe.—G. Lane.—The Sun.—The True Sun.—The Standard.—Dr. Gifford and Maginn.—The Evening Mail and St. James's Chronicle.

EVENING Papers have been almost as long in existence as daily morning Papers, but they were not originally issued every evening. The ordinary mode of their publication appears to have been three times a-week. We find, for instance, No. 1 of The London Evening Post, dated Dec. 12, 1727, announced to appear in this manner. These first evening Papers are, some of them, described as being published on the inland post nights. This indication of the means by which they were distributed explains also the prevalence, at that time and later, of one word in their titles. In the lists we find General Evening Posts, London Evening Posts, Lloyd's Evening Posts, St. James' Evening Posts, and others. A collection of articles from one of these first evening Papers was published in 1748.* They were from The National Journal or Country Gazette,† which began on Saturday, March 22, 1746, and was suppressed on Thursday, June the 12th, following, by the printer and author being taken into custody ; the former being confined in Newgate till the 26 th day of February, 1746-7, when he was discharged by Habeas Corpus,—the suspension of that act having just then expired.

In 1774, we find John Miller, of The London Evening Post, confined in the Fleet Prison, at the suit of Lord Sandwich, for damages given him by a verdict for alleged libel; but the share of such persecutions as fell to the lot of The Evening Papers did not prevent their increase, and in 1788 such Journals appear to have been sufficiently profitable to encourage the appearance of a daily evening Paper. Three years later a second appeared, and from that time to the present, the metropolis has had, not only its Newspaper fresh from the press at the breakfast table, but smaller Journals ready with the late News, to amuse the evening hours of such as will read them.

The great period for evening Papers was during the war, when all the country was in a state of excitement, and thirsted for the latest News that the mails which left London at night could supply. The Courier, in those times, became the great Paper, and obtained large circulation, and, consequently, great influence. In the letters of Daniel Stuart, which have already afforded particulars of the earlier history of The Morning Post, we find also some gossip about The Courier. He says (still about Coleridge):—"During three years, at the time of the overthrow of Bonaparte, The Courier, by Street's able management, sold steadily upwards of 8,000 per day; during one fortnight it sold upwards of 10,000 daily. It is, therefore, probable, at the time Coleridge wrote for it, in 1811, it sold 7,000. This, I suppose, he confounded with The Morning Post, which never sold more than 4,500; but Coleridge's own published letters show he never rendered any services to The Courier.

"So farwith regard to The Morning Post. Throughout the year 1803, during my most rapid success, Coleridge did not, I believe, write a line for me. Seven months afterwards I find Coleridge at Portsmouth, on his way to Malta. At Portsmouth, where he remained some time, I introduced him to Mr. Mottley, the bookseller; a man of great influence, and of a kind, lively, obliging disposition. Coleridge was delighted with his attentions. I have letters from Coleridge from Portsmouth, Gibraltar, Malta, Syracuse. &c.; and on his return to England, in the summer of 1806, he applied to me as his best friend. I gave him apartments at The Courier office to spare expense. In 1807 he was engaged with his play. Early in 1808, he gave his lectures at the Royal Institution, and again he had apartments in The Courier office. At the end of that year he began hisjdan of " The Friend," which lasted him till towards the end of 1809; and respecting which, I took great, expensive, and useless trouble, as a bundle of Coleridge's letters show, about subscriptions, paper, stamps, printers' money, &c., &c. When all these things failed, then Coleridge,in 1811,proposed to write for The Courier on a salary. It is true he sent some essays upon the Spaniards in the end of 1809, but that he did rather as some return to me for the sums I had expended on his account, than on my solicitation. In truth, Mr. Street, who was editor and half-proprietor of The Courier with me, never thought so highly of Coleridge's writings as I did; and whenever I proposed an engagement for Coleridge, Street received my suggestion coldly. The Courier required no assistance. It was, and long had been, the evening Paper of the highest circulation. From August, 1803, when I left The Morning Post, but, in truth, from the autumn of 1802, when Coleridge last wrote for it, till the autumn of 1809, Coleridge did not write a line for any Paper with which I was connected; and yet he says he wasted his prime and manhood in "writing for these Papers. A few weeks in 1800, and a few weeks in 1802, that was all the the time he ever wasted on The Morning Post; and as for The Courier, it accepted of his proffered services, as a favour done to him, when, everything having failed, he could do nothing else."

Here are some traits of Newspaper life in those days:—"Coleridge had exposed in conversation," says Stuart, " some improper part in the Duke of York's conduct. I wrote an article or essay on the subject in The Courier. Two or three Papers were allowed to go off early, every day, to the government offices. About four o'clock up came an alarming message from the Treasury, that if that paragraph went forth the Ministry would be ruined! We cancelled 3,500 sheets and expunged it, and I made Street promise to accept of no pecuniary remuneration for so considerable a loss, that it might not be said we had done this to extort money. The Paper at that time was supposed to be so much under Ministerial direction, that certain high personages would not have believed the paragraph was not sent designedly by Ministers to the Paper for a crooked purpose.

"Early in 1811, Coleridge had some private business with me. I called on him at Charles Lamb's chambers in the Temple, and we adjourned to a tavern, where we talked over the News of the day. There was at that time a dispute in Parliament about the conditions on which the Prince of Wales should accept the Regency, and it had been authoritatively, ostentatiously, gravely boasted, that the Royal Brothers had met, and had all agreed it should be a Regency without restrictions. Coleridge pointed out that this was a most unconstitutional interference, that the constitution knew nothing of an assembly of princes to overawe the Legislature. I wrote an article to this effect in The Courier, referred to the Germanic constitution, and censured the attempt to establish " a College of Princes" in England. The Duke of Sussex took this up in high dudgeon, and made a long angry speech in the House of Lords on the subject. He thought, evidently, that the article was a Ministerial manifesto from the cabinet in Downing Street; little knowing that it was only a tavern concoction, of which Ministers knew nothing.

" At this time a struggle was going on, whether the Regent should be a Whig or a Tory, and important letters were passing between his Royal Highness and Mr. Perceval. At midnight George Spurrett, the porter, who slept in The Courier Office, was knocked up; a splendid carriage and splendid liveries at the door; a portly elegant man, elegantly dressed, wrapped up in a cloak, presented himself, and inquired for Mr. Stuart; for, as I was abused in the Newspapers as the conductor of The Courier, the merit of which belonged wholly to Mr. Street, I was the j^erson inquired for by strangers. George said Mr. Stuart lived out of town; but Mr. Street, the editor, resided on the Adelphi Terrace. A packet was delivered to George, and he was enjoined to give it speedily to Mr. Street, as it was of great importance. This was a copy of the correspondence between the Prince of Wales and Mr. Perceval. To be sure of its being genuine, Mr. Street went immediately to Mr. Perceval to inquire. On seeing it, Mr. Perceval started back, and exclaimed, ' This is done to ruin me with the Prince! If it appears in The Courier, nothing will persuade him I did not publish it as an appeal to the public against him! It must not be published!' ' No!' said Mr. Street; ' it is a very good article for the Paper!' Mr. Perceval explained and entreated; Mr. Street still remarking, ' It is a very good article for the Paper, and what will partner Stuart say if he hears of my suppressing it?' ' Well,' said Mr. Perceval, who held it fast, ' some News shall be sent to you as an equivalent.' Accordingly, a copy of the official despatch of the taking of the island of Bandy, in the East Indies, was sent the same day, and was published in The Courier, before it appeared in The London Gazette. I knew nothing of this till the evening; when I dined with Street at Kilburn, where we had a hearty laugh at these occurrences."

A great feature of The Courier was its second editions. These, during those days of excitement, the public were never allowed to forget. Men with horns ran down the streets making " most hideous music," and shouting between each blast, " News, News, great News—Courier, Courier—great News, great News—second edition, second edition." Two or three strong-lunged fellows would at times be within hearing at the same moment, and no one could avoid noticing the fact. The stock of Papers each carried with him usually found a ready sale, and then the office was resorted to for more. A story has been told to show how these second editions were sometimes made. The editor must have a second edition, and News must be got to make it. The account of Bellingham's murderous act was, of course, a great card for the Papers. Thousands upon thousands had been issued with all that could be got together, but the public appetite being supplied, the demand fell; when suddenly the town was disturbed witb the horns and the voices and the hurrying feet of the Newsmen, who bellowed out, " Third edition, third edition—Courier, Courier—Bellingham, Bellngham—late News, late News." The Papers were sold rapidly, and on went the successful hawkers to find new customers. As the third edition was greedily searched for the additional intelligence, each reader was gratified with the important paragraph:—" We stop the press to announce that the sanguinary villainBellingham has refused to be shaved!!"

Stuart tells us he took no interest in The Courier after 1819,* and parted with his last share in it in 1822.

The career of a subsequent editor of The Courier has thus been sketched by a friendly hand in the columns of The Morning Chronicle:—"James Stuart, eldest son of the late Rev. Dr. Charles Stuart, belonged to and was nearly connected with the noble family of Moray. He was bred to the profession of the law, and became a writer to the signet in 1798. He had excellent talents for business, and had he given it due attention, he would most probably have attained the highest distinction in his profession; but, having inherited a respectable property iu the county of Fife, he became attached to agricultural pursuits; and these, with his duties as a country gentleman and magistrate, and the political engagements into which he entered with the utmost warmth, speedily engrossed by far the greater portion of his time and attention. He was a zealous and an uncompromising Whig. No man ever existed more completely devoted to his party, ormore disposed to make every possible exertion and sacrifice to promote its objects. In the halcyon days of Toryism, when the Dundases were all but omnipotent in Scotland, Mr. Stuart maintained his perfect independence, and distinguished himself by the vigour, the decision, and the boldness of his political conduct. At a later period, when the Liberal interest began to make some way in Scotland, and party spirit ran very high, Stuart was always to be found in the front of the battle. His advice, his efforts, and his purse were never wanting to forward the cause he had at heart. Hence he naturally became an object of hostility to the baser portion of the Tory party. Abuse of all sorts was heaped upon him. Most part of it, indeed, was too scurrilous and contemptible to deserve any notice; and but for the circumstance of its having been discovered that Sir Alexander Boswell, Bart., was one of its principal authors, it would have speedily and quietly sunk into oblivion. This discovery led to the duel in which Sir Alexander Boswell met his death at the hands of Stuart. The trial which followed was in the highest degree creditable to Mr. Stuart, who, it was admitted on all hands, could not have acted otherwise than he did. His business necessarily suffered by these continuous distractions; and his means were crippled, chiefly by the expensive improvements he effected on his patrimonial estate of Dunearn, and by the expenses in which they involved him, and partly by his too generous hospitality. Being of an extremely sanguine disposition, he attempted to repair his fortune by speculating in land, but the crash of 1825 proved fatal to his schemes, and involved him in embarrassments by which he was overwhelmed. As he had done nothing dishonourable, he might easily have settled with his creditors; but his feelings would not allow him to face them, and he took the rash and unfortunate resolution of retreating to America. On his return he obtained his discharge, but he lost the situations he had held in Edinburgh, which he might have retained had he not left Scotland. After his return Mr. Stuart published an account of his travels in the United States; and, though not very profound, this work gives on the whole an extremely good, though rather perhaps a little too flattering, account of our transatlantic kinsmen. Soon after the publication of this work, Mr. Stuart became the editor of The Courier, and, true to his principles, he gave in this capacity every support in his power to the Whig or Liberal party. He was appointed by Lord Melbourne to the situation of Factory Inspector, which he held till his death (in 1849). And it redounds much to his credit, that in this difficult position he conducted himself so as to acquire the esteem not merely of the manufacturers, but of the great majority of the workmen. His too great sensibility, his impetuosity, and his obstinate adherence to the opinions and steps he had either avowed or taken, sometimes hurried Mr. Stuart into difficulties and embarrassments, which more dispassionate, though not abler or better men, would have avoided. But in his bearing and manner he was a perfect gentleman, and his many excellent qualities made him be highly esteemed and beloved by a wide circle of attached and intelligent friends. If ever the history should be written, as it well deserves to be, of the rise and progress of Liberal opinions in Scotland during the present century, the name of James Stuart will occupy one of the most prominent and honourable places in its pages.

" Mr. Stuart was robust, active, and singularly capable of bearing fatigue. He died in his 74th year, of a disease of the heart, most probably induced by the excitement in which he passed the greater portion of his life."

After Stuart had received the appointment, and had resigned his connexion with the press, Laman Blanchard became editor of The Courier, bringing to the task that versatility of talent, and ardour of political feeling, for which he was distinguished. But the war was gone, and The Courier, like other evening Papers, was less profitable than of old; and, in an evil hour, the proprietors determined to sell the Paper to the party they had so long opposed. The Paper took Tory politics; Laman Blanchard, of course, at once resigned; and a few short years were sufficient to destroy a Journal which had once been the most valuable Newspaper property in England. The loss of his post on the Paper must have given some annoyance to Blanchard, and it was not until after his unhappy death thatBulwer made known the fact that the Government had been asked, and asked in vain, to give this clever writer some trifling recompense for the service his pen had done for the Liberal cause. Blanchard's "political articles were of considerable value to the party he espoused; although free from the acerbity and the personalities which the warfare of Journalism rarely fails to engender. The change of proprietorship and of politics in The Courier occasioned his retirement, and necessitated the loss of an income, for him considerable. His services to the Whigs, then in office, had been sufficient to justify a strong appeal in his behalf for some small appointment. The appeal, though urged with all zeal by one who had himself some claims on the Government, was unsuccessful. The fact really is, that Governments, at present, have little, among their subordinate patronage, to bestow upon men whose abilities are not devoted to a profession. The man of letters is like a stray joint in a boy's puzzle; he fits into no place. Let the partisan but have taken orders—let him but have eaten a sufficient number of dinners at the inns of court—and livings, and chapels, and stalls, and assistant-barristerships, and commissionerships, and colonial appointments, can reward his services and prevent his starving. But for the author there is nothing but his pen, till that and life are worn to the stump; and then, with good fortune, perhaps on his death-bed he receives a pension—and equals, it may be, for a few months, the income of a retired butler! And so, on the sudden loss of the situation in which he had frittered away his higher and more delicate genius, in all the drudgery that a party exacts from its defender of the press, Laman Blanchard was thrown again upon the world, to shift as he might, and subsist as he could."

Short as his clays unhappily were, Blanchard lived to see the desertion of political principle by The Courier punished by the complete destruction of the Paper.

In Daniel Stuart's defence of himself and his Paper against the imputations of Coleridge and his biographers, he speaks incidentally of the establishment of some opposition Papers by the booksellers, and of the projectors of the new Journals having taken away from him his chief literary assistant, George Lane. This remark was published in the Gentleman's Magazine, and in due time we find in the pages of that publication* a reply from Lane, in which he gives his version of the foundation of The Globe, and, incidentally, some facts about other Papers. He says:—"Mr. Daniel Stuart states that the booksellers having determined to set up two daily Newspapers, The British Press and The Globe, in direct opposition to his Papers, The Morning Post and The Courier, 'took' from his employment George Lane (meaning me), his chief assistant, supposing that when they got me ' they got The Morning Post, and that he (Mr. Stuart) was nobody.' To this charge of a combination against him, urged in several passages in his statement, I answer, that in my first interview with the booksellers on the subject of their Papers, I inquired the motives for their new undertaking, and, in answer, they stated their object was not pecuniary profit, but the protection of their trade, which suffered from the manner in which the existing Newspapers were conducted; that their advertisements were frequently thrown into the back of the Paper, and there mixed with others of a gross and offensive character; that frequently their advertisements were refused insertion, or if received, their insertion was attended with injurious delay, as happened upon occasions of important Parliamentary debate or other interesting matter requiring considerable space, and this in cases of new literary works prepared at great expense; and that, as a remedy for these grievances, they proposed to have a morning and evening Paper of their own, the columns of which they could command. These were the views and motives they professed, and I firmly believed them; and I further declare, that I never had cause to suspect that they had any other, or that the Papers were intended for the unworthy purpose alleged by Mr. Stuart; nor did I ever conduct them in that spirit. Mr. Stuart refers to Sir Richard Phillips as a voucher for his statement; but, at the time the booksellers applied to me, the late Mr. Debett, of Piccadilly, was the only member of the trade with whom I had the slightest acquaintance. Sir Richard Phillips I did not know until after I had made my engagement, when I found him a member of a committee for managing the financial affairs of the concern, with which, however, I had nothing to do, and I conducted the Papers entirely according to my own judgment, perfectly free from all undue influence. A new Newspaper is, I conceive, as legitimate a speculation as a new bank or a new insurance office; and that the booksellers were perfectly justified in setting up their Papers for the purpose I have stated. A new Paper does not create new readers; its circulation is derived from the existing stock, and must necessarily affect the whole, though, perhaps, not each individual in the same degree; hut that the new Papers were set up particularly in opposition to The Morning Post and The Courier I deny. If they were likely to affect any individual Paper, The Morning Chronicle would appear, on Mr. Stuart's own showing, to have the greatest cause for apprehension, for he says, ' Mr. Perry, who aimed at making The Morning Chronicle a very literary Paper, took pains to produce a striking display of book advertisements; while horses and carriages constituted the particular class of advertisements in The Morning Post.' This much may suffice in vindication of the booksellers. I now proceed to make some observations in vindication of myself. Mr. Stuart, while he gives me credit for merit of various kinds—which, without betraying excessive vanity, I could not arrogate to myself—says, I owned that I was indebted to him ' for all I knew of Newspapers,' that by his instruction, he might say education, I had become valuable in various ways, and that I was his chief assistant in his morning Paper. This I readily admit. His statement is perfectly correct and true. I was a total stranger to Newspapers when he accepted my proffered services, and any knowledge I possessed of Newspapers was acquired in his office. But I will go further than the bare admission of this part of Mr. Stuart's statement in its most extended sense. During my connexion with him he uniformly treated me with exceeding kindness and great liberality, of which the following particulars may convey an idea. He proposed to me to enter into a written engagement with him, which I declined. My refusal appeared to surprise him, and he said if I felt any caxise of dissatisfaction in the establishment it should be removed. I answered there was none; I was pleased with every one in it, and everything about it. He then said, if I did not consider my salary sufficient he was ready to increase it; to which I answered, that I was perfectly satisfied, and felt myself amply compensated as I stood, but that I wished to hold myself a free man. This conversation took place at an early period of our connexion; and upon that footing I remained until its close, during which interval he added more than once to my income, but not at my instance or request. The advance always came spontaneously and unsolicited, from his own will. I may add, that I never heard any member of the establishment complain of want of liberality on the part of Mr. Stuart. He wished to have his business done diligently, but he was uniformly liberal in compensation. These are facts not now disclosed, or sentiments not now expressed by me for the first time. In every company in which I ever heard his character and conduct alluded to, I have uniformly born testimony to his liberality, and expressed myself to the same effect. It will now occur to the reader to ask how it happened that I, so highly favoured, should withdraw myself from an establishment in which I had so much cause of content. Mr. Stuart had repeatedly communicated to me his intention to retire from conducting his Paper, and to confide the management of it to me; and the period was now approaching at which he proposed to carry his intention into effect. About this time the project of the booksellers became publicly known, and a proposal, totally unforeseen and unexpected, was made to me to become their editor, to which I gave a prompt and decided negative. On the very next day I learned that Mr. Stuart was desirous to dispose of his Paper, and it may be conceived that the information produced in me surprise and disappointment. I was not so unreasonable as to expect that Mr. Stuart should continue to carry on his Paper for my sake; and his uniform kindness would justify an expectation that in a negotiation for its sale he would endeavour to stipulate favourable terms for me: but this was not the position to which I had been taught to look ; I may have been too fastidious, but, whether the feeling was right or whether it wasAvrong, I did not relish the idea of being transferred like a fixture with the concern to strangers. This feeling was aggravated by a little occurrence not now necessary to revive, but which Mr. Stuart probably remembers, when just at this critical moment the proposal, which I had so recently rejected, was repeated and pressed upon me, and I, in a discontented frame of mind and with reluctance, consented to entertain it. If, then, I left Mr. Stuart, it was not until after I found he was ready, if opportunity offered, to part with me; if, as he charges, ' the booksellers took me from him,' it was not until he was ready to give me away. I continued with him nearly two months after I had apprised him of the engagement I had contracted, and during that time he never adverted to the subject, nor had 1 cause to learn, except from his reserve and the coldness of his manner, that I had excited his displeasure. I could have had no mean, sordid, or unworthy motive for leaving Mr. Stuart. My terms with the booksellers were not, in a pecuniary point of view, more advantageous than those Mr. Stuart had proposed for me. I was exchanging a life of comparative ease for one of incessant labour and anxiety; I was leaving friends to whom I was affectionately attached, to commit myself to strangers of whom I knew nothing. I was leaving an established, flourishing Paper to embark in a new speculation of uncertain issue. What mean, sordid, or selfish motive, then, could I have had to encounter so fearful a change? Mr. Stuart exclaims, ' The booksellers being possessed of a general influence among literary men, could there be a doubt of success?' Mr. Stuart greatly overrates the literary support and patronage which the new Papers received. The actual sale at the commencement did not exceed two hundred each, and any literary contributions received and inserted were paid for. The booksellers almost immediately, from various causes, began to drop off. Mr. Murray, now of Albemarle Street, then a very young man, was the most active, liberal, and valuable among them; but he, with Messrs. Longman, Clarke, of Portugal Street, Butterworth, and many others of the greatest influence and importance, after a short time withdrew; and I was left to contend with difficulties and under the most discouraging circumstances, in which the fortune of the Papers appeared desperate, and their very existence hung, as it were, by a thread, before I succeeded in establishing the concern on safe grounds, at which time not more than two booksellers remained partners in it."

Since the days of Lane. THE GLOBE has had many editors, and was for years regarded as the Liberal Ministerial evening Paper. Mr. Gibbons Merle was one of its literary aides, and whilst engaged on The Globe wrote the articles on Newspapers which appeared in the early numbers of The Westminster Review. Another writer on The Globe was Colonel Torrens, a retired officer of Marines, who fought with much distinction during the war,* and on the return of peace became a Newspaper proprietor and writer. He had a share in The Traveller, which was afterwards united to The Globe—as the heading of the Paper still bears witness.

THE SUN has long had a reputation for late intelligence; but is still more noticeable for the opposition it bad to contend with. For some years the town was kept constantly aware of the fierce contest between The Sun and The True Sun, established by Patrick Grant, and conducted for a time with great spirit. Laman Blanchard was on this Paper as a principal writer; Mr. William Carpenter being the sub-editor. Grant getting into difficulties mortgaged the new speculation, and it was subsequently bought and conducted by Mr. Daniel Whittle Harvey, who, however, did not succeed in making it profitable. One of its last editors was Mr. W. J. FOX, now M.P. for Oldham. One other fact must not pass unchronicled. Mr. Charles Dickens made his first Parliamentary campaign as a gallery reporter on The True Sun.

THE STANDARD is junior to both Sun and Globe, having been started to support the Conservative party during the Beform Bill excitement. It is said that Lord Lowther was one of the capitalists on the occasion; Mr. Baldwin* being the other; Dr. Maginn finding a title, a motto, and a prospectus. From the first number to the present time, The Standard has been edited by Dr. Gifford, a man well known for his talent and strong political bias. In the early days of The Standard Dr. Maginn was one of the staff, and many anecdotes are current of the glorious sayings and doings of that time; but Maginn was, like greater geniuses, too irregular for the punctual duties of a daily Paper, and he gradually dropped off, leaving his post to be filled by Alaric Watts, who held it for a time.

Besides The Sun, Globe, and Standard, we have now two other daily evening Papers—The Express, an evening edition of The Daily News; and The Evening Chronicle—both offshoots from the more important morning Journals. The Times and Herald also have evening Papers, but only thrice a-week. They are The Evening Mail and the St. James's Chronicle. The latter was at one time edited by a hardworking literary labourer named Stephen Jones, a Londoner, born in 1703, and educated at St. Paul's school. He was originally intended for a sculptor, and left stone for metal, and turned printer. From composing types, he rose to correcting proofs, and then took still another step, in 1794, by becoming an author. His first publication was an abridgment of Burke's Reflections on the French Revolution, and this was followed by a variety of compilations and abridgments. In 1797 Jones became editor of The Whitehall Evening Post, but editing did not fully occupy his time. Amongst his productions was one entitled, The Spirit of the Public Journals, a volume of which appeared annually for many years, commencing with 1799. On the decline of The Whitehall Evening Post he became editor of The General Evening Post, which he conducted for a considerable period, until it passed into other hands and was united to The St. James's Chronicle. He was also connected with the Freemasons' Magazine; and, after the death of Mr. Isaac Reid, he conducted the European Magazine. That gentleman, before his death, was engaged in preparing a new edition of Baker's Biographia Dramatica; his papers were put into Mr. J ones's hands, who, in 1812, published a new edition in 4 vols., 4to, much enlarged. This book was severely handled in the Quarterly Review; and Jones retorted in a pamphlet, called, " Hypercriticism exposed." He was not a man to be crushed by an adverse article, and continued to write and prepare food for printers till the close of his active and useful life.

* London: Printed by S. Clark, in Fleet Street, and to be sold at the pamphlet shops in town and country. 1748.

† This Paper was one of those published three times a-week, " on the evenings of the inland post nights." The editor observes in his prospectus, " Although there never was a time when the public was so overburthened with Newspapers as at present, yet there never was a time when the public so ardently wished for one more." In order to carry out the project, the projector requested contributions, among others, from " any ingenious gentleman who has any dead wit lying upon his handsand on political subjects from others of "a more serious turn." But, at the same time, he declared that he would exclude from his Paper the contributions of " cunning men," who possessed a natural fund of invention, and announced his Paper to be " entirely for the lovers of truth." A great portion of this Paper is taken up by serious articles and political squibs, throwing doubt upon the Government accounts of the war against the Pretender during his last efforts to obtain the Crown.

* " March 4, 1816.—The editor of The Courier Mr. S—gave a grand dinner a few days since to Earl of Yarmouth, Mr. Croker, icc.; when the magnificent service of plate made by Rundell and Bridge was exhibited; also the snuff-box set with brilliants presented to him by the King of France."—New Monthly Mag., Vol. LXXIX., p. 28.

* Gentleman's Magazine, Sept., 1838.

* Colonel Torrens was born in Ireland in 1783. He entered the marines at a veiy early age, and obtained a captain's commission in 1806. In March, 1811, when the Danes with a very superior force attacked the little island of Anholt, he commanded the marine garrison. He was rewarded with the rank of major, and ho next served in the Peninsula, and was appointed Colonel of a Spanish Legion.

* In searching through old Newspaper files the names of particular families are found identified with this class of literary property. The Baldwins appear to have been one of these. Like the Walters, three generations seem to have been Newspaper printers, and proprietors. The name of Richard Baldwin stands in the imprint of a Newspaper as long ago as 1689.

CHAPTER X.
REPORTING AND REPORTERS.

The gallery in which the reporters sit has become a FOURTH ESTATE of the realm. The publication of the debates, a practice which seemed to the most liberal statesmen of the old school full of danger to the great safeguards of public liberty, is now regarded by many persons as a safeguard, tantamount, and more than tantamount to all the rest together.—

MACAULAY'S Essay on Hallam's Constitutional History.

Early Parliamentary debates.—The Commonwealth.—The Revolution. —George the Second.—The Gentleman's Magazine.—Parliamentary History.—Guthrie.—Dr. Johnson.—Almon.—AYoodfall.—Perry.—Sheridan.—Peter Finnerty.—Mark Supple.—Sketch of the Reporter's Gallery.—O'Connel.—Sir R. Peel.—The Theory that no Reporters are in the House of Commons.

THERE were no satisfactory reports of parliamentary proceedings until Newspapers undertook the task of giving them. D'Ewes's Journals of Elizabeth's Parliaments contain some curious specimens of parliamentary speeches; the first volume of the Commons' Journals also gives some reports of debates; and a member of Parliament has left us a report of the debates of the session of 1621. Still these are only fragments. Rushworth gives a few discussions, and Gray, in his collection of debates, affords some more. Yet all these are disjointed and occasional efforts affording very incomplete results.

In our sketch of the rise of Newspapers, we have seen that the first parliamentary debates allowed to be published in public Papers were those of the Parliament when the power of Charles I. began to wane before the growing democracy. The Diurnal of Occurrences may be pointed to as containing the first Newspaper reports of parliamentary proceedings. In 1641, we have, " The Passages in Parliament from 3 of Jan. to the 10, more fully and exactly taken then the ordinary one hath beene, as you will finde upon comparing. And although the weeke past doth yeeld many remarkable passages (as hath beene any weeke before) yet you shall expect no more expression either now or hereafter in the title then the passages in Parliament &c. London printed for Nath. Butter at St. Austin's Gate in Paul's Churchyard, at the signe of the Pyde Bull 1641."

During the Commonwealth the reports were continued, hut the Restoration stopped them entirely.* Cromwell promoted, hut Charles forbade all parliamentary reporting, and with occasional exceptions the debates of his reign are lost to history. The Revolution of 1688 effected a partial freedom for the press, but still no one could safely print the debates. Boyer's Political State of Great Britain, however, gave a monthly record of Parliament, such as it was.

After tlie accession of George I., something like a regular account of the debates was given in a publication called The Historical Register, which continued to give them till 1737.* Here the thread was taken up by Cave, who thought them excellent matter for his Gentleman's Magazine. He bad previously been in the babit of sending to friends in the country some of the written memoranda of debates, which in those days circulated through the coffee houses and in private society; and the interest which attached to these imperfect documents doubtless suggested to the enterprising mind of the bookseller the value that more perfect reports must give to a monthly Magazine. He did not dare, however, to print his reports till the session was over, and then he ventured only on stating the initials of the speakers. In 1738 even this modest amount of publicity was objected to.

On the 13th of April in that year, the Speaker, Onslow, iiiformed the House,+ that it was with some concern he saw a practice prevailing, which a little reflected upon the dignity of that House: what he meant, he said, was the inserting an account of their deliberations in the Newspapers, by which means the proceedings of the House were liable to very great misrepresentations. That he had in his hands a printed Newspaper, which contained His Majesty's answer to their late address, before the same had been reported from the Chair, the only way of communicating it to the public. That he thought it his duty to inform the House of these practices, the rather because he had observed them of late to have run into very great abuses; and therefore he hoped that gentlemen would propose some method of stopping it. Six. W. Yonge continued the discussion, which deserves full quotation. He said; " I am very glad you have mentioned this affair. I have looked upon it as a practice very inconsistent with the forms and dignity which this House ought always to support; but since you have been pleased to mention this from the Chair, I must beg leave to carry my observations a little farther. I have observed, sir, that not only an account of what you do, but of what you say, is regularly printed and circulated through all parts, both of the town and country. At the same time, sir, there are very often gross misrepresentations, both of the sense and language of gentlemen. This is very liable to give the public false impressions both of gentlemen's conduct and abilities. Therefore, sir, in my opinion, it is now high time to put a stop to it. Not that I should be for attacking the liberty of the press; that is a point I would be as tender of as any gentleman in this House. Perhaps some gentlemen may think it indeed a hardship, not to be able to find their names in print, at the head of a great many fine things, in the monthly magazines; but this, sir, can never prevent gentlemen from sending their speeches, if they please; it only prevents other gentlemen from being misrepresented as to what they say, which, sir, I am sure is what ever)' gentleman in this House will wish for. Therefore, I hope gentlemen will consider of some method of putting a stop to this abuse, more effectual than we have fallen upon yet. There is, indeed, a resolution on our journals, against printing or publishing any of the proceedings of this House, but by authority of the Chair; but people had generally run away with the notion, that this prohibition is in force only during the time we are sitting, and that as soon as the session ends, they are at liberty to print and publish what they please; therefore, I hope gentlemen will come into a resolution, for explaining that matter; and if they do, I am very sure that if it is broke through, I myself will move the House, with the very first opportunity, next session. But the printers of the Papers, sir, which you have in your hands, cannot even plead the excuse of the recess of Parliament; therefore deserve to be punished; and if you do not either punish them, or take some effectual method of checking them, you may soon expect to see your votes, your proceedings, and your speeches, printed and hawked about the streets, while we are sitting in this house.

" Sir W. Windham next spoke. Sir, he said: Xo gentleman can be more jealous and tender than I have always been of the rights and privileges of this House, nor more ready to concur with any measure for putting a stop to any abuses which may affect either of them. But at the same time, sir, I own, I think we ought to be very cautious how we form a resolution upon this head; and yet I think it is absolutely necessary that some question should be formed. I say, sir, we ought to be very cautious in what manner we form a resolution; for it is a question so nearly connected with the liberty of the press, that it will require a great deal of tenderness to form a resolution which may preserve gentlemen from having their sense misrepresented to the public, and at the same time guard against all encroachments upon the liberty of the press. On the other hand, sir, I am sensible that there is a necessity of putting a stop to this practice of printing, what are called the speeches of this House, because I know that gentlemen's words in this House have been mistaken and misrepresented; I do not know, sir, but I have some reason of complaint myself upon that head. I have, indeed, seen many speeches of gentlemen in this House that were fairly and accurately taken; and no gentleman, when that is the case, ought to be ashamed that the world should know every word he speaks in this House: for my own part, I never shall, for I hope never to act or speak in this House, anything that I shall be ashamed to own to all the world. But of late, sir, I have seen such monstrous mistakes in some gentlemen's speeches, as they have been printed in our Newspapers, that it is no wonder if gentlemen think it high time to have a stop put to such a practice. Yet still, sir, there are two considerations, which I own weigh very much with me upon this occasion. That this House has a right to prohibit the publication of any of its proceedings during the time we are sitting, is past all doubt, and there is no question, but that, by the resolutions that now stand upon our votes, and are renewed every session, the printers of the Papers you have in your hand are liable to the censure of this House. But I am not at all so clear as to the right we may have of preventing any of our proceedings from being printed during our recess; at least, Sir, I am pretty sure that people without doors are strongly possessed with that notion, and therefore I should be against our inflicting any censure at present, for what is past of that kind. If gentlemen are of opinion, which I do own I am not, that we have a power to prevent any of our proceedings and debates from being communicated to the public, even during our recess, then, as this affair has been mentioned, they will no doubt think it very proper to come to a resolution against this practice, and to punish it with a very severe penalty; but, if we have no such power, sir, I own I do not see how you can form any resolution upon this head, that will not be liable to very great censure.

" The other consideration that weighs very much, sir, with me upon this occasion, is the prejudice which the public will think they sustain, by being deprived of all knowledge of what passes in this House, otherwise than by the printed votes, which are very lame and imperfect, for satisfying their curiosity of knowing in what manner their representatives act within doors. They have been long used to be indulged in this, and they may possibly think it a hardship to be deprived of it now. Nay, sir, I must go farther; I do not know but they may have a right to know somewhat more of the proceedings of this House than what appears upon your votes; and if I were sure that the sentiments of gentlemen were not misrepresented, I should be against our coming to any resolution that could deprive them of a knowledge that is so necessary for their being able to judge of the merits of their representatives within doors. If gentlemen, however, are of opinion that they can frame a resolution which will put a stop to all impositions, and yet leave the public some room for having just information of what passes within these walls, I shall be extremely glad to give it my concurrence. But I am absolutely against our stretching our power farther than it will go consistently with the just rights of Parliament; such stretches rather weaken than give any strength to the constitution; and I am sure no gentleman will care to do what may not only look like our claiming powers unknown to our constitution, but what, in its consequences, may greatly affect the liberty of the press. If we shall extend this resolution to the recess of Parliament, all political writing, if the authors shall touch upon anything that passed in the preceeding session, may be affected by it; for I do not know that anybody would venture to publish anything that might bring upon them the censure of this House.

" In the mean time, sir, I am as willing as any gentleman in this House, that a stop should be put to the practice you have taken notice of from the Chair. It has grown to such a pitch, that I remember some time ago there was a public dispute in the Newspapers betwixt two printers or booksellers of two pamphlets, which of them contained the true copy of a certain hon. gentleman's speech in this House. It is, therefore, high time for gentlemen to think of somewhat to be done for that purpose, and I make no doubt but that any resolution this House shall think fit to come to, will put an effectual stop to it.

" Mr. Thomas Winnington next said: I do not pretend to know the forms and the powers of this House so well as the honourable gentleman over the way, who has much more experience in both than I can pretend to; but it is very surprising to me, that any gentleman should seem to make a doubt of the power which this House has during the recess of Parliament. It is true, we have no power, but as a House, to make any commitment, or to pass any censure; but then it is as true, that the orders and resolutions of this House are, or ought to be, as binding during our recess, as during our sitting. The reason, sir, of this is plain; because we are still the same House, and we have the same authority during our adjournment or prorogation, as when we sit; our privileges are the same, and for the same reason our acts ought to have the same force too. Can any gentleman doubt, that if this House shall come to a resolution, that if any person should, during our recess, presume to print any of our proceedings, that we would not have a right to punish him next time we met together as a House? I dare say, gentlemen will not pretend that we have not; therefore, sir, I hope you will come to some very strong resolution upon this occasion. I hope ye will declare, that whoever shall presume to print any part of the proceedings of this House, during the recess of Parliament, will be equally liable to the censure of this House as if it were during the session.

" As to what the honourable gentlemen insinuated about the liberty of the press being in danger, it is a consideration I am in no manner of pain about. Our coming to a resolution, that we will not have what we say misrepresented, can never affect the liberty of the press. It is what every private gentleman has a right to require, though he were out of Parliament; for I believe no gentleman would wish to see his sentiments misrepresented in print, even though they regarded a private affair; but when such a thing happens in a debate, to fix a gentleman's public character, the consequences are much worse. For my own part, sir, I am not afraid of speaking my mind in this House; but I should be very sorry to see anything I say in this House misrepresented in a public Newspaper; and I should think I had a very good title to redress, even though I were not a member of this House.

" But, sir, setting aside the case of these gentlemen being misrepresented in -what they say in these public Papers, I think it is a very great injury done us, as a House of Parliament. I do not see why we ought to be less jealous of our rights and privileges, than the other House is. I know of no right we have given up, with regard to our power to regulate our own proceedings that the other House enjoys; and I am sure there have been some late instances, wherein they have, I believe, pretty severely punished some printers for presuming to publish some of their jjrotests. They did this, sir, not because their words or meaning were misrepresented, but because they conceived it to be an indignity done to them as a House of Parliament, to print anY proceeding of theirs whatsoever, without their consent and authority. That of itself, sir, is a reason why we ought to put a stop to this scandalous practice of printing our proceedings; because if we should appear less jealous of our rights and privileges, than the other House are of theirs, it may be afterwards told us, that we do not enjoy such rights and privileges, because at such a time, when we had the same reason as the other House had, we did not exercise them. Therefore, if we do not put a speedy stop to this practice, it will be looked upon without doors, that we have no power to do it, for the public will very justly think that if we had such a power we would exercise it. And then, sir, what will be the consequence; why, sir, you will have every word that is spoken here by gentlemen, misrepresented by fellows who thrust themselves into our gallery. You will have the speeches of this House every day printed, even during your session. And we shall be looked upon as the most contemptible assembly on the face of the earth. I agree with the honourable gentleman over the way, that it may not be quite so right, to punish those printers for what they have done already; for really, sir, we have been so very remiss in putting a stop to this practice, that by this time they may think they are in the right in what they do. But I can see no manner of difficulty we can be under, to come to some very vigorous resolution to prevent the like for the future. I woidd have this resolution, sir, extended not only to comprehend the time of our sitting, but of our recess. If the printers of the monthly magazines, and the other Newspapers, are not more cautious for the future, I thiuk we shall be wanting to that regard, which we owe ourselves as a House of Parliament, if we do not proceed against them with severity. Therefore, sir, I hope gentlemen will think of a proper resolution with regard to this matter of complaint.

" Mr. Pulteney said: Sir, I agree entirely with the gentleman who has already spoken, that it is absolutely necessary a stop should he put to the practice which has been so justly complained of; I think no appeals should be made to the public with regard to what is said in this assembly, and to print or publish the speeches of gentlemen in this House, even though they were not misrepresented, looks very like making them accountable without doors, for what they say within. Besides, sir, we know very well that no man can be so guarded in his expressions, as to wish to see everything he says in this House in print. I remember the time when this House was so jealous, so cautious of doing anything that might look like an appeal to their constituents, that not even the votes were printed without leave. A gentleman every day rose in his place, and desired the Ohair to ask leave of the House, that their votes for that day should be printed. How this custom came to be dropped I cannot so well account for, but I think it high time for us to prevent any further encroachment upon our privileges; and I hope gentlemen will enter into a proper resolution for the purpose.

"But, though I am as much as any gentleman can be for putting a stop to this scandalous practice, I should be very tender of doing it in such a manner as may either affect the Liberty of the Press, or make it seem as if we claim a privilege to which we have no title. An honourable gentleman near me was pleased to mention the powers which the other House had of calling printers to an account for printing their protests. It is very true, Sir, they have such a power, and they have exercised it very lately; but we have no such power; they may punish a printer for printing any part of the proceedings of their House, for twenty, thirty, or forty years back; but then, gentlemen are to consider that the House of Peers is a court of record, and, as such, its rights and privileges never die. Whereas, this House never pretended to be a court of record; our privileges expire at the end of every Parliament; and the next House of Commons is quite different from the last. As to the question whether we have a right to punish any printer, who shall publish our proceedings, or any part of them, during our recess, which I take to be the only question at present, it may be worthy consideration; for my own part, I am apt to think that we may; because our privileges as a House of Parliament exist during the whole continuance of Parliament; and our not sitting never makes any violation of these privileges committed during a recess less liable to censure, the next time we meet as a House. However, sir, as it has been long the practice to print some account of our proceedings during our recess, I am against punishing any person for what is past, because very possibly they did not know they were doing amiss; and if gentlemen think fit to enter into any resolution for the time to come, I dare say it will be sufficient to deter all offenders in that way. But that resolution, sir, cannot affect any person who shall print an account of your proceedings when this Parliament shall be dissolved. There is an honourable gentle-man* near me, who knows that the history of a whole Parliament was once published in a sixpenny pamphlet, and their transactions set in no very favourable light, for the gentlemen who composed it. I never heard, sir, that any succeeding House of Commons took that amiss, nor that the honourable gentleman who was generally looked upon as the author of it, was ever called to account by either House of Parliament. Parliaments, sir, when they do amiss, will be talked of with the same freedom as any other set of men whatsoever. This Parliament, I hope, will never deserve it; but, if it did, I should be very sorry that any resolutions were entered into in order to prevent its being represented in the present or the next age, in its proper colours. I am sure the honourable gentleman who sits near me, will agree with me in this; and whatever the other House may do, sir, I hope we never shall stretch our privilege, so as to cramp the freedom of writing on public affairs.

" But this consideration, sir, can never affect the resolutions which gentlemen propose to come to now. We have rather been too remiss in not putting a stop to this scandalous practice that has been complained of. I always thought that these pamphlets containing our debates, were circulated by the Government's encouragement, and at their expense; for till the honourable gentleman who spoke last save one in the debate, mentioned the magazines in the manner he did, I have been still used to look on the publishing them as a ministerial project; for I imagined that it being found impracticable to make the people buy and read The Gazetteer by itself, it was contrived so as that the writings of the other party, being printed in the same pamphlet, it might be some invitation to the public to look into The Gazetteer, and I dare say, sir, the great run which the magazines have had has been entirely owing to this stratagem. The good and the bad are printed together, and people are by that means drawn in to read both. But I think it is now high time, to put a stop to the effects they may have by coming to a resolution that may at least prevent anything being published, during the time of our sitting as a House, which may be imposed upon the world as the language and words of gentlemen who perhaps never spoke them.

Sir Eobert Walpole was the next speaker. " You have with great justice," he said, "punished some persons, for forging the names of gentlemen upon the backs of letters; hut the abuse now complained of is, I conceive, a forgery of a worse kind; for it tends to misrepresent the sense of Parliament, and impose upon the understanding of the whole nation. It is but a petty damage that can arise from a forged frank, when compared to the infinite mischiefs that may come from this practice. I have read some debates of this House, sir, in which I have been made to speak the very reverse of what I meant. I have read others of them wherein all the wit, the learning, and the argument has been thrown into one side, and on the other nothing but what was low, mean, and ridiculous; and yet when it comes to the question, the division has gone against the side which, upon the face of the debate, had reason and justice to support it. So that, sir, had I been a stranger to the proceedings and to the nature of the arguments themselves, I must have thought this to have been one of the most contemptible assemblies on the face of the earth. What notion then, sir, can the public, who have no other means of being informed of the debates of this House, than what they have from these Papers, entertain of the wisdom and abilities of an assembly, who are represented therein to carry almost every point against the strongest and the plainest argument and appearances. However, sir, as I believe gentlemen are by this time pretty sensible of the necessity of putting a stop to this practice, it will be quite unnecessary for me to argue a point wherein we are all agreed. But I cannot help taking notice of one thing mentioned by the lion, gentleman who spoke last, since I was the person VOL. II. to whom he was pleased to appeal. He mentioned that the history of a whole Parliament had been printed, and seemed to insinuate from this, that people might make very free with Parliaments. Really, sir, I will be so free as to own that I do know of such a pamphlet being printed; nay, I believe I know a little of the author, and the publication. But at the same time I know, sir, that that was one of the worst Houses of Commons that ever this nation saw; that they had a design to introduce the Pretender; that they had approved of a scandalous peace, after the most glorious war that was ever carried on; and had it not been for some very favourable circumstances that fell out, they would have set aside the jtresent happy establishment in His Majesty's person and family. I hope, sir, no gentleman will find fault with any reflections that could be thrown out against such a House of Commons; I hope likewise, that no gentleman will pretend to draw any parallels betwixt their conduct and ours. But, sir, besides these considerations, gentlemen are to reflect, that the Parliament which was described in that history, had been dissolved before the history itself was published. And not only so, sir, but there is a noble lord in the other House,* who can, if he pleases, inform gentlemen, that the author of that history was so apprehensive of the consequence of printing it, that the press was carried to his house, and the copies printed off there.

" This, I think, sir, will be sufficient to show, that the author did not think himself quite out of danger, even though the Parliament was dissolved. But I am not at all for carrying things to such a length at present; it may be sufficient, if we come to a resolution to prevent the publication of any part of our proceedings during the recess, as well as the sitting of the Parliament. As to what the honourable gentleman said, with regard to the magazines being published and distributed by order, and at the expense of the Government, I do not know if he was serious or not. If he was serious, he must have a very contemptible opinion of the understanding of those gentlemen who have the honour to serve His Majesty, if he imagines that they would be so weak as to propagate papers, every page almost of which hath a direct tendency against their own interest. If any gentleman will take the trouble, which I own I very seldom do, to look into one of these magazines, he will find four pages wrote against the Government for one that is in its favour; and generally the subject is of such a nature as would be severely punished under any other Government than our own. If the hon. gentleman was not serious, I think a more proper time might have been chosen for showing his wit, than while we are considering of the means of putting a stop to a practice, which he himself, and every gentleman who spoke in this debate, allows so nearly to affect the dignity and privileges of this House. For my own part, sir, I am extremely indifferent what opinion some gentlemen may form of the writers in favour of the Government: but, sir, 1 shall never have the worse opinion of them for that: there is nothing more easy than to raise a laugh; it has been the common practice of all minorities when they were driven out of every other argument. I never shall be afraid, sir, to do what I think right, and for the service of His Majesty and my country, because I may be laughed at. But, really, sir, I will be so free as to say, that if the want of wit, learning, good manners, and truth, is a proper object of contempt and ridicule, the writers in the opposition seem to me to have a much better title to both than those for the Government. No Government, I will venture to say, ever punished so few libels, and no Government ever had provocation to punish so many. I could name a Government in this country, sir, under which those writings, which are now cried up, as founded upon the laws, and in the constitution, would have been punished as libels, even by gentlemen who are now the warmest advocates for the liberty of the press, and for suffering the authors of those daily libels that appear in print to pass with impunity. But I ask pardon for what 1 have said that may appear foreign to the present consideration; I was led to it by what had been thrown out by the gentleman who spoke before."

With this the debate closed, and Mr. Speaker Onslow " having drawn up the question," the House of Commons resolved unanimously:— " That it is an high indignity to, and a notorious breach of the privilege of, this House, for any News-writer, in letters or other papers (as minutes, or under any other denomination), or for any printer or publisher of any printed Newspaper of any denomination, to presume to insert in the said letters or papers, or to give therein any account of the debates, or other proceedings of this House, or any committee thereof, as well during the recess, as the sitting of Parliament; and that this House will proceed with the utmost severity against such offenders."

After this all reports of Parliament were still further disguised by being given in the Gentleman's Magazine, as Debates in the Senate of Great Lilliput, and even with this precaution, the publication was thought so hazardous that Cave did not dare issue them in his own name, but put that of his nephew, E. Cave, Junior, in the imprint.

In the London Magazine the speeches were given, the speakers enjoying Roman appellations. Sir John Hawkins describes Cave's mode of obtaining his notes: " Taking with him a friend or two, he found means to procure for them and himself admission to the Gallery of the House of Commons, or to some concealed station in the other House; and there they privately took down notes of the several speeches, and the general tendency and substance of the arguments. Thus furnished, Cave and his associates would adjourn to a neighbouring tavern, and compare and adjust their notes; by means whereof, and the help of their memories, they became enabled to fix at least the substance of what they had so lately heard and remarked. The reducing this crude matter into form, was the work of a future day and an abler hand. Guthrie, the historian, a writer for the booksellers, Cave retained for the purpose."

The editor of the Parliamentary History,* after complaining of the carelessness with which Chandler had completed his collection of Debates, goes on to say that from the year 1735, when the Debates were no longer published in the Political State of Great Britain, the speeches were given by Guthrie in the Gentleman's, and by Gordon in the London Magazine, both those reporters attending in the gallery, and receiving notes and assistance from different members. From November 19, 1740, to February, 1743, the debates in both Houses were compiled by Dr. Johnson, and from such slender materials that great doubts of their authenticity have been entertained. Boswell says—" The debates in Parliament which were brought home and digested by Guthrie, whose memory was very quick and tenacious, were sent by Cave to Johnson for his revision; and after some time, when Guthrie had attained to greater variety of employment, and the speeches were more and more enriched by Johnson's genius, it was resolved that he should do the whole himself, from the scanty notes furnished by persons employed to attend in both Houses of Parliament. Sometimes, however, as he himself told me, he had nothing more communicated to him than the names of the several speakers, and the part which they had taken in the debate." Sir John Hawkins has, it is well known, thrown a doubt on the authenticity of Johnson's reports, but without giving any evidence in support of his assertion; whilst the editor of the Parliamentary History, from which we quote, declares that the debates prepared by Johnson are unusually authentic—a statement supported by comparing the doctor's version with a manuscript volume of debates in the House of Lords, in the handwriting of Dr. Seeker, Archbishop of Canterbury, who appears, from his own representation in the manuscript, to have first taken down the notes of the debates in short-hand, and afterwards to have written them out fully.

The editor of the Parliamentary History stands up manfully for Johnson's reports, and quotes passages from the Birch MS.S.,* to show that Cave had better assistance in his Parliamentary labours " than has been generally supposed; that he was indefatigable in getting them made as perfect as possible; and that it is probable some of the speeches written by Johnson were corrected by the speakers themselves.†

We must not here pass unnoticed the anecdote given by Sir John Hawkins about Johnson's report of a speech by Pitt:— " Dr. Johnson, Mr. Wedderburn (Lord Loughborough), Dr. Francis, the translator of Horace, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Chetwyn, and several other gentlemen dined-with Foote. After dinner, an important debate towards the end of Sir Bobert Walpole's administration being mentioned, Dr. Francis observed that Mr. Pitt's speech on that occasion was the best he had ever read. He had been employed, he added, during several years, in the study of Demosthenes, and had finished a translation of that celebrated author, with all the decorations of style and language within his capacity. Many of the company remembered the debate, and many passages were cited from the speech with the approbation and applause of all present. During the ardour of the conversation Johnson remained silent. When the warmth of praise subsided, he opened with these words, ' That speech I wrote in a garret in Exeter Street.' The company was struck with astonishment. After staring at each other for some time in silent amaze, Dr. Francis asked how that speech could be written by him. 'Sir,' said Johnson, 'I wrote it in Exeter Street. I never was in the gallery of the House of Commons but once. Cave had interest with the door-keepers. He and the persons under him got admittance. They brought away the subject of discussion, the names of the speakers, the side they took, and the order in which they rose, together with notes of the various arguments adduced in the course of the debate. The whole was afterwards communicated to me, and I composed the speeches in the form they now have in Parliamentary Debates; for the speeches of that period are all reprinted from Cave's Magazine.' To this discovery Dr. Francis made answer: 'Then, sir, you have exceeded Demosthenes himself; for to say you have exceeded Francis's Demosthenes would be nothing.' The rest of the company were lavish in their compliments to Johnson: one in particular praised his impartiality, observing that he had dealt out reason and eloquence with an equal hand to both parties. ' That is not quite true, sir,' said Johnson, ' I saved appearances well enough; but I took care that the Whig dogs should not have the best of it.'"

