Page images
PDF
EPUB

far the most active in the matter. A great many of the Manchester School of politicians took shares in it, and Mr. Bright, without himself incurring any responsibility as a shareholder, is said to have raised 45007. among his friends to set the paper afloat. The amount, it is added, was invested in the concern in the name of a relation. Mr. Cobden, for reasons which I have never heard assigned, declined to have any interest in the Star, as a shareholder; but he contributed 2507. as a gift to the fund which was raised for commencing and carrying on the publication. Mr. Cobden's notion was, that the great bulk of the people did not care for long leading articles, which he regarded as nothing better than dull disquisitions, or elaborate and heavy essays. This opinion he expressed on several occasions in the House of Commons; and, in accordance with it, he sought to impress on the Committee of Management of the Star that, instead of having three or four of those leading articles every day, or most days, they should only have one, and that this one should partake more of the character of a simple reference to the more important events of the day, than of general discussion on public questions. This was, with some modifications, made a feature of the Star at its commencement; but it was soon found that it would not answer. Not many months, not, indeed, many weeks, had elapsed before it was felt that the Star must resemble its contemporaries, in at least a great degree, with regard to its leading matter. The Star showed from the first con

siderable ability, but it harped too much on the one string of free trade, as expounded by the leaders of the Manchester School. In fact, it was but the echo, day after day, of the sentiments of Messrs. Cobden and Bright, so long as the former lived. And with its unceasing advocacy of free trade principles, there was blended a scarcely less strenuous advocacy of the peace-at-any-price policy. The result was, that it became a thoroughly anti-British paper. Nothing, indeed, could be conceived more entirely anti-national than the course which the Star pursued. The consequence of an undeviating perseverance in this policy may easily be guessed. The paper was exceedingly unpopular. It received no support from the community generally, but was almost wholly dependent on the extreme upholders of free trade principles, in conjunction with those who were prepared at any time, and all times, to sacrifice the honour of the country to the practical assertion of their un-English views. No one, therefore, will be surprised when I mention, that while its penny contemporaries, the Telegraph and the Standard enjoyed a circulation,the first of from 140,000 to 150,000 copies, and the other of from 120,000 to 130,000 copies daily,-the Star, including its evening edition, never reached 15,000 copies. Latterly, I am assured, it did not exceed from 10,000 to 12,000 copies. During its existence the Star, as was to be expected in a property so unprosperous as it was, repeatedly changed its proprietors and also its editors. Its last editor was

-

Mr. John Morley, now editor of the Fortnightly Review; and one of its last leading proprietors was Mr. Rawson, one of the principal proprietors, if not the principal proprietor of the Manchester Times. The losses by the publication of the Star were very great. I have heard them estimated at not less than 80,000. I cannot vouch for the correctness of that amount, but I have the best authority for stating the information having been given to me by a gentleman who had it direct from a leading proprietor,-that the year before the repeal of the duties on paper, the losses of the Star were not much, if at all, under 80007. The abolition of the paper duties, in 1861, considerably, as a matter of course, reduced the losses of the Star, as it increased the profits of its contemporary penny journals which were paying; but still, till the last, the Star continued to be a seriously losing concern. It expired in 1870, after a troubled existence of fourteen years.

CHAPTER XV.

PRESENT METROPOLITAN DAILY PAPERS.

THE MORNING POST.

Its Commencement-Its Early History-" Parson Bate," one of its first Editors, Fights a savage Duel-Connexion with it of Samuel Taylor Coleridge-Sir James Mackintosh-Dr. Southey -Charles Lamb-Relations between Mr. Daniel Stuart, when Proprietor, and Mr. S. T. Coleridge-Changes in the Editorship and the Politics of the Paper-Its present Position.

I NOW come to those Morning Papers which, though established in the last century, still exist; and taking them in the order of their commencement, the first that demands my attention is the MORNING POST.

The Morning Post-which bore originally the additional title of "and Daily Advertiser," was started in the year 1772. In stating that the Morning Post was set on foot in 1772, it is necessary, to prevent mistakes, that I should show that the date of 1781, given in "Mitchell's Newspaper Directory"-usually very correct cannot be the right one. First of all, the folio on the front page, which at the time I write is exactly "30,500," gives an anterior date to that given by Mr. Mitchell; and though that numbering of the Post does not carry us so far back as 1772, we have undoubted historic authority for the fact that

the origin of the paper could not under any circumstances have had a later date than I have mentioned. In my notice of the late Morning Herald I have stated, and will presently have to mention again, that the Rev. Henry Bate, commonly called the " gay and gallant Parson Bate," became editor of the Post in 1775, and we know that it had been established some time before his instalment in the editorial chair. As editor of the Morning Post, this "Parson Bate" fought a duel in 1777. The day of the month, nor even the month itself, is not given, but the year shows that Mr. Mitchell is in error in giving the year 1781 as that from which the Morning Post dates its commencement. This duel, it will be observed, was fought by Parson Bate as editor of that journal, and for offensive matter which he as editor had inserted in its columns. I am desirous of removing the error in the "Newspaper Directory" as to the time the first number of the Post appeared, because Mr. Mitchell's publication has a large sale, and is justly regarded as an excellent authority on newspaper statistics.

I have no doubt that "Mitchell's Directory" has fallen into its error by copying "Haydn's Book of Dates,"-usually a reliable authority-as in that work the year 1782 is given as the year in which the Morning Post was commenced. The Post is thus proved to be within a few months of its centenary anniversary. To live a century is a great thing for a newspaper; for I venture to say, that not one newspaper in a thousand has been able to boast of

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »