Ill 
 
 nil 
 
 i 

 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 MAY TREAT MORRISON 
 
 IN MEMORY OF 
 
 ALEXANDER F MORRISON 
 
 1
 
 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT
 
 >s- 
 
 -o-
 
 AN 
 
 EDITOR'S RETROSPECT 
 
 FIFTY YEARS OF NEWSPAPER WORK 
 
 BY 
 
 CHARLES A. COOPER 
 
 EDITOR OF THE ' SCOTSMAN ' 
 
 
 Hotttion 
 MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd. 
 
 NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN CO. 
 1896 
 
 A II rights reserved
 
 
 « • . t • • V . .•• •••*•*- ./•• • / . • • • • 
 
 * ■*»** * •** •••••
 
 C7A3 
 
 Ea S. C er. 
 
 p MY SON 
 
 CM 
 
 g THIS BOOK 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 C/3 
 
 a: 
 
 fr 

 
 PREFATORY NOTE 
 
 Twice in my life I have attempted to keep a diary. 
 In each case the diary was neglected after a few 
 months of diligent care. The months during which 
 the diaries continued were times of political excite- 
 ment, — years apart. All my life I have kept notes 
 of interesting conversations with more or less notable 
 persons ; that is, of conversations which interested 
 me. I have a fairly retentive memory. I have 
 had more than fifty years' experience of newspaper 
 work. These are my equipments for the produc- 
 tion of this book. It is a plain writing down of 
 recollections, of experiences, of conversations. It 
 leaves much untold. Some things in it may have 
 been extenuated ; nothing has been set down in 
 
 malice. 
 
 C. A. C. 
 
 Edinburgh, August 1896.
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 Wooden press days — The journalist — Newspapers and newspaper work in 
 the old days and the new — Improved machinery — The old and the 
 new journalists — Some old editors — Liquor and newspaper work 
 
 Pages I -9 
 
 CHAPTER n 
 
 Reporting, good and bad — Pressure on reporters — An old experience — • 
 Some murder trials ....... Pages 10-20 
 
 CHAPTER HI 
 
 All-round reporters — Old acquaintances — Samuel Warren — His simple 
 vanity — His politeness — His snubs to counsel — His character as a judge 
 — Member for Midhurst — Mr. Digby Seymour — Mr. Dearsly 
 
 Pages 21-29 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 Old electioneering — Hustings experiences — A bespattered candidate — 
 Corrupt practices — Flags and voters — A county election — Lord Hotham 
 — Lord Ripon's first election — James Clay — Beverley and bribery — 
 Alfred Crosskill ....... Pages 30-40 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 Thackeray — An interview and a criticism — Cough — Local magnates — "Salt 
 Tom " — A rule of life — The people of Hull — A compliment 
 
 Pages 41-49
 
 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 Dramatic criticism — Some autobiographical details — John Langford Pritchard 
 — Behind the scenes — Madame Celeste — Bruce Norton — The Manager 
 ui Distress — Musical criticism of old — Louisa Pyne — The Pyne and 
 Harrison Company ....... Pages 50-62 
 
 CHAPTER VH 
 
 Journalism before the abolition of the stamp — Growth of newspapers out of 
 London — Their influence — ^Journalistic prospects — The impressed stamp 
 — Michael James Whitty ...... Pages 63-73 
 
 CHAPTER VHI 
 
 Change to London — The Reporters' Gallery in the House of Commons — 
 Some experiences there — "Big-Endians and Little-Endians" — Old 
 reporters — A debate on the Address . . . Pages 74-84 
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 
 Sub-editorial work long ago — William Black — " Liners " — " Fire Fowler" — 
 The hangman's liner — The garrotting liner — The political liner — The 
 ecclesiastical liner — Count Carlo Borromeo . . . Pages 85-95 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 Samuel Lucas — Cobden and the Times — The Morning Star's editorial staff — 
 Washington Wilks — Editorial teas — Want of supervision — Revising an 
 article — ^Justin M'Carthy — Leicester Buckingham — Slow writers — Sala 
 and easy writing — Cardinal Manning on Sala — F. W. Chesson 
 
 Pages 96-109 
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 
 The Morning Star — The Dial and the Star — ^John Bright — His opinion 
 of Palmerston, Cornewall Lewis, Lord John Russell, Peel, Disraeli, 
 Gladstone — Bright on Trade Unions — As an orator — Gladstone and 
 Hennessy — Bright on Ireland ..... Pages 1 10-124
 
 CONTENTS xi 
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 
 Reform days — Lowe and Horsman — The " Ten Minutes Bill " — Household 
 suffrage — Mr. Gladstone and the Bill — The Tea-Room Conference — 
 Mr. Gladstone resigns leadership — Mr. Bright's attitude — The Reform 
 League — Mr. Beale, Bradlaugh, the League, and Mr. Walpole — The 
 agitators — Sir W. Adam on popular movements — Garibaldi in London — 
 The Princess of Wales's arrival — Hard descriptive vifork — Disembarka- 
 tion of the Princess — Meeting of the Royal couple . Pages 125-138 
 
 CHAPTER XIII 
 
 The paper duty — Its abolition — The S^ar^s diseases — " Readings by 
 Starlight " — Richard Whiteing — Severance from the S^ar — ^John Gorrie 
 — Last days of the 6'/ar ...... Pages 139-149 
 
 CHAPTER XIV 
 
 The Scotsman — Its history as a feature of British journalism— Its foundation 
 — Tory domination of the time — A subservient Press— The ideas and 
 promises of the founders — Charles M'Laren — William Ritchie — John 
 Ritchie — The prospectus — Early days and difficulties — Progress of the 
 paper in size, in circulation, and in advertisements — The penny 
 
 Pages 150-163 
 
 CHAPTER XV 
 
 Editor V. Business Manager — The management of the Scotsman — Romance 
 in business — Growth of circulation of the paper — Conservatism of the 
 Scots — How to enlarge the circulation — The causes of restriction — 
 Railway carriage and middlemen — A great alteration — The Caledonian 
 Mercury — A social revolution ..... Pages 164-175 
 
 CHAPTER XVI 
 
 Restlessness in effort — Necessary in newspapers — News for the Scotsman — 
 Stirring up the telegraph companies — Their inertness — Their charges 
 — An impeachment of them — A throttling band — Some newspapers 
 satisfied — Meetings of newspaper men — Telegraph managers brought 
 to bay — Reduction of charges — More suggestions — The "Special 
 Wire" offered — The "Malignant Being" — Adoption of special wires 
 — Enormous growth of telegraphing . . . Pages 176-190
 
 xii AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT 
 
 CHAPTER XVII 
 
 Growth of newspapers illustrated by the Scotsman — A London establishment 
 — Collecting news — Comprehensive plans — What should be given to the 
 pubHc — Parliamentary reporting— Difficulties and annoyances — Efforts to 
 get the Reporters' Gallery opened to newspapers out of London — Objec- 
 tions — The Serjeant-at-Arms — His Objections and Answers — Apathy of 
 other papers — Mr. Gladstone — A Select Committee — Victory ! 
 
 Pages 191-208 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII 
 
 London following Scotland — Special newspaper trains^The Glasgow special 
 — The Perth special — The example followed in London— New machines 
 — The Times' efforts to obtain quick printing — Its early machines — 
 Hoe's invention — The rotary web machine — Adoption by the Scotsman — 
 Latest developments — Mr. James Law — London correspondence — 
 Descriptive summaries — Book reviews as news . . Pages 209-223 
 
 CHAPTER XIX 
 
 Editors of the Scotsman — Alexander Russel — Those who knew him — My 
 association with him — His birth and education — Apprenticed to be a 
 printer — Shorthand writing — Russel in Berwick, Cupar, and Kilmarnock 
 — He joins the Scotsman — Accession to the Editorship-^" Russel of the 
 Scotsman " — Anonymous journalism — The work he did — A writing 
 Editor — His politics — His sturdy Whiggism — Hatred of mere political 
 expedients — Ecclesiastical criticism — "The enemy of the people of God " 
 — Opposition to the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill . . Pages 224-242 
 
 CHAPTER XX 
 
 Russel and party ties — His views on Home Rule — His readiness to listen to 
 argument — His contest with Mr. Duncan M'Laren — his views on 
 " Working-manism " — Mr. Duncan M'Laren and the Whigs — "Inde- 
 pendent Liberals" — Mr. M'Laren's action against the Scotsman — 
 Presentation to Russel — His continuation of the contest — Reported 
 reconciliation — The Annuity Tax agitation and Disestablishment — The 
 Free Church — The Irish Church — Russel's dislike of narrow Volun- 
 taryism — His probable course in recent times . . Pages 243-266
 
 CONTENTS xiii 
 
 CHAPTER XXI 
 
 Russel's early experience in writing — Disparagement of quick writing — 
 Number of articles per day — Russel and literature — His style — His 
 careful guarding of statements — Mr. Gladstone and his Cabinet — 
 Russel's use of humour — Illustration, not mere joking — Russel and 
 imagination — The subjects he delighted in — His inability to praise — 
 His appropriation of credit of articles — Quicker journalism — Spontaneity 
 of Russel's humour— Anecdotes — Russel known on the country-side — 
 His use of quotations — Memory's betrayal — A closing interview — Mr. 
 J. R. Findlay's reminiscences of Russel . . . Pages 267-296 
 
 CHAPTER XXn 
 
 The ecclesiatical yoke in Scotland — A holiday trip — A new acquaintance 
 — The Sound of Mull — Our new friend in a new aspect — Arrival at 
 Portree — Journey to the Quiraing — A funeral procession — "His 
 luggage " — A Gaelic song — Uig and its burial-place — The walk to the 
 Quiraing — Scene in the graveyard — Searching for the family grave — 
 A walk on Loch Duich side — Glen Shiel — The milestones — The Cluny 
 Inn — A dark look-out — Ministerial denunciation of the sin of walking 
 on the Sabbath — Brighter prospects — Sabbatarianism and hypocrisy 
 
 Pages 297-314 
 
 CHAPTER XXHI 
 
 English misconceptions of Scotland — A bigoted M. P.— John Hill Burton — 
 His idea of reviewing — Mutual Admiration Societies — Burton, the 
 Scotsman, and Free Trade — Burton's pedantry — His History of the 
 Reign of Queen Anne — An inaccurate quotation — Edward Ellice and 
 Mr. Gladstone — Ellice's papers — Burton's Bohemianism — Dr. John 
 Brown, his kindliness — Professor Blackie — His contributions^ — His 
 mistakes — The Gaelic way of spelling whisky— The Blackie Brother- 
 hood — Its ending — Some letters of advice — Differences healed 
 
 Pages 315-337 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV 
 
 Misleading journalists — A case in point — " The biggest liars in Edinburgh" 
 — Too much caution — The betrothal of the Princess Louise — The 
 anonymous letter writer — Some specimens — A United Presbyterian 
 minister and anonymous letters — Conviction and penitence — The 
 "Christian minister" and the wickedness of the newspaper — A lunatic 
 visitor — An important discovery — Lunatic letter writers — Police advice 
 and criticism — The students and the Editor— An unpleasant lesson — 
 An angling recollection Pages 33S-352
 
 xiv AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT 
 
 CHAPTER XXV 
 
 More angling recollections — Loch Leven trout — Fishing poor compared 
 
 with some Highland lochs — Tongue and its waters —John Ross 
 
 Salmon v. Trout fishing — A reproof — The poacher — Tossing and trout- 
 ing — The piety of the ghillie — A ghillie's praise— John Stewart— Loch 
 
 Maree — Sir Molyneux Nepean — Minnow v. Fly — A chan"-e How to 
 
 avoid midges — A curious trouting experience — Angling evenings — South 
 Uist — The Howmore ••.... Parses 3153-367 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI 
 
 Mr. W. P. Adam — His work as Whip — His honesty of purpose — A Liberal 
 mistake in Midlothian — 1874 to 18S0— Mr. Gladstone's resignation 
 of leadership — Mr. Forster and the Marquis of Hartington — An inter- 
 view with Mr. Forster — His anxiety as to the leadership— Impressions 
 of Mr. Forster— Mr. Adam's work — His difficulties — Liberal doubts 
 and fears — London and Lord Beaconsfield — Sudden announcement of 
 Dissolution — An incident of the time — A conversation with Lord Gran- 
 ville — His doubts as to the election— Sir William Harcourt and Liberal 
 
 prospects — Mr. Adam's estimates of result — The new Ministry Mr. 
 
 Adam's place in the Liberal Government — His disappointment 
 
 Pages 368-382 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII 
 
 Mr. Gladstone — His candidature for Midlothian — Lord Rosebery's share in 
 it — Doubts as to its wisdom — The 1879 Campaign — Lord Airlie and 
 Sir George Campbell— The 1880 Campaign— Enthusiasm of the people 
 — An interview with Mr. Gladstone in London— His failure to read 
 newspapers— An illustration— The result of the election— The Dis- 
 establishment Question — A private deputation— A suggestion for safety 
 —A walk with Mr. Gladstone— The cruise of the Tantallon Castle— 
 News of defeat of the Rosebery Government— Anxiety on board ship— 
 My last conversation with Mr. Gladstone . . . Pages 383-398 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII 
 
 The Home Rule Question— Necessity for some devolution— Opponents of 
 local-national bodies, afterwards Home Rulers— A dinner incident- 
 Edinburgh's return in 1885— Sir George Harrison— His death— Mr. 
 Childers— The Parliament of 1885-86— Political information and how 
 to use it— Information from Mr. Childers— Sketch of draft Home Rule
 
 CONTENTS XV 
 
 Bill published in the Sco/sma;i~Consten\a.tion among Liberals — Mr. 
 Gladstone's personal influence — The Scotsman's attitude — Painful recol- 
 lections — Accusations and invitations — A curious mission — Mr. Childers 
 as a correspondent — His inconsistencies — His objections to the Home 
 Rule Bill — His action in its favour — Party fears — Other objecting 
 statesmen Pages 399-412 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX 
 
 Danger of doing kindly deeds — An instance — Sir William Harcourt and 
 Scottish Liberal members- — Complaints against them — Mr. Marjori- 
 banks — Urging him to political endeavour — His success — His place in 
 the Government of 1892 — Lord Randolph Churchill — My meetings with 
 him — His criticisms and his confession — Sir William Harcourt on con- 
 sistency — Sir George Campbell — A story of him — Lord Young and some 
 sayings of his Pages 413-425 
 
 INDEX 427-430
 
 \ J » 
 
 O-i J 5 O ^ * 
 
 
 •.^. ;'.>, ?., ] ]' ^.^r^J ^i ^/>\ 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 Wooden press days — The journalist — Newspapers and newspaper 
 work in the old days and the new — Improved machinery — 
 The old and the new journalists — Some old editors — Liquor and 
 newspaper work. 
 
 There can be few journalists now in active work 
 who have seen a newspaper of good size and fair 
 circulation printed on a wooden press. I have. It 
 is long ago ; but the memory of it is with me yet. 
 Recollections of the past, even in regard to news- 
 papers, may not be unpleasant in themselves ; but 
 they are vivid reminders of a long-past youth, and 
 these are not altogether a comfort. For myself, I am 
 inclined to agree with Moore in this matter — 
 
 Give me back, give me back the wild freshness of morning, 
 Her clouds and her tears are worth evening's best light. 
 
 Still there are some compensations, always provided 
 that your years have been fairly spent. If it be 
 good to use your life in hard work, most journalists 
 ought to have a respectable record. For my years 
 have taught me that in comparison with other 
 pursuits journalism makes more demands on the 
 worker than almost any other calling. Perhaps we 
 
 B
 
 2 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 are all inclined to magnify our own office ; but when 
 allowance has been made for this in my case I 
 adhere to the conclusion just stated. The journalist 
 may not, strictly speaking, scorn delights and live 
 laborious days. , He, has his share of pleasures — 
 when he can find ' time to enjoy them. Still, as a 
 rule, othes , peopl.e'-s jplea'$.ure3 make work for him, 
 while they do not always bring him friends. He 
 must work nights as well as days. He must be 
 patient and enduring. He must be prepared to 
 sacrifice home comforts in the service of the public. 
 If his work be daily journalism, it begins when it 
 ends. The publication of one paper is the starting- 
 point for the next. The completion of one task is 
 the beginning of another. The strain is never 
 relaxed, except at the cost of inefficiency or neglect, 
 or the tightening of it on others. 
 
 In the days of that old wooden press which I 
 remember, newspaper life was easier, even for those 
 who had to produce daily papers. The electric 
 telegraph was not. Railways were in their infancy. 
 Posts were slow. You could discuss a piece of 
 news without troubling yourself as to any possible 
 modification of it in the next hour or the next twenty- 
 four hours. Weekly papers represented the great 
 bulk of the journalism of the day. They could be 
 compiled leisurely, and no haste was necessary in 
 getting them to press. So to speak, there was for 
 them no "latest news." It had all come to hand 
 hours before the post closed. When restless spirits 
 began to look after later news, the race commenced
 
 I IMPROVED NEWSPAPER MACHINERY 3 
 
 that has landed us where we are. Austraha is as 
 near to us as London then was to Birmingham. 
 The Houses of Pariiament are at our doors in 
 Edinburgh. A whisper in a European court is 
 heard in every town in the United Kingdom. News 
 from India is pubhshed here an hour before the time 
 at which it was despatched. 
 
 All this has revolutionised journalism. The old 
 wooden press has gone. The Cowper machine has 
 gone. The old journalistic methods have gone. 
 The newspaper has had to keep time with the rail- 
 way and the electric telegraph. It is not often 
 printed from type. The invention of the paper 
 process of stereotyping has added millions to the 
 circulation of newspapers. In the old wooden press 
 days, and in the days of improved machinery that 
 followed, the printing had to be done from the type, 
 and it went on at a slow and lumbering pace. Only 
 one side of a sheet could be printed in a single 
 operation, and only one machine could be used. By 
 the adoption of the stereotyping process, it became 
 possible to start several machines, and in that way 
 several thousand copies could be printed in an hour ; 
 but on one side only. The other side had to be 
 printed afterwards. Thus every sheet had to go 
 twice through the press. This crippled production, 
 and new presses had to be invented. Now a single 
 machine will print between twenty and thirty thou- 
 sand copies an hour on both sides. Rolls of paper 
 are at one end of the machine. At the other end 
 there is an incessant outpouring of newspapers.
 
 4 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 folded and ready to go into the hands of the reader. 
 The machine will do more than this. Instead of 
 printing a single sheet only, it will print three sheets 
 for the one copy of the paper, place them in position 
 and paste them together. Thus larger papers can 
 be produced than could be issued of old, and hundreds 
 can be printed in the time formerly required to print 
 one. Labour is vastly lessened in proportion to 
 the work done. Yet there are at least a hundred 
 workers employed on newspapers nowadays for one 
 similarly employed fifty years ago. 
 
 The changes have not been confined to mechanical 
 appliances. The men employed on journalistic work 
 are not what they were. I am not going to pretend 
 that there was a golden age of journalism. It is 
 altogether otherwise. Journalism never was so good 
 as it is now ; and it will be better. There are more 
 able men engaged in newspapers now than there 
 were in the wooden press days. I am a disbeliever 
 in the giants of old times. I don't believe that 
 Sterling or Black could have earned his daily 
 bread as a journalist now. They could command 
 thunderous sentences : they could not command 
 agility. Perhaps the American joker carried my 
 opinion to an extreme length when he said that 
 Shakspere would not make a newspaper man — he 
 lacked the necessary fancy and imagination. But 
 the fact remains that for the most part the journalists 
 of fifty years ago could not have done the work of 
 the journalists of to-day. Nay, the point may be 
 pressed further. Not only could they not have
 
 THE JOURNALIST 
 
 done present-day newspaper work, but present-day 
 newspaper men can and do produce better work than 
 came from the old men. Nobody need accept this 
 opinion unless he chooses : there it is, and it will be 
 found difficult of disproof. 
 
 It may be fully admitted that the men of fifty 
 years ago — that is, the best among them — did most 
 excellent work — for their time. They were the best 
 for doing what had to be done. Journalism, like 
 other things, illustrates the great truth of the appear- 
 ance and survival of the fittest. It also illustrates 
 the other form of this principle — that the poet is 
 born, not made. The wise doctor is born, not 
 made. The successful merchant is born, not made. 
 The great lawyer is born, not made. So is the 
 journalist. It does not follow that there are none 
 but born journalists. There are many in the calling 
 that have been made, and badly made. It is the 
 same with doctors, and lawyers, and even with the 
 writers of verses. It has always been the same. 
 The old journalists did great work — of its kind ; 
 and for the most part they did it without training. 
 I remember able newspaper men who had been 
 tailors, doctors, lawyers, ministers of religion. One 
 of the shrewdest newspaper men I ever met had 
 begun a successful career, after being a weaver, with 
 four pennyworth of cheese. He built up a weekly 
 paper and he made it one of the best in the 
 country. 
 
 Another journalist of those days had been 
 educated for a Roman Catholic priest, and had fallen
 
 6 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 into the snare of marriage. He was a bad business 
 man, but a good writer. In his later days he had 
 failings. At one time he argued himself into the 
 belief that the only proper food for man was eggs 
 and green tea. He acted upon his belief for about 
 six weeks, and then required a rest from journalistic 
 work for a season. He was not insane. He wrote 
 forcibly. He thought vigorously. He was a Free 
 Traderwhen FreeTrade was unfashionable. It is true 
 he wrote his newspaper out of existence by persist- 
 ently advocating the Peace Society and teetotalism. 
 These were his latest beliefs, and he introduced 
 them into everything he did. In this respect he 
 was a reproduction of Mr. Dick. I have known 
 him introduce the Peace Society into an article on 
 high farming ; and teetotalism into an article on 
 Lord John Russell. 
 
 This same editor had not always been a tee- 
 totaller. He was a member of a club of which the 
 editor of the rival paper in the town was also a 
 member. They invariably met and drank together 
 on the night before their papers went to press. 
 Leading articles had all been written before eight 
 o'clock in the eveninof. Dinner had been eaten at 
 two o'clock in the afternoon. Supper became a 
 necessity, and press night an excuse for not going 
 home for it. Thus they met and fought their 
 battles. One morning about two o'clock my editor 
 came back to the office in a state of elation. As a 
 rule he did not return, and I was surprised to see 
 him. He produced from his pocket a proof of a
 
 I STRONG DRINK AND NEWSPAPER WORK 7 
 
 leading article, not his own. The rival editor had 
 boasted a good deal and drunk more ; and in the 
 process had produced the proof and left it in my 
 editor's hands. That was why he had revisited the 
 office. We did not go to press till eight o'clock in 
 the morning. He had therefore plenty of time, and 
 he wrote a short article answering that of his 
 opponent, whose article was also quoted. There 
 was a sensation next day ; but the rival editor kept 
 silence. 
 
 It has been affirmed by advocates of total absti- 
 nence that strong drink destroys the ability to do 
 good work, I am not prepared to discuss that 
 question or to insist that the advocates of total 
 abstinence are wrong. But the case of the rival 
 editor of whom I have just spoken may be quoted 
 against them. When I first remember him he was 
 a reporter — one of the best I have ever met. It 
 was at the time of the Free Trade agitation. The 
 paper on which he was engaged favoured Free Trade. 
 Mr. Bright and Mr. Cobden came to the town in 
 which it was published, and were entertained at a 
 banquet the evening before the paper's publication. 
 A full report of the proceedings at the banquet had 
 to appear in the paper. Only the one reporter was 
 available. He went to the banquet and took copious 
 notes and copious draughts of wine. When the 
 banquet was over he could not stand. He was 
 helped into a cab, driven to the office, carried 
 upstairs to his desk. The editor was in agony. 
 No report seemed possible. The reporter managed
 
 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 to get his note-book out of his pocket and demanded, 
 " Gimme pencil." A pencil was put into his fingers 
 and he began to write. He produced five columns 
 of speeches — a capital report ; and it was in time 
 for the publication of the paper. 
 
 As an editor he was not great — when he was 
 sober. He seemed to know this. His practice 
 was to write his articles in the day-time. They 
 were dull enough then in all conscience. After he 
 had finished them he went to the club of which I 
 have spoken. In the short hours of next morning 
 he returned, usually tipsy. Then he began to 
 correct his proofs. He changed sentences. He 
 introduced new ones, and he made them sparkle 
 with humour. His corrections were all but illeo-ible- 
 but they were the salvation of his literary credit. 
 
 A predecessor of this editor was dull both drunk 
 and sober. He was fond of writing essay-like 
 articles which, it is safe to say, nobody could read. 
 The paper was sinking under him, when one day he 
 produced an article that set the town talking, and 
 sold several hundred extra copies of the paper. 
 The editor was complimented by everybody. He 
 bore himself proudly. For several days he was or 
 seemed to be a happy man. Then he collapsed. 
 The rival paper in its next publication printed the 
 article side by side with one from Chambers s 
 EdinbtL7^gh Journal. They were identical. The 
 editor had not changed a word. Two days there- 
 after the town knew him no more. 
 
 Still another editor of those days presents himself
 
 LEADER-WRITING MADE EASY 
 
 to my mind. He was a clever fellow, who could 
 write well and vigorously. What he had been 
 previously I do not know. I believe that later he 
 was appointed consul in Mexico or some other state 
 in that part of the world. It was his practice to 
 write his leading article or articles at home the night 
 before publication. The rest of the week he did 
 nothing. One night his articles had not come to 
 hand at the office. Ten o'clock came ; eleven ; 
 twelve ; and still no sign of an article. There was 
 commotion in the office ; and at last a messenger 
 was sent to the editor's house. He found him with 
 a glass of brandy and water before him, and news- 
 papers scattered about. There was no article 
 written. 
 
 " What do you want ? " asked the editor. 
 
 " The article for to-morrow." 
 
 " Didn't I send It ? " 
 
 " No ; at least It has not come to the office." 
 
 "Give me the Twies." 
 
 The Times was found and handed to him, and 
 with unsteady fingers he cut out one of its leading 
 articles. This he stuck upon a sheet of paper, and 
 then taking his pen wrote at the top, " What does 
 the Times mean by this ? " Nothing more. 
 
 In that form and with that introduction it 
 appeared next morning as the editor's leading 
 article.
 
 . CHAPTER II 
 
 Reporting, good and bad — Pressure on reporters — An old experience 
 
 —Some murder trials. 
 
 It has been said by some old journalists and others 
 that reporting is now a lost art. I do not profess to 
 agree with the criticism. There is as good reporting 
 now as ever there was. In quantity there is far 
 more. Indeed that fact seems to be the basis of the 
 criticism. Reporting, it is said, has become more 
 mechanical and less intellectual. Anybody can write 
 shorthand ; and the extension of newspapers has 
 brought many "bodies" forward as reporters who 
 can do little else than write shorthand. There is an 
 old story of one of these verbatim men who had 
 been sent to report a speech. When he came back, 
 the editor asked him how much the speech would 
 make in length. "Three columns," he replied. "But 
 we have not room for three columns," said the editor, 
 " and it is not worth so much. You must put it into 
 a column and a half." "Very well," was the reply; 
 " which half of it will you have ?" Condensation was 
 for that man a lost art ; and so it is wfth many of the 
 reporters of to-day, Mr. Pitman has destroyed them 
 as thinking beings, and has made them into machines.
 
 CHAP. II REPORTING, GOOD AND BAD n 
 
 There is a story of a great painter who, being asked 
 with what medium he mixed his colours, repHed, "With 
 brains." So it is with good reporting : it is short- 
 hand mixed with brains. Take half the reporters of 
 the day and ask them when they come from a meet- 
 ing what has been said. They can no more tell you 
 without reference to their notes than they can fly. 
 I have seen a reporter when he came out of the 
 Gallery of the House of Commons put aside his 
 notes and write a report of the speech he has heard 
 without referrinof to them. It was not a verbatim 
 report ; but it was infinitely better, and in one sense 
 truer, than a verbatim report. Some of the best 
 reporters I have known could not write a word of 
 shorthand. Especially was that the case in the old 
 days. Still there were as good shorthand writers 
 then as now, only they were not machines. It is 
 true there was not the same pressure then as now. 
 A reporter might have days in which to produce his 
 account of a meeting. Now he must have it ready 
 in a few hours at furthest after the meeting is over 
 — perhaps in a few minutes. Then he had no 
 trouble with the electric telegraph ; now he has the 
 operator waiting for him. Remembering all this, I 
 am often surprised at the good work that is done. 
 ' Once, many years ago, I was sent to report a 
 murder trial at Lincoln. There was no railway from 
 my place — Hull — and no electric telegraph. I had 
 to cross the river in a small steamboat ; then take 
 the coach and by it travel to Lincoln. A reporter 
 for the rival paper was bent on the same mission.
 
 12 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 A good deal of importance was attached to the trial, 
 for a reason which may be told later. Both papers 
 were published on the same day, and the question 
 was which should have the better report. To my 
 surprise I found when we had crossed the river that 
 my opposing reporter had orders to take a post- 
 chaise, and with changes of horses, get to Lincoln 
 before the trial, and back afterwards quicker than 
 the coach. This it had been thought would enable 
 the composing staff of the paper to set a longer 
 report than would be possible if the coach alone 
 were taken. I felt aggrieved. I believed that on 
 equal terms I could produce as good a report as he 
 could ; but if he was to get home hours before me, 
 no good reporting of mine would avail. A crumb 
 of comfort came to me when I learned that the 
 steamboat across the river ran in conjunction with 
 the coach ; and no arrangement had been made for 
 a special boat. I had just time to write a note to 
 the editor of my paper suggesting that he should 
 send over a special steamer to meet the coach the 
 next day. As it turned out he did not adopt my 
 suggestion. I got upon the coach, satisfied that I 
 had done all that could be expected of me. The 
 driver was a wooden - legged man, known as 
 "Wooden-legged Tommy." There was a tradition 
 that when he drove the coach there was sure to be 
 rain. In this case there was rain. I sat beside him 
 and shared the wet with him. We were at the first 
 stage before my rival, and I suggested to Tommy 
 that a little brandy and water would do him no
 
 II A REPORTING EXPERIENCE 13 
 
 harm. He agreed with me, and we became close 
 friends. I confided to him the difficulty as to my 
 rival. "Oh," said he, "you leave that to me, sir. 
 I'll mak' it all right." He declined to tell me what 
 he meant, and I did not press for explanation. 
 
 The trial began that afternoon soon after we Pfot 
 to Lincoln. It did not finish that evening, and only 
 came to a close on the afternoon of the next day 
 about an hour before the coach started on its return 
 journey. The day was beautifully fine. My rival 
 had got into his post-chaise directly the trial was 
 over, and was well on his road before we started. 
 To my surprise, Tommy was again the coachman. 
 Before we had gone five miles on the old straight 
 Roman road, rain began and poured all the rest of 
 the journey. Tommy was full of nods and becks 
 and wreathed smiles ; but he was close as an oyster 
 as to what they meant. At the first stage we heard 
 that my rival had got away about a quarter of an 
 hour before us. Tommy beamed more than ever. 
 At the second stage my rival had not got away 
 when we drove up. He was not ready to go before 
 we started. Indeed we drove off nearly together. 
 To my surprise and delight he fell behind, and when 
 we arrived at the river -side he was not in sight. 
 The steamboat was panting at the jetty, and I had 
 scarcely got on board before she was off But 
 Tommy had time to say to me, " I tell'd you I 
 would mak' that all right." "What did you do .'^ " 
 "Do," he cried; "why, Jim that drove him is 
 a pard of mine, and I squared him." I got to
 
 14 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Hull that night. My rival did not ; and we had the 
 report. 
 
 The trial was peculiar in one respect. A gentle- 
 man farmer named Copeman had been murdered on 
 his way home from a fair or market near Brigg. 
 His body was found by the roadside fearfully beaten. 
 A young farmer whose name I forget was, for some 
 reason, suspected, and was arrested. He was a man 
 in good position, and naturally the affair created a 
 great deal of interest. At the trial the evidence, 
 which was purely circumstantial, was very strong ; 
 but the jury found the accused not guilty. He was 
 liberated, and shortly afterwards was rearrested on 
 a charge of having stolen a handkerchief from Mr. 
 Copeman. There could be no doubt that this 
 handkerchief was in the possession of the murdered 
 man immediately before his death. It was found in 
 the possession of the accused, and there was every 
 reason to believe that it had been taken at the time 
 of the murder. The accused was tried at the next 
 assizes, found guilty, and sentenced to transportation 
 for life. The first jury had hesitated to convict 
 because of the death penalty for murder. The 
 second jury decided in accordance with the evidence. 
 
 Another murder case which I had to report at its 
 final stages was in some respects not unlike that just 
 described. Near to Mirfield there stood a house 
 occupied by an elderly couple — man and wife. They 
 kept one servant — a young woman. One morning, 
 as they made no appearance, the neighbours became 
 alarmed, the house was entered, and it was found
 
 11 THE MIRFIELD MURDER 15 
 
 that all the three occupants had been most brutally- 
 murdered. If I remember aright, they had been 
 clubbed to death. The house had been robbed, and 
 the conclusion of the police was that burglars, who 
 had broken in, had been disturbed by the residents 
 and had killed them. It was pretty plain that more 
 than one person had been engaged in the crime. 
 The police speedily found reason to suspect two 
 hawkers, named Patrick Reid and Michael M'Cabe, 
 and they were arrested. Evidence accumulated 
 against them, and they were brought to trial at York. 
 The charge against them was of having murdered 
 one of the three occupants of the house — I forget 
 which. They were acquitted and released, only to 
 be speedily rearrested. 
 
 At the next assizes they were put upon their 
 trial for the murder of another of the occupants of 
 the house. It was certain that if they had killed one 
 they had killed all three, and they had been acquitted 
 of the murder of one. Happily this was a case in 
 which autrefois acquit could not apply. On their 
 second trial they were both convicted and sentenced 
 to death. 
 
 Then a curious disclosure was made. Mr. Digby 
 Seymour had defended one of the two — I forget 
 which, and at the trial he had done his best to show 
 that if either of the men had been concerned in the 
 murder it must have been the other man and not his 
 client. After the conviction Mr. Seymour made it 
 known that before the trial he had had an interview 
 with his client, who had confessed to him that he,
 
 i6 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 and he alone, had committed the murder, and that 
 the other man was innocent. The object of this 
 disclosure was to save the life of the man who had 
 not had the benefit of Mr. Seymour's advocacy at the 
 trial. The story was not altogether believed — that 
 is, Mr. Seymour's client was not believed ; but I 
 think the sentence of the other man was commuted 
 to penal servitude for life. 
 
 One other case of murder comes to my recollection. 
 It was highly dramatic in almost every incident. In 
 Hull there was at that time a row of respectable 
 houses called Prospect Place. In front of each house 
 there was a small garden plot, separated by a wooden 
 railing from the footpath. The road was narrow, and 
 on the other side of it was a ditch usually full of 
 stagnant and weed-grown water. The place was a 
 cul-de-sac. In one of the houses about half-way down 
 the place a young man lived with his parents. He 
 was cashier in the office of a firm of wealthy 
 merchants. One morning in May, just as day broke, 
 the policeman on the beat saw what he thought was 
 a drunken man lying partly in the ditch of which I 
 have spoken. He crossed the road and found that 
 the man was dead. It was the young fellow just 
 mentioned. Alarm was given, and on examination 
 it became clear that murder had been done. The 
 young fellow had been garrotted at the gate leading 
 to his house, and his body had been dragged across 
 the road and thrown partly into the ditch. The 
 assumption was that some noise had alarmed the 
 murderer or murderers, and they had not completed
 
 II A HULL MURDER 17 
 
 their task of hiding- the body. The pockets of the 
 dead man had been rifled, his watch taken, and 
 whatever money he might have had in his posses- 
 sion when he was attacked. 
 
 The same day two men, named Snape and Smith, 
 were apprehended. I saw them when they were 
 brought up at the PoHce Court. The poHce knew 
 them as being of the criminal class. The evidence 
 that justified their apprehension was to the effect 
 that they had been trying to dispose of a watch, 
 which, from the description given of it, was believed 
 to be that of the murdered man. This watch was 
 not in their possession when they were arrested. As 
 soon as they were caught, several people living in 
 the district where the murder was committed, 
 identified them as having been seen together, going 
 in the direction of Prospect Place, between ten and 
 eleven o'clock on the previous evening. They 
 protested their innocence, and were remanded. The 
 police had noticed mud and weed on the boots of 
 Snape, and the assistance of an expert brought to 
 light the fact that the weed adhering to the boot was 
 a species of confervoe, which the expert declared was 
 to be found in the ditch in Prospect Place, and no- 
 where else near the town so far as he knew. 
 
 Meantime the police had made another discovery. 
 On the footpath near the gate of the house of the 
 murdered man, one of them picked up a tail of fur. 
 Manifestly it had once been part of a boa ; and the 
 indications were that it had been violently torn out 
 of its place. The theory then set up was that the 
 
 c
 
 i8 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 young fellow had been spoken to by some woman 
 who was wearing a boa, and that while she kept him 
 in talk he was attacked from behind by a confederate 
 of hers, and in his struggle had caught hold of her 
 boa and torn the tail from it. This new clue led to 
 the arrest of a woman known as Black Rose. She 
 had lodged in the same house as Snape and Smith. 
 In her possession was found a boa with one tail 
 gone ; and furriers swore that the tail found at the 
 place of the murder fitted the boa, and was exactly 
 of the kind that would be put to it. In the end 
 Black Rose, Snape, and Smith, with two other 
 persons, were committed for trial charged with the 
 murder. 
 
 In due course the trial came on. I had to go to 
 York to report it. I stayed at the Robin Hood Hotel, 
 where also stayed a solicitor named Archer, managing 
 clerk for the prosecuting attorneys, and the solicitor 
 who had the defence of Snape and Smith. His 
 name was Greaves. Black Rose was undefended ; 
 but I think counsel appeared for the other two 
 prisoners. The trial lasted two days. All the 
 evidence had been given ; counsel had made their 
 speeches ; and the Judge had summed up. The 
 jury were leaving the box about five in the afternoon 
 to consider their verdict, when one of their number 
 fell down in an epileptic fit. The court was adjourned 
 for a short time to enable a doctor to see the suffering 
 man. When it met again, this doctor stated that 
 while his patient was recovering, he would not be 
 in a condition to give attention or consideration to
 
 II AN INIQUITOUS PROSECUTION 19 
 
 the ev^idence he had heard for some days to come. 
 The result was that the trial had to begin afresh 
 next day. The evidence first taken was read over, 
 and supplemented ; and a statement which ^^Black 
 Rose had made in her own defence on the first trial 
 was put in as evidence against her. In the end the 
 jury acquitted all the prisoners. 
 
 That evening, when we were at dinner at the 
 Robin Hood Hotel, Archer said, " Greaves, we could 
 have told you where Smith was on the night of the 
 murder. He was not in it." " No," replied Greaves, 
 "I know that, and I also know that Snape was not 
 in it." "Oh yes, he was," said Archer; "he and 
 Black Rose and that other fellow did it." I was 
 horrified at all this. " What !" I said to Archer; "do 
 you mean to say you put Smith on his trial, knowing 
 him to be innocent?" "Yes," he replied. "That 
 seems to have been a very shocking course. You 
 put the man's life in peril when you knew he had not 
 committed the crime 1 How did you reconcile that 
 to your conscience?" "Oh, very easily," was the 
 reply. " You see, Snape was the guilty one. Several 
 of our witnesses swore they had seen him and Smith 
 together near to Prospect Place. They weremistaken ; 
 the second man was not Smith. But if we had 
 withdrawn the charge against him, their evidence as 
 against Snape would have been discredited ; and we 
 should not have had a chance of getting a conviction. 
 If Smith had been convicted, we could have made 
 it all right for him." I was not convinced of the 
 honesty of the proceeding ; but there was no
 
 20 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, ii 
 
 more to be said. I may add that I believe 
 Snape was convicted some months afterwards 
 of being in possession of bank notes which had 
 been taken from the murdered man at the time 
 of his death.
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 All-round reporters — Old acquaintances — Samuel Warren — His 
 simple vanity — His politeness — His snubs to counsel — His 
 character as a judge — Member for Midhurst — Mr. Digby 
 Seymour — Mr. Dearsly. 
 
 If there was less of rush in the reporting of those 
 old days there was plenty of variety, in the widest 
 sense of the word. Division of reporting labour had 
 scarcely then begun, at least on the provincial 
 papers. There was no man specially told off for 
 agricultural subjects, or for descriptive writing, or 
 for trade questions, or indeed for anything. The 
 reporter must be fit for all subjects — racing, prize- 
 fighting, fat cattle, flower shows, religious meetings, 
 — v/hatever wanted attention. Of course there were 
 many who were not fit to deal with all the matters 
 that had to be dealt with. Some of the reporters 
 were indeed not fit to deal with any of them. It is 
 pretty much the same now. But the adaptable 
 fellow got a training which in these days it would 
 be difficult to get. Real knowledge came by ex- 
 perience and observation ; and probably there were 
 then as many good all-round men as are to be found at 
 present. One subject may be mentioned — dramatic
 
 22 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 criticism. This has become something like a 
 specialty ; and great ability is devoted to it. Yet 
 I think if I were to search some old files I could 
 find sound and able dramatic criticism done by 
 reporters who had, before going to the theatre at 
 night, been engaged among prize cattle during the 
 day. As with dramatic criticism, so with other 
 subjects. The old days of provincial journalism 
 were not all ignorance and confusion. I can remem- 
 ber a dozen men who were trained as reporters in 
 those days who rose to high positions subsequently. 
 They became lawyers, or authors, or clergymen ; 
 and in these new callings their old experience stood 
 them in good stead. As for others who remained 
 in journalism — where are they now ? When I think 
 of them, I am somehow reminded of Mrs. Hemans's 
 "Graves of a Household." One was successful 
 in India; and died there. One founded a news- 
 paper in New Zealand ; and is a wealthy and 
 prosperous man. Some went to London and 
 succeeded. Some went there, and like other clever 
 fellows succumbed to its manifold temptations. Their 
 places know them no more. 
 
 More pleasant than such memories as these are 
 others of acquaintances and experiences in the far- 
 back days. It was my good fortune to make the 
 acquaintance of Samuel Warren. He had made a 
 literary reputation of its kind by his Diary of a 
 Late Physicia7i, and by that wonderful novel Ten 
 Thousand a Year. He became Recorder of Hull, 
 and there I met him. Of course I had read his
 
 in SAMUEL WARREN 23 
 
 books, and at that time a real live author was a man 
 to know. In these days they are as plentiful as 
 blackberries, or Colonels in the United States. 
 Some of them I know, others I have known. 
 Perhaps it may be said without offence that con- 
 fidence in their own merits is more or less the badg-e 
 of all their tribe. But I have never met one whose 
 simple vanity was as marked as that of Samuel 
 Warren. He was always posing ; always feeling 
 for applause. Yet you could not be angry with him 
 or despise him. He was sincerely and honestly vain. 
 It was the vanity of the child dressed in new clothes. 
 What is more, he knew he was vain, and he 
 struggled against it without success. 
 
 One evening I dined with him at the Vittoria 
 Hotel in Hull, where he stayed when he was down 
 to fulfil his duties as Recorder. He was a delight- 
 ful talker, with many I's in his conversation. After 
 dinner we drew to the fire, and then he began to 
 talk in earnest. His subject was himself and his 
 vanity. For an hour he enlarged on this theme. 
 He had plenty of material. He lamented his 
 weakness. He told how he made the best 
 resolutions to get rid of it, and how he fell back 
 at once. " I cannot help it," he said. " It is 
 weak and foolish. I should have more respect if I 
 were less vain. But the opportunity of attracting 
 attention is, I regret to say, too much for me. I 
 am laying my weakness bare to you to-night. You 
 can see what I am and what I would wish to be. 
 You will say that a man who can confess as I am
 
 24 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 confessing is not likely to sin again. I shall be 
 guilty to-morrow if the opportunity arises." An 
 opportunity did arise, and there was another display 
 of genial vanity. Those who indulge in psychical 
 studies may know Warren's case to be common. I 
 have never seen one so marked. 
 
 A more punctiliously polite man than Warren 
 never existed. He used to be as polite with 
 criminals as with friends. On one occasion a prisoner 
 had been found guilty of pocket-picking. He was an 
 old offender. Warren had bes^un to sentence him 
 with the words, " Prisoner at the bar," when he was 
 interrupted by the Clerk of the Peace, who reminded 
 him that some formality had been omitted. " I beg 
 your pardon, prisoner," he cried, " I really must beg 
 your pardon. I was about to be guilty of an irregu- 
 larity." Then the formality was gone through, and, 
 after a ten minutes' lecture to the prisoner, that 
 worthy was sentenced to as heavy a punishment as 
 could be awarded in his case. 
 
 Once the punctilious politeness of Warren failed 
 him. As Recorder he was judge of a court of 
 venire, at which civil cases were tried. Such a case 
 was going on. It was an action between two 
 parishes as to the chargeability of a pauper. Fights 
 on questions of this kind were common in those 
 days. On one side were Mr. Archbold, a veteran 
 lawyer, whose books may now be obsolete though 
 they were authoritative then, and Mr. Perronet 
 Thompson, son of Colonel Perronet Thompson of Free 
 Trade renown. On the other side were Mr. Digby
 
 Ill A COMMENT ON COUNSEL 25 
 
 Seymour and Mr. Littler. As the case went on it 
 was plain that Mr. Archbold and Mr. Thompson 
 were making the best of it. At last Warren, leaning 
 over his desk, and beaming on the bar, said : 
 
 " Mr, Seymour, do you know what you and Mr. 
 Littler in the hands of Mr. Archbold and Mr. 
 Thompson remind me of ? " 
 
 " No, sir," replied Mr. Seymour. 
 
 " Of two geese on a common." 
 
 There was laughter in the court, and Mr. 
 Seymour and Mr. Littler made the best of it. 
 Warren evidently thought he had said a good thing, 
 and for a minute looked happy. Then the rudeness 
 of what he had said occurred to him, and he became 
 sad and apologetic. 
 
 " I sincerely beg your pardon," he cried, " I 
 ought not to have said such a thing. Pray forgive 
 
 me. 
 
 Mr. Seymour was equal to the occasion. 
 " There is nothing to forgive," he said. " My 
 learned friend and myself would never think of 
 resenting such a remark, corning from y 021, sir." 
 
 The emphasis on the last words was not noticed 
 by Warren. He became happy at once. 
 
 Warren was a good judge. He was careful in 
 the management of every case, and firm in keeping 
 a hand on the frequent divagations of counsel. He 
 seemed always in the course of a case to be leaning 
 towards the prisoner. He took care that nothing 
 was, as he thought, unfairly pressed by the prosecutor, 
 while at the same time he encouraged everything
 
 26 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 that might tell in the accused's favour. He summed 
 up judicially and impartially. Making allowance 
 for little displays of vanity, he put the case to the 
 jury with admirable clearness. It was for them to 
 return the verdict. If that happened to be " guilty," 
 his duty began again. To me he always seemed 
 rather severe in his sentences ; but I do not re- 
 member a case where it could be said with justice that 
 a prisoner got more punishment than he deserved. 
 
 In 1856 Warren was elected member for Mid- 
 hurst. He was proud of this, and let it be known 
 that he meant to shine as a statesman. His career 
 in Parliament was short. In 1859 he was offered 
 the Chairmanship of the Lunacy Commission. The 
 offer threw him into a state of the greatest perplexity. 
 Acceptance of it meant the resignation of his seat in 
 the House of Commons, and the abandonment of all 
 his hopes of greatness as a statesman. But he was 
 poor, and the salary of the offered post was consider- 
 able. It meant in effect a sufficient provision for him 
 for the rest of his life. While he was in this state of 
 doubt — between ambition on the one hand, and the 
 acceptance of a competency on the other — he wrote 
 to me. In the simplest form he told me all his 
 difficulties. In pages of writing he discussed his hopes 
 and fears, and asked for suggestions as to the course 
 he should take. I have no doubt that he wrote many 
 such letters. My answer was in effect, " Take the 
 place," and I should be much surprised to hear that 
 any of his other correspondents had written in a 
 different sense. Anyway he did take the place.
 
 Ill . TWO DROMIOS 27 
 
 There are men still livino- about the House 
 of Commons who remember Warren's retirement. 
 One Wednesday afternoon he succeeded in finding 
 an opportunity, and in a characteristic speech an- 
 nounced his resignation and bade the House fare- 
 well. I am afraid he was laughed at ; but there 
 must have been some present who recognised in 
 what he said and did a kindly, generous spirit. 
 All his vanity could not hide the fact that he was 
 in the best sense an honest gentleman. 
 
 About his time there were several men who 
 practised at the bar before him who had a high 
 reputation, or who have made one since. I have 
 mentioned the names of Mr. Archbold and Mr. 
 Perronet Thompson. They were lawyers of a dry 
 school. Mr. Digby Seymour, whose name I have 
 also mentioned, was not dry. He was eloquent, 
 and attracted audiences even then. He became 
 Recorder of Newcastle. He was great at election 
 speech-making. Twice I had experience of him in 
 such work. The first time had a certain peculiarity. 
 Members had to be elected for Hull, and one of the 
 candidates on the Liberal side was a Mr. William 
 Digby Seymour. He was no relative of William 
 Digby Seymour, the lawyer. He was a merchant 
 in London. He had plenty of money and no oratory. 
 I do not think I do injustice to the other William 
 Digby Seymour when I say he had plenty of oratory 
 and no money. It was another illustration in its 
 way of the celebrated aphorism of the " unfortunate 
 nobleman " who was sent to prison for not being
 
 28 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Sir Roger Tichborne — " Some people has money 
 and no brains. Some people has brains and no 
 money. Why should not the people as has brains 
 and no money get money from them as has money 
 and no brains ? " Of course I do not mean that Mr. 
 William Digby Seymour, the lawyer, had money- 
 getting in his mind ; but he found oratory for the 
 William Digby Seymour who had none, but whose 
 means were abundant. The lawyer made speeches 
 for the merchant. The names were the same, and 
 people at a distance who knew the merchant and 
 did not know the lawyer must have wondered at 
 the eloquence which the former seemed to have 
 developed. Mr. Seymour was elected, and I have 
 never had any doubt that he owed his election 
 in the main to the oratory of his namesake, the 
 lawyer. 
 
 That Mr. W^illiam Digby Seymour, the lawyer, 
 believed he had won the election there can be little 
 doubt. For, on a later occasion when a vacancy in 
 the representation of Hull occurred, he offered him.- 
 self as a candidate. He was not elected. His 
 eloquence was unabated. Yet somehow it failed to 
 win the electors. They had an overdose of oratory 
 and voted for another man. If I remember rightly, 
 Mr. Seymour did not often attend the quarter- 
 sessions after his rejection as a Parliamentary 
 candidate. 
 
 One other member of the bar of those days stands 
 out in my recollection. Mr. Dearsly was a young 
 man with great gifts. What he was as a lawyer, I
 
 in A DIRE ALTERNATIVE 
 
 29 
 
 cannot say. As an advocate for jury practice he 
 had few equals in those days. He was eagerly 
 sought for to defend accused persons, and he won 
 acquittal in many cases by sheer force of ingenuity and 
 eloquence. It may be feared that many scoundrels 
 owed to him escape from punishment which they 
 richly deserved. It was, or seemed to be, all but 
 impossible for juries to withstand his pathetic appeals. 
 Again and again I have heard the Recorder try by 
 the use of cold reason to weaken the impression 
 Mr. Dearsly had made ; and the effort was rarely 
 successful. Even then his success used to make 
 me doubt the wisdom of juries. They would give 
 to sentiment what they would not yield to evidence. 
 Dearsly was a Roman Catholic. He was also an 
 extremely gay man — I do not like to use the word 
 dissipated. Perhaps if he had been less mercurial 
 and more steady he would have been less eloquent 
 and less effective as a jury advocate. He could not 
 resist temptation. He made the best resolutions, 
 and kept them till the chance of breaking them 
 came. He knew his weakness, and deplored it. 
 Once, when I had been saying something to him on 
 the subject, he said, " I know all you say is true. 
 It is hell or a cell with me." I never heard that he 
 became a monk.
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 Old electioneering — Hustings experiences — A bespattered candidate 
 — Corrupt practices — Flags and voters — A County election — 
 Lord Hotham — Lord Ripon's first election — James Clay — 
 Beverley and bribery — Alfred Crosskill. 
 
 In the last chapter I have spoken of some election- 
 eering. There was fun and sometimes anything 
 but fun in reporting elections in those days. The 
 ballot was unknown. Nominations were not made 
 in the returning officer's rooms, but before the 
 electors, and many who were not electors. The 
 candidates presented themselves on hustings erected 
 for the purpose. They were duly proposed and 
 seconded by friends, and then they made speeches 
 to show that they really were fit and proper persons 
 to represent the constituency. In all this there was 
 fine opportunity for the display of election wit by 
 the crowd before the hustino;-s. Sometimes — indeed 
 often — that wit took the form of paving-stones, or 
 rotten eggs, or rotten herrings. When feeling ran 
 high, it was best to have one of the supports of the 
 roof of the hustings in front of you. No special 
 provision was made for reporters. They were 
 admitted to the hustings, and allowed to get to 
 the front — if they could. Their object was to get
 
 CHAP. IV A COURAGEOUS CANDIDATE 31 
 
 near to the candidate their newspaper favoured, so 
 that at least his eloquence should not be wasted. I 
 have stood at the elbow of many candidates and 
 taken notes of their sayings with my note-book in 
 my left hand. It was not always safe. Missiles 
 were aimed at the candidate ; and if the aim was 
 bad or indifferent, the reporter was certain to share 
 freely in the gifts intended for the more important 
 person. I remember one occasion when unsavoury 
 eggs were the most numerous of these gifts. The 
 candidate was a courageous gentleman. I stood at 
 his elbow. The first egg struck me on the shoulder 
 and bespattered my note -book. Others, better 
 aimed, took him in the chest, the arms, the head, 
 until he had something like the appearance of a 
 custard. I was nearly as well painted. I could not 
 leave him while he tried to speak. He would not 
 move. At last his courage prevailed. The storm 
 of missiles ceased. He said what he had to say ; 
 and he wound up thus : 
 
 "Gentlemen who do not intend to vote for me, 
 for these and other mercies" (pointing to his bespatter- 
 ings) " I thank you. It is to me most gratifying 
 that you are not more in number. If you had been, 
 you would have finished me as a man. As it is, you 
 have given me strength as a candidate. You have 
 proved that my foes are not so numerous as my 
 friends. To-morrow I shall win at the poll." 
 
 And he did. 
 
 The public nomination was necessary as well for 
 an uncontested as for a contested election. When
 
 32 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 there was no contest, the crowd was, as a rule, 
 noisier than in the case of a contest. The nomina- 
 tion was the opportunity for those who would have 
 liked a fight, and who were baulked of one, to show 
 their displeasure. They did so freely. I should be 
 sorry to say that political principle had anything t'o 
 do with their anger. A contested election meant 
 the spending of much money— a non-contested 
 election meant the spending of very little. No 
 Corrupt Practices Act, like to that under which free 
 and independent electors now suffer, was then in 
 existence. Flags must be numerous, and they must 
 be of silk. The wives of the free and independent 
 voters saw to this, and also saw that the flags were 
 not too much exposed if the weather was bad. 
 Blue and orange silk dresses were numerous after 
 an election, vice blue and orange flags deposed. I 
 have known free and independent electors who gave 
 their votes to the blues because blue was regarded 
 by Mrs. Voter as best suited to her taste and com- 
 plexion. Nobody troubled about a public-house or 
 two being opened. Beer was a sedative to be taken 
 by refractory voters. A man might never ride in a 
 cab between any two elections ; but on the polling 
 day he could not, and would not, move without one. 
 I daresay the result, so far as it could be measured 
 by legislation, was not worse than it is under our 
 present perfect and altogether pure system. 
 
 At the general election of 1847 the Conservative 
 candidates for the East Riding of Yorkshire were 
 returned without opposition. They were Lord
 
 IV AN OLD-FASHIONED ELECTION 33 
 
 Hotham and Mr. Henry Broadley. How well I 
 remember Lord Hotham. He was even then of 
 the old school — a gentleman every inch of him. 
 He had retired from the navy, but had kept his 
 sailor's frankness and bluntness. His invariable 
 wear in the House of Commons and at public 
 meetings was a blue dress-coat with brass or gilt 
 buttons. His oratory was moulded in the fine old 
 stately style. He never gabbled over a speech. 
 He never talked one out in a conversational way. 
 He put in all the inflections and minded his points. 
 Thus his sentences were well marked. As you 
 listened to him you almost expected to hear at 
 every turn a quotation in sonorous Greek or in 
 musical Latin. He spoke sensibly ; and I don't 
 know that in the course of its history the House 
 of Commons has had in its rank and file many 
 worthier or more honest men than Lord Hotham. 
 
 At the time of the election, when he and Mr. 
 Broadley were returned without opposition, Bever- 
 ley was the county town for the East Riding. It is 
 as pleasant a place as can be found. Close to it 
 is a great breezy moor — the Westwood. It has a 
 minster which shines as an ecclesiastical edifice 
 among the cathedrals of England. It has one of 
 the finest parish churches in the country. It has, 
 or had, two market-places — the Wednesday and the 
 Saturday market. In the larger of these places — I 
 forget whether it belongs to Wednesday or Saturday 
 — the hustings were erected. It is a great square 
 with standing-room for many thousands of people. 
 
 D
 
 34 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 When Lord Hotham and Mr. Broadley came to 
 the hustings, they were escorted by some hundreds 
 of farmers and country gentlemen, all mounted. 
 Before the proceedings began on the hustings these 
 horsemen formed a great crescent line. Each wing 
 started from the side of the hustings and extended, 
 so to speak, round the square. Thus they enclosed 
 the crowd on foot. Whether there had been some 
 expectation of riot, or whether the arrangement was 
 purely for display, I do not know. At any rate, 
 there was no riot. The two candidates were con- 
 verted into members and were duly girt with the 
 sword of a knight of the shire. This being accom- 
 plished, the horsemen got their mounts into stables 
 as soon as they could, and hasted to the Assembly 
 Rooms, where a good dinner and a pint of wine 
 each awaited them — provided at the expense of 
 the new members. Speeches were made. Nobody 
 thought of corruption. The election was as valid 
 as the marriage of a couple by the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury. What bad old times those were ! 
 
 It cannot be doubted that the borough voters of 
 those days — or at least the majority of them — 
 regarded their votes as instruments which ought to 
 produce them something at election times. They 
 were to a great extent "freemen." Many of them 
 had paid for their franchise, and they thought it 
 ought to produce them some return. Thus they 
 would not vote unless they were paid ; but it did 
 not follow that payment by anybody would secure 
 their votes. I remember hearing the case for them
 
 IV VISCOUNT GODERICH AND JAMES CLAY 35 
 
 put by Mr. James Clay, who sat for Hull for many 
 years. Whist players recognise him as an authority 
 in respect to their favourite game. It had been 
 proved that many freemen had been paid for their 
 votes given to him. He explained their case : 
 "These good men,"' he said in effect, "have been 
 accustomed to payment for voting. They are not 
 unprincipled. There are not many of them who 
 would take payment to vote for the man whose 
 principles were not theirs. But they expect to 
 be paid for voting for the man with whom they 
 agree. This may be bribery in a technical sense ; 
 but it is not bribery in any corrupt sense." Mr. 
 Clay's argument was in accordance with the facts. 
 But those facts do not square with the electoral 
 morality which happily now prevails. 
 
 The occasion on which Mr. Clay justified or 
 extenuated the payment of voters was one of 
 interest. It was in 1852. At the general election 
 of that year he and Viscount Goderich were the 
 Liberal candidates for Hull. Viscount Goderich 
 is the present Marquis of Ripon. That was 
 his first effort to enter Parliament. He and Mr. 
 Clay made a sort of formal entry to begin the 
 campaign. They went to the Cross Keys Hotel, 
 the bow-windows of which hostelry look out on the 
 market-place. A great crowd had gathered, and 
 speeches were expected. The windows were thrown 
 open, and the candidates presented themselves. 
 Lord Goderich was put forward first. He was puny 
 in figure and squeaky in voice. He was cheered to
 
 36 - AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 the echo when he appeared. But not a word that 
 he said could be heard by the crowd. Vainly he 
 strained his throat in reply to shouts of " Spe-ak oop, 
 man." It was of no use. The crowd was getting 
 out of heart, and the backers of the candidates 
 were looking dismal. Mr. Clay was equal to 
 the occasion. With some brusqueness he elbowed 
 Lord Goderich aside and presented himself The 
 crowd knew him. He was an old favourite, and a 
 roar of welcome went up from the assemblage. 
 When it lulled he began, " Now my old friends and 
 constituents, let me see if I can make myself heard." 
 "Well done, Jimmy," was the answering cry. He 
 did make himself heard. He always spoke slowly 
 and distinctly — so slowly that he could almost have 
 been reported in long-hand. He had a good clear 
 voice, which on this occasion he used to the best 
 advantage. There was, in what he said, and in his 
 manner, a suspicion of contempt for his puny 
 colleague. The crowd did not object to this, 
 and in the end were in the best of good-humour. 
 
 This was the beginning of an election that ended 
 in the return of Mr. Clay and Viscount Goderich. 
 They did not enjoy the victory. A petition was 
 presented against their return, and they were 
 unseated. The evidence showed that there had 
 been wide-spread bribery, and a commission of 
 inquiry was issued. The head of that commission 
 was a Mr. Solly Flood, who was, I think, an 
 Irishman. The commission sat for weeks, and 
 brought to light the fact that several thousands of
 
 IV OLD ELECTIONEERERS 
 
 37 
 
 voters had been bribed by payments averaging thirty 
 shilHngs each. They had been nominally engaged 
 as messengers, and never delivered any message 
 or went anywhere except to draw their pay. The 
 business had been managed by an expert old 
 electioneerer familiarly known as Sammy Wilde. 
 He was a little stout man, whose business was that 
 of a slater. He had been electioneering from his 
 youth upward, and was trusted for his honesty by 
 all the candidates he favoured. In his time he 
 must have had many pretty experiences in the way 
 of bribery ; but he had never done it on so large a 
 scale before. The borough narrowly escaped dis- 
 franchisement. I suppose its size, and the fact that 
 there were a few virtuous men in it, saved the con- 
 stituency. It was before this commission that Mr. 
 Clay delivered the defence of voters who took pay, 
 of which I have already spoken. The com- 
 missioners differed as to the wording of their 
 report, and Mr. Solly Flood drew up one of his 
 own. Of it all that I can remember is that it was 
 very long. 
 
 At that time Beverley returned two members. 
 Its Sammy Wilde was a man named Daniel Boyes, 
 a publican. He was a great favourite with the free 
 and independent electors. He always took care 
 that there was a contest, and that they were paid. 
 At one election two candidates were under his wing. 
 They were Liberals. One of them was Mr. or 
 Baron Goldsmid, a rich Hebrew. Jewish disabili- 
 ties had not then been removed ; and Boyes pointed 

 
 38 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 out to the electors the everlasting glory that would 
 be theirs if they did their part in the battle of civil 
 and religious freedom by returning Mr. Goldsmid. 
 That would be a great and crowning victory for 
 them as Liberals. Strangely, Boyes's ardour for Mr. 
 Goldsmid suddenly cooled. It became known that 
 there was a rupture between them. The rumour 
 spread that Mr. Goldsmid had refused to put his 
 cheque-book at the disposal of Daniel. Such a 
 thing had never been heard of before. It was an 
 unpardonable sin ; and it was not pardoned, Mr. 
 Goldsmid was rejected. The other Liberal was re- 
 turned along with a genuine old Tory, Mr. Sackville 
 Lane Fox. The free and independent electors had 
 resented the indignity put upon them by Mr. Gold- 
 smid, and had voted for Mr. Fox without payment. 
 That at least was said at the time. I am not sure 
 that they had shown so much self-denial. 
 
 In the course of elections in Beverley I became 
 acquainted for the time with several men of more or 
 less note. One was the Hon. Francis Lawley. 
 Another was the Hon. Arthur Gordon, uncle of the 
 present Earl of Aberdeen. He charmed everybody. 
 Yet his connection with Beverley was not a long 
 one. Money was the first necessity there. It is on 
 record that the electors did one remarkable and 
 disinterested action. At a certain election a Mr. 
 Glover became a candidate. He was what would 
 now, I suppose, be called a Tory democrat. He 
 had no money, and he was rejected. At the next 
 election he presented himself again, and was returned
 
 IV BEVERLEY DISFRANCHISED 39 
 
 by a good majority. His oratory had triumphed. 
 His avowals of poverty had gone to the heart of the 
 electors. He did not sit long. A petition was 
 presented against him on the ground that he had 
 not the necessary property qualification. It was 
 true he had not, and he was unseated. If I am 
 not mistaken it was his case that led to the abolition 
 of the property qualification. A Bill was introduced 
 for its abolition, and that Bill became an Act. 
 After all, the disinterested action of the Beverley 
 voters had its reward. 
 
 Meantime the influence of Daniel Boyes, though 
 backed by that of William Crosskill, a famous 
 agricultural implement maker, had been waning. 
 The Conservatives were increasing in strength. 
 They borrowed Daniel's methods, and poached on 
 his venal manors. Finally, under the auspices of 
 Sir Henry Edwards, the borough was disfranchised. 
 In 1868 the general election took place close on the 
 heels of the municipal elections. Conservative candi- 
 dates were put forward in every ward. Almost every 
 elector was paid — certainly every elector who would 
 take money was paid. The Conservative candidates 
 were returned. The Parliamentary election resulted 
 in the return of Sir Henry Edwards and his Con- 
 servative colleague. The virtuous Boyes and his 
 friends were righteously indignant at the wholesale 
 corruption of voters. A petition against the return 
 of the Conservative members was presented. Then 
 it came out that no money had been paid for votes 
 at the Parliamentary election. The bribery had
 
 40 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, iv 
 
 been done at the municipal elections, and the 
 gratitude of the honest but well-paid voters had 
 been strong enough to induce them to vote at the 
 Parliamentary election for those who had found the 
 money they had received a month or two before. 
 This virtue was not rewarded. The members were 
 unseated. Wholesale corruption was reported ; and 
 in the end the borough was disfranchised. 
 
 Just now I mentioned the name of William Cross- 
 kill, He was one of the most interesting men I 
 have met. He was not blessed with much more 
 knowledge of letters than bare acquaintance with the 
 three R's could give him. But he was most in- 
 genious and enterprising. He invented several 
 well-known and useful agricultural implements. He 
 produced a portable railway. From the humblest of 
 beginnings he had become a large employer of 
 labour. His works were extensive. His pride in 
 them was great. It was legitimate pride. He was 
 an excellent talker, and an indefatigable worker. 
 He did as much as most men in his day for high 
 farming. Unfortunately his works had grown more 
 rapidly than his capital ; and there came a foreclosure. 
 His political friends took up his case, and got for 
 him the appointment of stamp distributor in Hull. 
 It was a fairly paid office, and in it he rested till his 
 death.
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 Thackeray — An interview and a criticism — Gough — Local magnates 
 — "Salt Tom"— A rule of life — The people of Hull— A 
 compliment. 
 
 Though in my early experience I met many men of 
 distinction in their time, my memory of them is com- 
 paratively slight. One of them was Thackeray, and 
 of my one interview with him I have a clear recollec- 
 tion. It was when he was delivering his lectures on 
 "The Four Georges." Asa reporter I went to the 
 first of these lectures in Hull, and wrote a fairly long 
 account of it. On the morning when the report 
 appeared, a note from Thackeray was put into my 
 hands at the office. In it he simply asked that the 
 gentleman who had reported his lecture would call 
 upon him. I was mightily proud of the invitation. 
 I pictured to myself the interview, and thought of 
 praises which would be given to me. I knew the 
 report was accurate, as far as it went, and it did not 
 enter into my mind that fault could be found with 
 me. I went and was brought to Thackeray. He 
 rose from his chair, and standing with his back to 
 the fire beckoned me to a seat. Then the con- 
 versation began.
 
 42 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 " Are you the young man who reported my 
 lecture ? " he asked. 
 
 " I am." 
 
 ** Do you know, sir, that you have done your best 
 to deprive me of my Hving ? " 
 
 " No," said I, in sheer astonishment. 
 
 "You have," he said. "I make my hving by 
 dehvering those lectures. If they are reported, no 
 one will come to hear them, and I shall not be 
 wanted." 
 
 " That view of the matter never occurred to me," 
 I said somewhat nervously. " I had no other object 
 than to let the general public who could not hear 
 the lectures know what they were like." 
 
 " No doubt," he said ; " but there are people who 
 will be satisfied with your reports, and I shall be 
 deprived of my just gains as a worker." 
 
 " Was the report good as far as it went ? " 
 
 "Confound it, sir, that is what I complain of. If 
 the report had not been good, I should not have 
 cared. The public would have seen that it was 
 rubbish that I could not have written," 
 
 " In that case," said I, "as I have not wronged 
 you by incapacity or stupidity, you have nothing to 
 complain of save my ignorance of your position. 
 That ignorance is now removed, and of course, so 
 far as I am concerned, I shall respect your wishes." 
 
 " Thank you. Is there any one else to be con- 
 sulted ? " 
 
 "Of course," I replied, "the editor may have 
 views of his own, and I must do his bidding. But
 
 V AN INTERVIEW WITH THACKERAY 43 
 
 I have no doubt that when I tell him what you have 
 said, he will not require the lectures to be further 
 reported." 
 
 " Then you will tell him ? " 
 
 " Yes ; as soon as I see him." 
 
 " Thank you. Then that matter is at an end." 
 
 I was rising to go, when he said, "And now, 
 young sir, what do you think of the lecture ? " 
 
 "I thought it very clever," I replied; "but I 
 thought you had used a great deal of cleverness in 
 trying to hide a kindly heart under cover of cheap 
 cynicism." 
 
 "Confound it," he said, "you are frank enough. 
 What do you mean by cheap cynicism } " 
 
 "Well, I am scarcely prepared to answer that 
 question off-hand." 
 
 " I think you should try to tell me what you 
 mean. It sounds like harsh criticism ! " 
 
 " Please remember, it is the criticism of a very 
 young man. Perhaps it is impertinent." 
 
 " I am sure you did not mean to be impertinent, 
 and I should like to know what was in your mind." 
 
 " I thought the lecture was cynical. You will, I 
 think, admit that it is," 
 
 He nodded : and I went on. 
 
 "It struck me that the cynicism was what any 
 clever man who chose to give his mind to it could 
 produce, and therefore I spoke of it as 'cheap 
 cynicism.' " 
 
 "Thank you," he said, with a smile. "Perhaps 
 you are right. But no one has ever said such a
 
 44 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 thing to me before. Don't imagine I am offended. 
 Ex oribus parv2ilortmi : you know the rest." 
 
 I did, and I felt a Httle mortified. But the kind- 
 ness of the tone soon removed all that feeling. I 
 was a babe, to him ; and I had been a venturous babe. 
 
 That was my interview with Thackeray. So far 
 as I remember, I never saw him in private again ; 
 and doubtless he soon forgot all that had passed. It 
 had one good effect, so far as I was concerned. It 
 made me much more modest in future in expressing 
 opinions as to any man's literary work. 
 
 Dickens and Fanny Kemble I met, but, strangely 
 enough, neither of them made any remarkable im- 
 pression upon me. Doubtless that was my fault. 
 Anyway it is a fact. 
 