Cave's name has been immortalized because he had the good fortune to get Johnson to write out his Parliamentary notes. Had this not occurred it is most likely that the reputation of giving early notices of the debiftes of his period, would have fallen to the lot of his opponent of the London Magazine—Gordon, the translator of Tacitus; who, it is shown in the preface to the Parliamentary History,* not only anticipated Cave with some of the earlier debates, but was absolutely robbed of them by the Gentleman's Magazine, who copied the London, even to the errors of the press! This, of course, was before Johnson bad anything to do with the affair.

On the 30th of April, 1747, Edward Cave and Thomas Astley were ordered into the custody of the Usher of the Black Rod, for having printed, in the Gentleman's and the London Magazine, a report of the trial of Lord Lovatt, contrary to privilege. On Cave's examination, as to how he got particulars of the debates published in his Magazine, he admitted that he had taken notes, and that sometimes " he had speeches sent to him by very eminent persons," but denied that he " employed persons to make speeches for him." On expressing contrition, be was discharged on paying the fees.

From 1743 to 1766, a space of twenty-three years, there appears to have been no one hold enough to attempt a regular report of the debates. In the latter year Almon commenced, as we have already mentioned, the publication of some brief reports—important at the time and in their consequences—but very deficient as a record of the historical discussions of the time.* In 1774, however, Almon began to publish regular reports of both Houses in his Parliamentary Begister, and from that time to the present clay ojur records of both chambers of the Legislature may be regarded as tolerably complete.

But though, after the famous struggle with public opinion, and the imprisonment of a Lord Mayor,* reporters were not systematically persecuted, no facilities were offered them. Whoever took a debate had to sit in the strangers' gallery, and often to wait for hours on the stairs before admission was granted even then. When in the House no note-book dare be exhibited, and hence the only man able to report at all was one with a great memory. The most celebrated of these early reporters was William Woodfall.

Woodfall's mode of reporting was, of course, very different to that adopted at the present day, and when the difficulties he had to contend with are remembered, the results he secured are surprising. He used to get through an entire debate, making here and there a secret memorandum, and then when the House was up he went off to write out his report, which occupied him sometimes till nearly noon of the next day—the Paper containing the debate being published in the evening. His reputation, however, spread far and wide, and when strangers visited the House, their first inquiry often was, " Which is the Speaker, and which is Mr. Woodfall?" It is said he would sit for very many hours without any refreshment whatever, but when hungry and faint with his long task, would draw a hard-boiled egg from his pocket, take off the shell in his hat, and stooping down make a meal on the indigestible dainty in haste, lest the Sergeant-at-Arms should witness the infraction of the rules of the House against strangers. Woodfall is said to have been very dignified, and not very fond of the society of his fellow-reporters, and a " gallery" tradition declares, that one day the well-known hard eggs were filched from his pockets by some rival, and unboiled ones put in their places, to the great discomfiture of the victim of the practical joke. Woodfall is described as the intimate of Garrick, Goldsmith, and all the other actors and dramatists of repute in his day, and his critiques on the theatres were looked for with much interest, and were, doubtless, influential on the fortunes of the candidates for public support. His first reports were made for The London Packet, from which he transferred his services to The Morning Chronicle; but, after some years, leaving the latter for The Diary, Perry opposed him by commencing the present successful system of reporting,—a system supported not by one man of remarkable powers, but by a succession of skilful men, each taking notes for a fixed period and then writing them out for the press.

Perry was the first man who was able to print the debates of one night in a Paper of the next morning; and he succeeded in doing this by a division of the labour of reporting. Whilst Woodfall was laboriously working out his report, assisted by notes from some of the speakers, for publication in the evening, Perry's version of the debate was being circulated and read all over the town. The result was clear. Woodfall's Paper failed, and Perry made a fortune.

Perry alludes to this very important innovation introduced by him, when he commenced his editorship of The Gazetteer—this substitution of numbers for an individual in reporting. But the debates, long after that period, were not reported with the despatch now indispensable. The Houses used to sit late, on what used to be then called field-days; and when they rose at a late hour in the morning, sometimes as late, indeed, as seven or eight o'clock, The Chronicle, which laid itself out in reporting, would not appear till two or three o'clock in the afternoon. It must not be supposed that these late sittings were frequent. It often happened that the reporter, whose turn it was to go first, would take the whole of the proceedings. But every now and then came a murderously heavy day, and the poor reporters who were obliged to be on the stairs of the entrance to the gallery of the House of Commons by twelve o'clock at noon, could not leave the House till their turn came; for the gallery was not, after the House was locked, accessible till eleven o'clock; so that it was necessary for the reporters to wait many hours. When the speakers were second rate, they were disposed of very summarily; but if it happened that Sheridan, or Wyndham, or Tierney, or Whithread, were on their legs during the whole of a reporter's turn, the publication was necessarily delayed, for such men could not be slurred over. On the subject of Parliamentary reporting, Perry used to say, that for the public the reports could not be too short, and for the members too long. In those days there were few speakers, but the style of speaking was highly finished, and the public would look for the account of a speech of Sheridan's, for instance, with great eagerness.

Sheridan repaid the attention of the reporters to his brilliant harangues, by speaking in their favour, when their character and position was attacked by the benchers of Lincoln's Inn. Those irresponsible legal curiosities having passed a bye-law of their society, the object of which was to exclude from it all men who dared to write for the Newspapers, a petition was presented to the House of Commons, from a gentleman against whom this ridiculously illiberal rule operated. In the discussion to which the subject gave rise, Sheridan said: —" Much illiberal calumny had been cast upon those gentlemen who were reporters, which it is time should now be fully confuted. He had to state, then, that there were amongst those who reported the debates of that House, no less than twenty-three graduates of the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Dublin, and Edinburgh; those gentlemen were all in their progress to honourable professions; and there was no possible course better than that which they had adopted for the improvement of their minds, and the acquisition of political experience. They had adopted this course from an honest and honourable impulse; and had to boast the association of many great names, who had risen from poverty to reputation. This had been long the employment, and indeed, chief means of subsistence, of Dr. Johnson and Mr. Burke. Such were the men at whose depression this legal bye-law aimed! Never was there a more illiberal and base attack on literary talent; he could find no parallel to it in the History of England, except one indeed, in the reign of Henry the Fourth, which went to exclude lawyers from sitting in Parliament. At this, as might be exjjected, the body who now sought to proscribe others were mightily offended; they branded the Parliament with the epithet of indoctum; and Lord Coke had even the hardihood to declare from the bench, that there never was a good law made therein! It was impossible to imagine a single reason for the enactment of the bye-law complained of. It was a subversion of the liberty and respectability of the press; a most unjust individual proscription; a violation of the best principles of our constitution. For (exclaimed Sheridan) it is the glory of English law, that it sanctions no proscriptions, nor does it acknowledge any office in the state, which the honourable ambitious industry, even of the most humble, may not obtain." Mr. Stephen (father of the attach^ of the Foreign Office) followed Sheridan in a very manly speech. He declared that he had been a member of Lincoln's Inn for thirty-five years, but that he had not the most remote connection with the framing of the obnoxious bye-laws alluded to; he thought it a most illiberal and unjust proscription; a scandal rather to its authors than its objects. " I will put a case,'' said Mr. Stephen; " I will suppose a young man of education and talent contending with pecuniary difficulties—difficulties not proceeding from vice, but from family misfortunes. I will suppose him honestly meeting his obstructions with honourable industry, and exercising his talents by reporting the debates of this House in order to attain a profession. Where, I ask, is the degradation of such an employment? Who could be so meanly cruel as to deprive him of it? The case, sir, which I have now supposed, was thirty years ago—my own!" Sir John Austruther was also a member of Lincoln's Inn, but reprobated the bye-laws referred to; and the benchers, overwhelmed by the indignation their regulation had excited, expunged it from the books.

Several of the members of Perry's corps of parliamentary reporters were men remarkable for talent and wit, and from that day to the present the " gallery" has held a number of distinguished men. Amongst the recent literary instances, the names of Hazlitt and Charles Dickens are often quoted. The latter is described by his old colleagues as having been as excellent in this his first literary attempt, as he has since proved to be in the higher walks wherein he won his fame. He was for some years in the gallery; was very rapid; and it was said of him, that he once wrote out from his notes the copy for a column and a half of The Morning Chronicle in an hour—a feat almost unexampled in its way.

At present the reporters are as quiet and punctual as any other class of professional men, but in the days when every gentleman considered it a part of his duty, and a proof ofhis respectability, to drink one bottle of port, at least, after dinner daily—when people were spoken of as two bottle men, and three bottle men, and capital fellows—the representatives of the press seem not to have been behind their countrymen in their devotion to Bacchus.

There was never a deficiency of wit and humour amongst reporters, and when it was the fashion to heighten these by full potations, it is not surprising that an occasional escapade would attract more than ordinary notice. One bygone worthy, distinguished in this way, Mark Supple* it was, whose name has found a place in all the jest books for a feat which Peter Finnerty, another spirit of kindred quality, used to tell after the following fashion:—

"Mark Supple was big-boned and loud-voiced, and had as much wit and fun as an Irish porter could carry; often more than he himself could carry, or knew what to do with. He took his wine frequently at Bellamy's (a great place in those days for reporters as well as M.P.'s), and then went up into the gallery and reported like a gentleman and a man of genius. The members hardly knew their own speeches again, but they admired his free and bold manner of dressing them up. None of them ever went to the printing office of The Morning Chronicle to complain that the tall Irishman had given a lame, sneaking version of their sentiments, they pocketed the affront of their metamorphosis, and fathered speeches they had never made. Supple's way may be said to have been the hyperbole, a strong view of orientalism, with a dash of the bog-trotter. His manner seemed to please, and he presumed upon it. One evening as he sat at his post in the gallery, waiting the issues of things, and a hint to hang tropes and figures upon. A dead silence happened to prevail in the House. It was when Mr. Addington was speaker. The bold leader of the press gang was never much on serious business bent, and at this time he was particularly full of meat and wine. Delighted, therefore, with the joause, but thinking that something might as well be going forward, he called out lustily, ' A song from Mr. Speaker.' Imagine Addington's long, prim, upright figure; his consternation and utter want of preparation for, or of a clue to repel, such an interruption of the rules and orders of Parliament. The House was in a roar—Pitt, it is said, could hardly keep his seat for laughing. When the bustle and confusion were abated, the Sergeant-at-Arms went into the gallery to take the audacious culprit into custody, and indignantly desired to know who it was; but nobody would tell. Mark sat like a tower on the hindermost bench of the gallery, imperturbable in his own gravity, and safe in the faith of the brotherhood of reporters, who alone were in the secret. At length as the mace-bearer was making fruitless inquiries, and getting impatient, Supple pointed to a fat quaker, who sat in the middle of the crowd, and nodded assent that he was the man. The quaker was, to his great surprise, taken into immediate custody; but after a short altercation, and some further explanation, he was released, and the hero of our story put in his place for an hour or two, but let off on an assurance of bis contrition, and of showing less wit and more discretion for the future."

Peter Finnerty was the hero of several frays; in one of them Lord Castlereagh being his opponent. The Annual Register affords us a notice of the affair in its record of law cases. " On the 31st of January, 1811," says that authority, "judgment was prayed against the defendant, in the cause, ' The King v. Finnerty.' Defendant had suffered judgment to go against him by default. The indictment was for a libel on Lord Castlereagh, one of His Majesty's principal Secretaries of State, which appeared in the Morning Chronicle of last year. The defendant had accompanied the expedition to Walcheren, for the purpose of writing a narrative of its proceedings, when a general order was issued to Lord Chatham and Sir E. Strachan, to inquire of all the vessels which accompanied the expedition, whether a gentleman of the name of Finnerty were on board, and if found, to convey him to his Lordship or Sir Richard, with a view to his being sent home. He was accordingly conveyed to Sir R. Strachan, and sent home on board of a revenue cutter. The letter in The Morning Chronicle, charged as the present libel, consisted of a narrative of these facts, and an attribution of the whole to Lord Castlereagh, and insinuated that this measure was only one instance of a course of oppression which the defendant had received from the personal malice of his Lordship, and that his Lordship had been guilty of great villainy in and concerning the administration of Ireland.

"Mr. Finnerty, who appeared without counsel, put in a very long affidavit, in which he stated that the court having, in an application by him to postpone the trial of his cause, on account of the absence of material witnesses, thrown out their opinion as to the calumnious nature of the libel, he had thought it most respectful to the court to suffer judgment to go against him by default, reserving to himself the testimony of such of his witnesses, whose regard to justice would induce them to make affidavits for him, and the jDresent opportunity of justifying the whole imputed libel, which he did most unequivocally. The affidavit proceeded to state that he had, at the same time when he wrote the letter, no intention to libel anybody; and that he had, before its publication, consulted an eminent barrister as to the libellous tendency of it, who was of opinion that it was not libellous; that the defendant was no conspirator in Ireland; that he was invited to accompany the expedition by Sir Home Popham, for the sole purpose of narrating the proceedings of the expedition; and the affidavit quoted a letter from Sir Home to that effect: the deponent solemnly declared he had no other view in accompanying the expedition; that he rejected the proposal of Lord Chatham and Sir Richard Strachan to publish nothing but what had undergone their revision; that he had incurred considerable expenses in his voyage, and that the prejudices which had been excited against him by the order for his quitting the expedition, had deprived him of £500, which he calculated he should have gained by his intended publication; that he had intended to bring an action against Lord Castlereagh for a libel, but was advised against it by his counsel; that he did not accompany the expedition clandestinely; that the main object of Lord Castlereagh was to harass the deponent; and that a noble Lord, nearly connected with Lord Castlereagh, had been heard to declare in a public coffee-room, ' I wish some man would shoot that fellow (meaning the deponent) out of the way.' The affidavit was then proceeding to enter into the circumstances of the trial of Mr. Orr, in Ireland, for administering a seditious oath, in which trial, the letter in The Morning Chronicle stated the verdict of guilty to have been obtained from the jury by promises, by threats, and by intoxicating them with liquor; and was about to quote two affidavits made by as many of the jurors to this effect, when the court objected to their perusal, as irrelevant. Mr. Finnerty observed, that it was stated as a fact in the imputed libel, that these affidavits were made; and he thought it proper to verify that statement. The affidavits were not long. Lord Ellenborough consented to hear them, long or short. The defendant's affidavit travelling still further from the record, however, as it proceeded, Lord Ellenborough at last objected to trying the government of Ireland, under pretence of passing sentence upon the defendant, and refused to hear any more affidavits quoted upon the subject of Lord Castlereagh's conduct in Ireland. Mr. Finnerty said, that such a liberty had been granted in the case of Governor Picton; the government of Trinidad was fully investigated upon the trial of that man for torture; the defendant's (Mr. Finnerty's) crime was merely that of reprobating a man who patronized torture. The letter in The Morning Chronicle made a general charge of cruelty against Lord Castlereagh; and the defendant was now proving particular instances of it. After some further conversation on this topic, in which Mr. Garrow attacked, and Mr. Finnerty justified his affidavit, the defendant was advised by the court to prepare a more temperate affidavit, and was then remanded to a future day. Being brought up again on Feb. 7th, he presented his affidavit to the court. It was read, and detailed in the first place, the reasons why the defendant was not in court before, when judgment was prayed against him; it next proceeded to state why he had suffered judgment to go by default; but now stated his belief of every circumstance with which he had charged Lord Castlereagh, and at this period offered the truth in justification. Lord Elleuborough said he had objected to this before, and had warned him to amend what he had done; and hoped he was now come in a proper spirit to mitigate a crime of which he had confessed the commission. It appeared, however, that such was by no means Mr. Finnerty's intention; and, in a long conversation which ensued, he repeatedly presented affidavits to prove all the enormities practised under Lord Castlereagh's government, and with his concurrence, and declared that nothing on earth should induce him to make any submission to his Lordship. The court as repeatedly refused to admit them, and warned him that he was introducing irrelevant matter, and only aggravating his offence. He was heard, however, in a long and spirited defence, which was replied to with great severity by the Attorney General; who, after representing in the strongest terms the additional criminality the defendant had incurred by his justification, trusted that if there was any kind of punishment in their Lordships' discretion more degrading than imprisonment, that too would be inflicted upoD him. This hint for the pillory was not, however, attended to by the court, which, by Mr. Justice Grose, pronounced the following sentence:—' That the defendant be committed to His Majesty's gaol for the city of Lincoln, for the space of eighteen calendar months, and find security for his good behaviour for five years from that time, himself in £500, and two sureties in £250 each, and be further imprisoned till that security be procured.'"

The "veteran Journalist," to whom I have before expressed my obligations for some curious facts, says in a letter:—" An anecdote which now occurs to me will serve to give a good idea of poor Perry. Peter Finnerty was sincerely attached to Perry and The Chronicle, but he had great defects, and required to be well watched. Perry would have been glad to be rid of him, but he would no more have thought of dismissing an old servant without some very strong cause indeed, than he would of cutting his own throat. I have heard him say, I would give anybody £200 who would take Finnerty from The Chronicle. The libel on Lord Castlereagh, for which Finnerty was sent to Lincoln Castle, was inserted in The Chronicle on F.'s own responsibility, and against the order of Perry, who, for a long time refused it admission, but was at length worried into publication."

The present occupants of the reporters' gallery are a very honourable body of men. Amongst the seniors, if not the seniors, are Mr. Dod, the author of the Peerage, and of the useful little blue-covered volume, the Parliamentary Companion, who has been in the gallery for The Times for between thirty and forty years; and Mr. Tyas, another veteran of more than thirty years' Parliamentary service on the same Paper. Tyas is said to have been the author of the sharp critiques on Lord Brougham's classical knowledge; and is spoken of as the hero of another gallery tradition. The story runs that Tyas had been luxuriating over a glass of wine, and the pages of Cicero, when the hour came, and he was due in the House. As he took his place Lord Brougham was speaking, and soon the pencil of Tyas was on his track. The legal orator went on, and the mind of the reporter unconsciously kept upon the double thread of Brougham and Cicero. The scholar in the gallery thought the scholar on the floor of the House, would remember a fine illustrative passage in the Roman orator. But he passed it, and concluded his harangue. Tyas went to work to write out his notes, and when the arguments required it he put in nearly a page of Cicero. Brougham reprinted the speech, adopting, without remark, the whole of the interpolated matter.

Members have sometimes complained of the way in which their harangues are reported; but the truth is, that the speakers owe a great debt of gratitude to those who place their speeches before the public. The words as they are uttered, and the same as they are printed, are often a curious improvement one upon the other. All the stutterings, the hesitations, the repetitions, are omitted; the arguments, the important illustrations, and the facts alone being preserved. When The New Times was started, a part of their plan was to report the Parliamentary debates verbatim. This was commenced, but it is said that within a week the proprietors were threatened with actions for damages for burlesquing the speeches of the honourable M.P.'s. The printing of their harangues as they were spoken was unendurable, and verbatim reports were abandoned.* Mr. Angus B. Reach, an experienced reporter—perhaps better popularly known as the author of innumerable light literary sketches of men and manners—threw off, some time ago, a slight outline of the reporters at their posts, which may help to complete this part of the subject:—

The little door opened, and we stood in the Reporter's Gallery—the back of the Speaker's ugly gothic chair below us— the senators, with their hats on, sitting, standing, walking, lolling lazy on either side—the clerk's table with the mace and the shiningly bound volumes of the statutes at largo in the midst, and the bright bude light shining over all.

The hon. member for Forty winks was on ins legs, although his luminous remarks could only be heard amid the buzz of about 150 distinct conversations going on around. But the hon. member had got his speech off by heart, and was speaking to his constituents through the reporters' gallery. Hapless man! The Times reclined gracefully back and amused himself by sharpening his pencils. The Chronicle was talking to The Herald about Alboni. The Morning Post was drawing carricatures in its note book, and The Morning Advertiser was musing on what it would have for supper. So the hon. member talked, and no one heeded him.

After him came another, an Irish orator, standing up in the midst of a whirlpool of his blazing and dazzling metaphors and and similes, like a juggler casting round his head a halo of brass balls. But no nimble pencil followed the burning phrases of the patriot.

" What arc they about?" we whispered to our conductor in dismay; " there is eloquence running to waste."

" They are waiting," replied our Mentor, " they are waiting until he makes a point; Papers have no room for flourishes. Imagine the consequence, were every word spoken in the House of Commons set down in cold blooded type exactly as it is uttered. What a huge conglomeration of truisms, absurdities, bad taste, wretched jokes, and worse grammar! Depend upon it, sir, literally-reported debates would infallibly disgust the nation with representative government.

" Then you pick and choose," we interrupted.

" Yes; we are the winnowers in this great granary of words. Men there are who, when they speak, drop from their lips ripest wholesomest grain, but from the mouths of most come flying empty torrents of mere hunks and chaff. It is ours to wait, and watch, and sift out the scattered globules of fact or argument, and enshrine them in printer's ink."

" But you do not," we said, " arrogate the right of sitting in judgment on the soundness of an argument, or tlie authenticity of a fact."

" Clearly not," said the Reporter, " we record all arguments —good, bad, or indifferent; we set down all facts—certain or dubious. But ours is to separate the arguments and the facts from the words—the mere empty verbiage in which they are oftentimes all but smothered. How many inaccuracies do we not patch up. How many inelegancies do we not lick into graceful form. How many unfinished sentences do we not fill up and round off. How many slovenly speeches do not appeal' shortened one hundred, and improved two hundred per cent., by passing through the alembic of this little gallery."

Now and then a speaker, who thinks himself neglected, ventures to complain, but generally proves rather the reporter's case than his own. Newspapers, and all engaged upon them, are too anxious to get anything new for their Journal to neglect one word that the world would care to hear, or one fact the world would like to know. In July, 1833, O'Connell stood up in the House and attacked the reporters for what he chose to regard as a neglect of his merits, and did not hesitate to impute dishonourable motives to those whom he accused, knowing they could not there answer him. He moved to bring the representatives of The Times and Chronicle to the bar for not reporting his speech in full. A Mr. O'Dwyer, who had himself, it was said, been employed on The Times, seconded the motion.* Many members were ready to vindicate the fairness of the Newspaper reports, and amongst them Sir Robert Peel,† who gave his testimony to the fact, that the reports were given with great fairness and impartiality, and added, amid loud cheers:—" During fifteen out of those twenty years he had held office, and during the whole of that time he had never received any communication from any person connected with the press respecting the manner in which his speeches had been reported. He had never during that time received any solicitation for any favour or patronage from any reporter; and he believed he might say that no application had been made to any of his colleagues while he was in office for any such patronage or favour from any reporter, in consequence of his having reported their speeches fully. (Hear, hear.) If he could bear his testimony to the independence of the reporters, founded as it was on the experience of fifteen years in office, he thought that he might challenge those who had succeeded him to say whether they could not bear the same evidence." These sentiments were greeted by loud cries of " Hear, hear."

The reporters took a course which staggered O'Connell. His attack had an effect the very reverse of what he anticipated. They penned a letter, in which they complained that a member of the House had most falselv accused them of dishonourable motives, and had done so not out of doors, where they could meet him with an instant denial and proof of falsity, but had done so under the shelter of the privileges of the House; declaring, in conclusion, that they could not report one line of what he said until the unjust imputation had been withdrawn. In Parliament the affair was pressed to a division, when O'Connell's followers mustered at the vote, but only numbered 48; whilst 159 members voted against him, and the order for the attendance of the offending persons was discharged. O'Connell was glad after this to be more just, and so escaped what to him would have been semi-annihilation—his expulsion from Newspaper notice.

Anxious as he was to be reported in England, there were occasions when O'Connell preferred that what he said should not be printed in this country. Of this an amusing anecdote has been given. O'Connell was on a visit to Ireland, and indulging in long speeches of a most " combustible character," when the Government thought fit to send over some short-hand writers to take down the harangues. " The first appearance of the Government reporters was at a meeting at Kanturk. The gentlemen were Englishmen," says the storv, " and belonging to Mr. Gurney's reporting staff. They came on the platform, and introduced themselves to Mr. O'Connell. He shook them by the hands, and said to those around him, ' Nothing can be clone here until these gentlemen are afforded every requisite accommodation.' This was at once provided, and having assured Mr. O'Connell that they were 'perfectly ready,' and well provided for, he came forward to address the people, and commenced his speech, to the great dismay of the Englishmen, in the Irish language. Having explained to the assembly who they were, and how he humbugged them, he continued in the same language to address to the meeting everything he wished to convey to them; the people laughing all the while at the English reporters, while they joined very good humouredly in the laugh raised against them."

More recently (June, 1849) Mr. John O'CoDnell tried his hand at clearing the gallery, because, in his own opinion, his speeches were not given at sufficient length. This was bad enough from the O'Connell; but that his son John should take such a step was too absurd. Bidicule instead of indignation was excited, and the general feeling was well conveyed by a writer in The Spectator, who said: — "The House had better lose no time in placing the matter on a more simple and decorous footing, or it will be forced. If driven to it, no doubt, the leading Journals could return their own members to report for them from the body of the House: meanwhile, they have their honorary member in the person of Mr. Trelawnev, who furnished intelligent accounts of what passed during the exclusion of the reporters, and will probably do so as often as it may be required."

Even now the theory of Parliament is, that the debates take place with closed doors; to speak of reports in Newspapers, except to complain of them as a breach of privilege, is irregular, and the mere mention of the fact that there are strangers in the House is enough, as a matter of course, to clear the reporters' gallery. Should this farce continue? Should that which is of vital importance to our liberty be held on such terms?

" It is almost impossible," says a writer we have before quoted, " to overrate the value of this regular publication of proceedings in Parliament, carried, as it has been in our own time, to nearly as great copiousness and accuracy as is possibly attainable. It tends manifestly and powerfully to keep within bounds the supineness and negligence, the partiality and corruption, to which every Parliament, either from the nature of its composition or the frailty of mankind, must more or less be liable. Perhaps the constitution would not have stood so long, or rather would have stood like an useless and untenanted mansion, if this unlawful means had not kept up a perpetual intercourse, a reciprocity of influence between the Parliament and the people. A stream of fresh air, boisterous perhaps sometimes as the winds of the north, yet as healthy and invigorating, flows in to renovate the stagnant atmosphere, and to prevent that malaria which self-interest and oligarchical exclusiveness are always tending to generate."

* July 9, 1662.—A very extraordinary question arose, about preventing the publication of the debates of the Irish Parliament in an English Newspaper, called The Intelligencer; and a letter was written from the Speaker to Sir Edward Nicholas, the English Secretary of State, to prevent these publications in those Diurnals, as they call them. —Ann. Reg. from Lord Mountmorres's Hist, of Irish Parl. Vol. II.

* It is told of Pclham that, being asked to take steps for stopping the publication of debates of the House of Commons in the Newspapers, he replied, " Let them alone; they make better speeches for us than we can for ourselves." A similar answer is related of George II. Being informed that an impudent printer was to be punished for having published a spurious (King's) speech, he answered, he hoped the man's punishment would be of the mildest sort: because he had read both, and as far as he understood either of them, he liked the spurious speech better than his own.—Lord Waldegrave's Memoirs, p. 88.

† Parl. Hist., vol. x, p. 800.

* "Meaning Sir Robert 'Walpole, who in the year 1713, wrote a pamphlet entitled ' A Short History of the Last Parliament.' "

" While the new elections were depending, it was the opinion of Somers and the Whig Lords, that to state to the people, in a strong and perspicuous manner, the proceedings of the late Parliament with a view to expose the measures of the Ministry, and to guide the electors in the choice of the new representatives, would be highly advantageous to their party. As no one seemed better calculated for this office than Walpole, he undertook a pamphlet, at their desire, on the Thursday, and published it on the Tuesday following, under the title of A Short History of the Last Parliament, with the motto:

' Venalis Populus, venalis Curia Patrum.'

To this publication is prefixed a Dedication by Pulteney, then his coadjutor, composed in a strain of irony and humour peculiarly his own, and in which, though addressed to an anonymous peer, it is easy to perceive that the Earl of Oxford was the objcct of allusion."—Coxe's Memoirs of Sir Robert Walpole.

* Probably Lord Cobbam.

* Preface to Vol. IX. A.D., 1733—1737.

* Birch MS.S. in British Museum, No. 4,302.

† A corrected list of debates reported by Johnson will be found in the Preface to the Parliamentary History, Vol. XII.

* The editor of the Parliamentary History says:—" It was observed, that from the year 1735, when the debates were no longer published in the Political State, the speeches were given in the Gentleman's Magazine by Guthrie the historian, and in the London Magazine by Gordon the translator of Tacitus; both of whom attended in the gallery of the House, and received information from Members of Parliament. In justice to this last-mentioned publication,—a publication which by no means holds that rank amongst the periodical collections of the times to which it is entitled,—the editor feels it his duty to point out one or two gross errors into which Sir John Hawkins, in his Life of Dr. Johnson, has led his readers. Speaking of the eagerness of the public to know what was going forward in both Houses of Parliament, Sir John informs us, that Cave, the proprietor of the Gentleman's Magazine, ' had an interest with some of the Members of both Houses, arising from an employment he held in the Post-Office. Of this advantage he was too good a judge of his own interest not to avail himself. He therefore determined to gratify his readers with as much of this kind of intelligence as he could procure, and it was safe to communicate: his resolution was to frequent the two Houses whenever an important debate was likely to come on, and from such expressions and particulars in the course thereof, as could be collected and retained in memory, to give the arguments on either side. This resolution he put into practice in July, 1736. The proprietors of the London Magazine also gave the debates, but from documents less authentic than Cave.'

" Now, it so happens, that Parliament was not sitting in July, 1736; and, by referring to the volumes themselves, it will be seen that the debates of the session, which opened on the 10th of February, 1737, as they stand in the Gentleman's Magazine of that year, are copied verbatim, down to the very errors of the press, from the London Magazine; from that very Magazine, the proprietors of which, as Sir John would have us believe, ' gave the debates from documents less authentic than those of Cave!' By turning over the pages of the present volume, it will be seen that most of the great debates are taken from that publication; and its merits will more strikingly appear in the future progress of this work."

* This continuation contains no debating in the House of Lords, and is scanty and imperfect to a degree that can hardly he conceived, but of which some idea may be formed from the fact that all the debates and proceedings in Parliament during the important period between 1751, and the accession of George the Third in October, 1760, are comprised in less than three hundred loosely printed octavo pages.—Pref. Pari. Hist., Vol. II.

* Though generally so accurate, yet mistakes have sometimes been made in reports; and now and then not without a slight suspicion of fun being intended at the expense of an honourable member. Mr. Wilberforce once explained to the House, that he was thus made to speak in recommending the cultivation of the potato crop:—" Potatoes make men healthy, vigorous, and active; but what is still more in their favour, they make men tall; more especially was he led to say so, as being rather under the common size, and he must lament that his guardians had not fostered him under that genial vegetable!"

* Mark Supple died in 1807. VOL. II.

* Mr. Sadler, Mr. Trant, and some other members, dissatisfied with the meagre reports of their speeches in the daily Papers, engaged Mr. Hodge to report them in full. On reading the speeches so reported they were found such sheer nonsense, that the practice was incontinently abandoned.—Times, July 8, 1830.

* There was a joke current on O'Dwyer's return to Parliament, which described his qualifications for Newspaper employment, and concluded with—" and so, not being clever enough for The Times, they made him an M.P."

† Sir Robert Peel has on other oeeasions evinced his esteem for the Parliamentary reporters. When he opened his picture gallery in 1837, and invited the literary celebrities of the day, he paid the " gallery" a compliment which was thus recorded by the London correspondent of a local Paper (himself a reporter, and therefore cognizant of the fact):—" There are in Monday's Papers long critiques on Sir It. Peel's collection of pictures at "Whitehall Gardens, opened for the first time to inspection of any but very special friends indeed on the Saturday previous. Sir Robert's gallery was one of the most exclusive in England; but for some reason or other, known only to himself, he suddenly resolved to relax his rigid interdiction against nearly all the applicants, and availed himself of the re-arrangement of the collection to invite a vast number of fashionable, political, artistieal, and other people to look at his pictorial treasures on Saturday. The evening previous he went tip to the Reporters' Gallery, in the Commons, and personally gave to those present, with every mark of courtesy and cordiality, some two dozen tickets, regretting that the vast number of invitations he had issued precluded his being more liberal to the Fourth Estate, with several of whom he shook hands; and next day, during the exhibition of the pictures, was, at his special request, introduced to Mr. Tyas, one of the most distinguished veterans of the press, for many years connected with The Times, and at present the writer of the Parliamentary summary of that Paper."

CHAPTER XII.
A CONCLUDING WORD.

THE Papers of the provinces, and those published once a week in London, would deserve, and should have, some chapters, did the limits of this book permit. Amongst the country Journals are many of great talent and integrity, and many having a greater age even tban some of their metropolitan rivals. Politicians, poets, novelists, have been numbered, and are still numbered, in the editorial ranks of the provincial press. On the London Weekly Papers also, there are many men occupying the first rank as thinkers and writers; and in the history of these Journals many curious facts deserve to be recorded. The literary talent and political integrity of The Examiner; the pains-taking elaboration of details and good sense displayed in The Spectator; the popularity of The Observer—the Paper that forms the link, on the seventh day each week, between all the morning Papers; and the peculiar features, each good in its way, of the other Journals, would make an admirable theme. The Sunday Times might be noticed for theatrical and sporting News; The Weekly Messenger for country politics and country markets; The Weekly Dispatch for its strong Liberal principles, and great mass of News adapted to popular tastes; The Illustrated London News for its pictured pages and great store of amusing and unexceptionable matter, and marvellous success; The Weekly Chronicle and Weekly News for their general usefulness. Others, as worthy in their way, adapted to the needs of special classes of readers—as The Athenaeum and Literary Gazette; The Lancet, and The Gardeners' Chronicle —might come in as further subjects for description. But the allotted space is full.

Nearly six hundred pages are occupied by the present collection of previously scattered facts and sketches, illustrative of the history of the Newspaper press; and yet it would not be difficult to number up a host of other stray dates and passages that—had one again to go over the ground—might fairly claim a place. To those who have attempted the task of bringing together, for the first time, the data from which the history of any subject is afterwards to be completed, it will be only requisite to repeat, that this is such a first attempt, and they will at once understand the great difficulty of avoiding faults, both of omission and commission. And the plea, too, will go far to excuse if it may not altogether secure pardon for such faults.

Whatever the defects of these pages, however, one thing at least they may surely be said to show; and that is, the great debt of gratitude which those who enjoy the liberty of these our later days owe to the press. This debt has not been imposed by one great act, or on one grand and showy occasion—but has been growing up day by day, and year by year—since the time when the Long Parliament showed the people what publicity for public proceedings would do for the Common Good. The very thought of those old times calls up a recollection of the good, and brave, and clever men who have been contributors to this great and excellent^ work. We call to mind the indefatigable Prynn, with his pen that never tired, and his heart that no punishments could break; the republican Lilburn, schooled under the rod of a tyrannic monarchy, yet ready to denounce a tyrannic and hollow commonwealth; the noble-souled Milton, with the genius of a poet, the patient endurance of a political martyr, and the strong and lofty mind of a republican statesman; the clever and ready Marchamont Nedham, careless and irregular, perhaps, in days of mingled trouble and dissipation, but yet wielding, when at liberty to do so, an useful pen against an ancient tyranny, which the people were striving to cast off. And painful memories here force their way in; for who can overlook the wretched martyrs Twyn and others, who were made victims when Charles the Second turned the palace of Whitehall into a huge brothel, and employed the cavalier L'Estrange to find out, and send to the gaol and the gallows, the men who dared to sigh in type for the stern crop-eared Commonwealth, which preceded a debauched and degraded Restoration. Then again we recollect Tutchin, goaded by the brutality of Jefferies to a career of political pamphleteering, which gave many an opportunity of revenge upon the enemies who had inflicted mischief upon him. Next following in the list, come the sturdy Defoe, who wrote so fully and so well; the bitter and witty Swift; the ambitious and sceptical Bolingbroke; the graceful and correct Addison; and the versatile Steele, and the rest, who gave a polish and a perfection to writings on current topics for public prints which they had before needed, and the fruits of which we trace in our modern leading articles. Wilkes and Churchill, with all their vices, present themselves for a share of our esteem; and, in a catalogue of Newspaper worthies, who could omit Sam Johnson, with his reports from the lobby; and Ohatterton, with his contributions that failed to keep him in bread. A Lord Mayor beckons us from the Tower, to remind us that his incarceration gained one step in advance, whilst the eloquent Erskine pleads in Westminster Hall; and the humbler hero, William Hone, calmly but manfully beards an intolerant judge at the Old Bailey. And so we come from name to name—human stepping stones, as it were, through two centuries—here to our own time. As we approach the present day, the number of the labourers in the field of the press becomes greater and greater, and our gratitude has to be spread over a wider space. The germs of liberty, planted under the shadow of the press in the earlier days of its existence, have scattered the elements of their multiplication on all sides, and these newer vitalities have been true to the ancient stock. TV ithin the present century, whenever a great truth has demanded to be known, there has been found a man ready to put it into words, and a printer bold enough to put it into type. Whenever these truths have been found distasteful or dangerous there has been no lack of lawyers to prosecute, and (sometimes) of juries to convict; as witness the number of victims offered up at the shrine of intolerance by George the Third, Castlereagh, and Eldon. Gaols have from time to time been filled, but still the ball rolls on, and liberty is the winner in the end.

The moral of the history of the press seems to be, that when any large proportion of a people have been taught to read, and when upon this possession of the tools of knowledge, there has grown up a habit of perusing public prints, the state is virtually powerless if it attempts to check the press. James the Second in old times, and Charles the Tenth, and Louis Philippe, more recently tried to trample down the Newspapers, and everybody knows how the attempt resulted.

The prevalence or scarcity of Newspapers in a country affords a sort of index to its social state. Where Journals are numerous, the people have power, intelligence, and wealth; where Journals are few, the many are in reality mere slaves. In the United States every village has its Newspaper, and every city a dozen of these organs of popular sentiment. In England we know how numerous and how influential for good the Papers are; whilst in France they have perhaps still greater power. Turn to Russia where Newspapers are comparatively unknown, and we see the people sold with the earth they are compelled to till. Austria, Italy, Spain, occupy positions between the extremes—the rule holding good in all, that in proportion to the freedom of the press is the freedom and prosperity of the people.

INDEX

ACTA Diurna, i. 35, 289

Advertisements, ii. 118

Advertiser, Expenses of the Public, ii. 191

Almon, i. 227; his reports, ii. 266

Appeal to a jury, ii. 17

Areopagitica, Milton's, i. 122

Argus, The, i. 255

BACON, Lord, anecdote of, i. 116

Bankrupt, The, by Foote, i. 215

Barnes, Mr., editor of the Times, ii. 175; and Lord Brougham, 177

Bastwick and the Star Chamber, i. 69, 87

Bate, Rev. H., ii. 114, 145

Battle of the Unstamped, ii. 71

Baxter, persecution of, i. 158

Black, John, ii. 110

Blount's publication, i. 163

Birkbeck, Dr., ii. 81, 83

Birkenhead, John, i. 104

Blanchard, Laman, ii. 231

Bogle v. Lawson, ii. 183

Bolingbroke, i. 181

Bonaparte demands the English press to be silenced, ii. 1

Bridge Street Gang, ii. 69

Brougham, Lord, ii. 54, 177

Bulwer and the Newspaper stamp, ii. 73

Burdett, Sir F., ii. 63

Burke, i. 225; and Crabbe, i. 271

Burns the poet and the editor, ii. 115

Burnett, i. 28.

Burton and the Star Chamber, i. 64, 68, 87

Bute, Lord, and the North Briton, i. 209

Butter, Nathaniel, i. 10, 33, 48, 49, 50, 53, 54

CAMPBELL, Lord, ii. 105, 109

Canning and Gifford, i. 285; ii. 142

Carr's trial, i. 151

Cato's letters, i. 199

Cave's reports, ii. 261

Censorship in England, i. 39, 136

Chalmers, i. 20, 31, 33

Charles the First, i. 86

Charles the Second and the press, i. 134

Chatterton, i. 212

Civil war and the press, i. 45

Clement, Mr., proprietor of The Morning Chronicle, ii. 112

Clergymen pilloried and flogged, i. 159

Cobbett, W., ii. 44. 53

Coleridge, ii. 108, 117, 127, 129 131, 225

Constitutional, The, ii. 188

Collins, i. 22

Contest in the Commons, i. 231

Country Newspapers, i. 178.

Courier, ii. 223

Courier, late editions, ii. 227

Cowper's Newspaper sketch, i. 249

Cromwell, and the News-bearer, i. 23; attacks upon, i. 133; anecdote of, i. 269

Crabbe's Poem, "The Newspaper," i. 273

DAILY Advertiser, ii. 91

Daily Courant, i. 245; ii. 90

Daily News, ii. 185, 188, 189

Daily Paper, first, i. 175

Daily Papers, London, ii. 91, 93, 95, 97

Daily Universal Register, ii. 153

Dandy of Fifty, ii. 41

Dawks the News-writer, i. 166

Day, The, ii. 185

Debate, stormy, i. 233

Defoe, i. 174

Delinquencies, Lord Melville's, ii. 19

Despatches, spurious, i. 277

Destruction of manuscripts, i. 97

D'Israeli, B., i. 34

Diurnal occurrences, i. 90

Drake, i. 135

Dudley, Bate, ii. 149, 151

Dyer, the News-writer, i. 164

Easthope, Sir John, ii. 112

Editorial duel, ii. 149

Early struggles of the press, i. 37

Englishman, The, i. 176

English Mercuric, i. 33, 292

Evening Papers, ii. 221

Evening Mail, ii. 240

Examiner, i. 182; ii. 288; of 1710, i. 183

Exclusion bill and the press, i. 154

Execution of Coleman, i. 29; of Matthews, i. 197

Expenses of a Newspaper, ii. 193, 196

Express, The, ii. 240

FAIRFAX, Sir Thomas, i. 130

Fielding, i. 206

Finch Lord, anecdote of, i. 195

Finnerty, Peter, ii 275

First editor's-room, i. 21

First Newspapers in England, i. 49

Fletcher's "Fair Maid of the Inn," i. 19

Flying Post, i. 165

Foote, i. 213

Forbidden books imported, i. 71

Forged "English Mercurie," i 35, 292

Fourth Estate—What is it? i. 1

Fox, ii. 25

Fraud, great continental, ii. 181

Free press, argument for a, i. 4

GARRICK, ii. 97

Guardian, i. 176

Gazette de France, i. 30

George the First and the press, i. 204

George the Third and the press, i 251, 261

Gifford, i. 19

Giles, i. 134

Globe, ii. 233

Gordon's reports, ii. 265

Gray, proprietor of the Morning Chronicle, ii. 103

Gray, Hon. A., i. 150

Guthrie's reports, ii. 261

HARVEY, D. W., and True Sun, ii. 239

Hazlitt, i. 23

Heraclitus Ridens, i. 152

Herald, Morning, prospectus of, ii. 146

Hetherington, Henry, ii. 71

Heyling, Peter, i. 106

Holland, pamphlets issued from, i. 160

Hunt, Leigh, ii. 32, 35, 39, 43

Idler, the, on Newspapers, i. 208

Imprints, early, i. 48

Increase of readers, i. 44

Index of forbidden books, i. 38

Inquisition, i. 38

Intelligencer, The, i. 138, i. 144

JAMES the Second and the Newspapers, i. 156

Jefferies, victims of, i. 151, 158

Johnson, Dr., i. 5, 207; his reports, ii. 263

Johnson, Rev. S., trial of, i. 158

Jonson, Ben, Staple of News, i. 11, 21

Jones, Stephen, ii. 240

Junius, i. 226; ii. 91, 94

KEACH, trial of, i. 143

Knightley, Sir R., trial of, i. 41, 42

LOGOGRAPHIC printing, ii. 153, 155, 157, 159

Lamb, Charles, ii. 131, 135, 137

Lane, Mr. George, and The Morning Post, ii. 120, 233

Laud, Archbishop, i. 65

Laws affecting books, i. 73; and the press, i. 135, 136

Law of libel, i. 257, 259

Laws, severe, i. 283

Leighton, punishment of, i. 57

L'Estrange, Sir Roger, i. 137, 144, 156

Libel, actions for, i. 253

Liberty of the press destroyed by licensing act of Charles the Second, i. 135

Licensing act expired, i. 162

Lilburn, persecution of, i. 75

Locke, a writer of debates, i. 149

London Gazette, i. 148, 155

Long Parliament and the press, i. 117, 130

Lord Mayor committed to the Tower, i. 241

Lyndhurst, Lord, i. 5

MABBOTT, the licensor, i. 130, 132

Macaulay, i. 6, 153, 154

Mackintosh, Sir James, ii. 5, 11, 12. 122

Maginn, Dr., ii. 240

Mail, the Overland, ii. 205

Mail, West India, ii. 211

Mansfield, Lord, i. 5

Marryatt, i. 8

Marvel, Andrew, i. 150

Mercuries, the early, i. 96

Mores and the London Post, i. 228

Middiman, i. 134

Mill, Mr. James, ii. Ill

Milton, i. 9, 12, 137

Modes of defeating the law, ii. 79

Morning Advertiser, ii. 91

Morning Chronicle, history of, ii. 99

Morning Herald, ii. 145, 147

Morning Journal, ii. 185

Morning Post, history of, ii. 113, 119, 141

Murphy, i. 31

NEDHAM, Marchamont, i, 98

Newes of this present weeke, i. 48, 49

Newes out of Holland, &c., i. 50, 51

News, The, ii. 33

News books i. 31

News-letters and News-writers, i. 9, 25

News out of Kent, i. 31

Newspaper, Crabbe's, i. 273

Newspaper criticism in 1805, ii. 33

Newspaper expenses, ii. 193

Newspaper forgery, i. 35

Newspaper life, ii. 214

Newspapers, assize charge against, i. 197

Newspapers, first taxes on, i. 187, 281

Newpapers in 1849, ii. 89

Newspapers, their number in 1849, ii. 88

News-writers, i. 11

News-writers of 1712, i. 185

News-writers' office, i. 17

New Times, The, i. 175, 185

Night search by the licensers, i. 139

North Briton, i. 209, 211

North, Dr. John, i. 27

North, Roger, i. 27

North's Examen, i. 28

OBSERVATOR, The, i. 168

Obserrator, Tutchin's, i. 173

O'Connell and the reporters, ii. 283; in Ireland, ii. 286

Old Newspapers in the Museum, i. 91

Oliver, Alderman, committed to the Tower, i. 239

Onslow's motion, ii. 244

Orange Intelligencer, The, i. 162

O'Reilly and The Times, ii. 181

Overland mail, ii. 205

J Oxford Gazette, i. 148

PAINE, Trial of, i. 263

Papers, illegal, i. 205

Parliament and The Oracle, ii. 21

Parliamentary debates, i. 134—149

Parliamentary ordinance, i. 120

Parliament defeated by the press, i. 243

Partisan News-letters, i. 27

Peel, Sir R., testimony as to reporters, ii. 283

Peltier, ii. 9; trial of, ii. 5

Penny Newspaper stamps in 1848, ii. 88

Percival the minister and the Courier, ii. 226

Perry and Gray, ii. 103

Perry, James, life of, ii. 99; start in life, ii. 101; his character, ii. 107; mode of reporting, ii. 268

Phillip, Sir Richard, ii. 234

Pillory, writers punished by, i. 65, 68, 82, 158

Pitt and the country Newspapers, i. 279

Plebeian, The, i. 198

Police and the News-hawkers, ii. 77

Police and the unstamped, ii. 75

Post and Chronicle, ii. 123, 125

Praed, Maekworth, ii. 145

Press of the present century, ii. 1

Press, Parliamentary attacks on, i. 229

Printers' houses broken open, i. 14

Printers in 1724, i. 246

Printing-houses in 1724, i. 156

Proclamation against libels, i. 73

Prosecutions, Government, ii. 51, 53, 55, 57, 59, 61, 63, 65, 67

Prynn, Trial of, i. 59, 66, 68, 71, 87

Public Advertiser, ii. 91

Public Ledger, ii. 188

Pulteney, ii. 253

QUARRELS of the licensers, i. 55

Queen Anne, i. 167

Quidnunc, Addison's, i. 177

REFORMATION, influence of, i. 39

Register, Cobbett's, ii. 49

Reminiscenses, Charles Lamb's, ii. 139

Reporting and reporters, ii. 242

Representative, The, ii. 187

Roche, Eugenius, ii. 144, 186

Romish censors of the press, i. 125

Ruddiman, life of, i. 34

Rupert, Prince, i. 25

Ryves, i. 107

SALARIES of Newspaper staff, ii. 196

Saunders's News-letter, i. 36

Scotsman, The, ii. 110

Scott, Sir Walter, i. 26

Secret printing, i. 43

Sergeant-at-Arms and the Mayor, i. 235

Services rendered by the press, ii. 289

Shaftesbury, Earl of, 150

Shebbeare, ii. 94

Sheridan, i. 275

Sheridan's defence of reporters, ii. 271

Sheridan, Whitbread, and Wilberforce, ii. 31

Shirley's sketch, i. 47

Sketches, Foote's, i. 217, 219, 221, 223

Slop, Dr., ii. 185

Smollett and Wilkes, i. 209

Spankie and Lord Campbell, ii. 105

Specimens of early Newspapers, i. 51

Spectator, i. 176

Spectator's comic Newspaper, i. 179

Stamp duty, reduction of, ii. 87

Stamp, halfpenny, i. 189

Stamp, plea against, ii. 85

Standard, The, ii. 240

Star Chamber, i. 40, 74, 75

Steam printing, ii. 170

Steele's defence, i. 193; expulsion of, i. 194

Stephen, James, and the Morning Post, ii. 146

Stirling, Captain, ii. 176

St. James' Chronicle, ii. 240

Stoddart, Dr., ii. 174

Stuart, James, of The Courier, ii. 228

Stuart, J., petitions the House of Commons; is reprimanded, ii. 32

Stuart, Peter, of The Oracle, ii. 18

Summary, first Parliamentary, ii. 179

Sun, ii. 239

Sun, The True, ii. 239

Supple, Mark, ii. 273

Swift, i. 176, 203

Swift and Bolingbroke, i. 181

TATLER, i. 176

Tattersall, Mr., ii. 114

Taxes on Newspapers, i. 254

Thiers, i. 6

Thomasson's collection, i. 93

Tierney, Mr., ii. 128

Times and the steam press, ii. 171, 173

Times, first number of, described, i. 247

Times, history of, ii. 161, 163, 165, 167, 169

Times' testimonial, ii. 184

Times, the New, ii. 185

Titles of Newspapers, i. 246

Travelling press, i. 41

Trcnchard, i. 201

Twyn, trial and execution of, i. 141

Trials, Cobbetf s, ii. 47

Trieste route, ii. 209

Triumphant return of Prynn, i. 89

Tutchin, trial of, i. 169; in gaol, i. 171

Twenty-four hours of Newspaper life, ii. 214

Twiss, Horace, ii. 180

Tyas, Mr., the reporter, ii. 280

VIOLENT proceedings of the House, i. 237

WAGHORN, Lieutenant, ii. 207

Walgrave's travelling press, i. 41

Walpole, Sir R., ii. 255

Walter, founder of the Times, ii. 154

Walter, John, ii. 164; his account of the Times, ii. 165; his will, ii. 179.

Watts' letter, i. 35

Weekly News, i. 10; titles of, i. 48

Weekly Papers, ii. 288

Wharton, persecution of, i. 74

Whitehall and the News, i. 153

Whitehall Evening Post, ii. 241

Wickstone's trial, i. 42

Wilkes, i. 210

Williamson, Sir J., i. 148

Wyndham and Sheridan, ii. 23

Windham, Sir W., ii. 246

Wither, George, i. 109

Wolsey, i. 38

Wood, Anthony, i. 98

Woodfall, ii. 93, 98

Woodfall's reports, ii. 267