 Among lecturers whose sayings I reported in 
 those days was Gough, the American advocate of 
 teetotalism. He was, in many respects, the most 
 eloquent man I ever heard speak in public. No 
 doubt there was a kind of trickery in his oratory ; 
 but you lost sight of that in the air and manner 
 of intense earnestness with which his words were 
 delivered. I can recall even now some of the 
 striking phrases with which he drove home his 
 arguments. They might have been appropriated 
 by him from others. I believe they were. But 
 they had the force of novelty and fine delivery ; 
 and it is unquestionable that they often made a 
 great impression upon those who heard them. 
 
 Wholly different from lecturers or literary men 
 were some of the local magnates of the period.
 
 'SALT TOM' 
 
 45 
 
 Yet in their way they were interesting as studies of 
 human nature. One I particularly remember was 
 known in Hull as "Salt Tom." His name was 
 Thomas Thompson. He was a merchant. He 
 had been Mayor of the town, and Alderman. It 
 was said he had made a large fortune out of salt — 
 hence his familiar cognomen. About the fortune 
 there was no doubt. In those days there were no 
 stipendiary magistrates. The justices each had 
 their day in the police court. No sailor who had a 
 dispute with a captain or a shipowner ever chose 
 " Salt Tom's " day for the hearing of his case. He 
 was not consciously unjust or unfair ; but, as a ship- 
 owner, he always saw the shipowner's case more 
 clearly than the case of the sailor. 
 
 At the time of which I am thinking, Mr. 
 Thompson had retired from business, or at least had 
 left the control of it in the hands of his sons. For 
 many years of his life he had occupied a fair-sized 
 house looking over the H umber Dock. When he 
 retired he took a country house, and his old place 
 became the counting-house and offices for the 
 business. But he reserved one room in it for 
 himself; and in that room he smoked and drank his 
 grog. He delighted to have his cronies there ; and 
 many a sitting I have had with him, and listened to 
 his glorification of the good old times, and his 
 lamentations over their passing away. In that 
 room he more than once told me the story of his 
 life. He was born at Alnwick of very poor parents. 
 Early in the century he had found his way to Hull
 
 46 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 with not even the proverbial half-crown in his 
 pocket. He tried to earn a living and was not very 
 successful. In his search for employment he 
 haunted the dock quays, and soon he saw what he 
 thought was a chance for him, if he could get a few 
 pence before the world. He noticed that on a ship 
 from the East Indies there were bags for which 
 nobody seemed to care, and he thought he could 
 make a profit by buying some of these and selling 
 them. At last he scraped together fourpence, and 
 with this in his pocket went to the captain of the 
 ship and bargained for some bags. He got two or 
 three for his fourpence, took them off, found a 
 market for them, and had as a result eightpence in 
 his pocket. He went straight back to the captain, 
 bought some more bags, and sold them at a profit. 
 He did this three or four times. The captain, 
 struck with his return so often, asked him what he 
 wanted with the bags. Thompson told him of the 
 business he was doing, and the captain, surprised, 
 said, " You'll do, my lad ; you'll get on. You shall 
 have some more, and you can pay me when you 
 have sold them. But let me give you a bit of 
 advice that will be useful to you. In all you do, 
 learn to distinguish between a sharp trick and a dis- 
 honest action." 
 
 "And that," said the old man with pride, "has 
 been my rule through life." 
 
 Casuists must decide what merit was due to him 
 for discovering the dividing line. I am sure he 
 never meant to be dishonest.
 
 V THE PEOPLE OF HULL 47 
 
 Thompson had a great contempt for the people 
 of Hull in the generic sense. Very few of them had 
 been so successful as he had been ; and I believe it 
 does sometimes happen that successful men are 
 given to admiring their own surpassing ability, and 
 looking with contemptuous pity upon those who 
 have not amassed wealth. Thompson was no 
 worse in this respect than many other men. 
 
 One day he said a very contemptuous thing of 
 the people of Hull. I only record it and make no 
 comment. 
 
 "You don't seem to think very highly of Hull 
 people," I said, after he had been criticising them 
 for some time. 
 
 "The people o' Hull," sneered he — "the people 
 o' Hull ha' got the mud o' th' Humber i' their 
 brains." 
 
 He may have been right. I felt thankful that 
 he even allowed that they had brains. 
 
 Thompson had a great crony named Brownlow, a 
 large shipowner. Brownlow was the most unpunctual 
 of men. He always came late to an appointment. 
 On one occasion when he was late as usual Thompson 
 was indignant. " Late again, Brownlow," he said. 
 " You're always late. I suppose you can't help it. 
 I believe you must have been born half an hour 
 late." 
 
 Brownlow was not offended. He laughed and 
 accepted the excuse made for him. 
 
 What a number of other figures of that time flit 
 across my mind. There was Bright, the corn
 
 48 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 merchant, who was a pillar of the Church. He 
 preached good things. He presided at religious 
 meetings and exhorted young men to be pious, 
 honest, and church-going. He was the President of 
 a Society at which young men read papers — for the 
 most part on subjects they did not understand — and 
 discussed them. I was asked to read a paper, and 
 did so. The subject was " The Press and the 
 Pulpit." Of course I exalted the Press. The 
 discussion of that paper was promptly adjourned at 
 the instance of the Chairman ; and before the next 
 meeting I was informed that I " need not attend, for 
 that no discussion of my subject would be allowed." 
 In the end Mr. Bright was convicted of forgery, and 
 I believe died in penal servitude. 
 
 Then there was Alderman Bannister. He was 
 a handsome overbearing man. Everybody liked 
 him on one side, so to speak, and disliked him on 
 another. He was always blundering in his speech. 
 On one occasion, shortly after the first attempt to 
 raise a volunteer force, he was called upon as a 
 volunteer officer to respond at a municipal dinner 
 to the toast of "The Volunteers." He spoke for 
 some time in a bombastic vein, and he perorated 
 thus : " Gentlemen, on behalf of my comrades, I can 
 assure you that if Napoleon's colonels should land 
 at Spurn, the First East York Rifles will not be the 
 last to flee." He could not comprehend the laughter 
 that followed. 
 
 On another occasion he was presiding as a justice 
 in the police court. I was there as a reporter.
 
 V A DOUBTFUL COMPLIMENT 49 
 
 Some person came forward with an irrelevant 
 complaint. 
 
 "Be off with you," said Bannister, "you've no 
 locum standu?)i here." 
 
 " Locus standi, sir," said the clerk, correcting him, 
 
 " All right. Locus standi, then. I don't know 
 anything about your French." To the person 
 addressed — " You know what I mean." 
 
 I suppose the applicant did. Anyway he de- 
 parted, and Bannister went on with the dispensation 
 of justice according to his lights. 
 
 Compliments have not often come my way. I 
 am not complaining. Probably I have had as many 
 as I have deserved. But once I was complimented. 
 I had stepped out of my range as a pressman and 
 had undertaken to deliver a lecture to the members 
 of the Mechanics' Institute. The subject I chose 
 was "Castles in the Air." The members did not 
 seem to be deeply anxious to hear me. When the 
 lecture began there were eight people in the body 
 of the hall, and three on the platform, one of whom 
 was the chairman. Him I had safe. Before the lecture 
 was ended, the other two men had sidled out. Four 
 of the audience had gone. At the close, one of the re- 
 maining four came forward and shook hands with me. 
 He was a German, I think, a teacher of languages. 
 " Thank you," he said ; " oh, thank you ! You have 
 expressed what I feel." Of course this praise soothed 
 me. The week afterwards I heard that my appreciative 
 German had made a surreptitious departure from the 
 town to escape the pressure of a host of creditors. 
 
 E
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 Dramatic criticism — Some autobiographical details— John Langford 
 Pritchard — Behind the scenes — Madame Celeste — Bruce Norton 
 — The Manager in Distress — Musical criticism of old — Louisa 
 Pyne — The Pyne and Harrison Company. 
 
 Among the wonderful journalistic things in the far-off 
 times was the dramatic and musical criticism of the 
 provincial newspapers. I took a good deal of interest 
 in those days in both the drama and music, and I 
 think the assertion may be permitted to me that I 
 tried to know something about them, and to write 
 intelligently on them. It does not in the least follov/ 
 that the effort was successful. Probably it was not. 
 But the fact that then impressed itself on my mind, 
 and that has never been removed, is that with a few 
 exceptions criticism was treated as if it were the 
 province of anybody who could report a speech or 
 write a decent paragraph. Indeed I am not sure 
 that the latter qualification was deemed to be abso- 
 lutely necessary. Many criticisms I have seen in 
 which the most conspicuous features were ignorance 
 of the subject criticised, and generous disregard of 
 English grammar. This was not altogether a 
 monopoly of the provincial newspapers. On the
 
 CHAP. VI AUTOBIOGRAPHY 51 
 
 metropolitan press there were some critics of ability, 
 and many who were no better than their country 
 fellows. Two things could not be dispensed with — 
 one of them must be present in every notice of a 
 performance. There must be either lavish praise 
 or violent condemnation. Your puff absolute covered 
 a multitude of sins. Your denunciation absolute 
 might create the impression that you knew something 
 of what you were writing about. The first pleased 
 the manager and the praised actor and singer. The 
 latter went a long way with the public. Of course 
 there were men who were sound and good critics ; 
 but they were not many. 
 
 It chanced to me that I had some opportunities 
 of knowing a little about things dramatic. To tell 
 how the chance came makes a sentence or two of 
 autobiography necessary. When I left school — 
 earlier than I should have left it if my father had not 
 died — I went into the business department of a 
 newspaper office. I knew a little Latin and less 
 Greek. Some German I had also. Of British poetry 
 I had much. Milton was my favourite. I believe 
 that at that time I could have repeated most of the 
 " Paradise Lost " from memory. Scott I had revelled 
 in. Byron fascinated me. Shakespeare I reverenced 
 without being sure that I always understood him. 
 Gibbon's Decline and Fall I had read with profound 
 interest. Macaulay's Essays were unending delights 
 to me ; and when his History 0/ Bji^land SippCD.rcd, I 
 greedily devoured it. Of history generally I had read 
 a good deal without in the least neglecting fiction.
 
 52 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Thus when I entered the newspaper office I was 
 much more Hkely to be attracted by the Hterary side 
 of journalism than by its business side. Before I 
 had been in the place a fortnight, I came to the 
 conclusion that if I was ever to make way in news- 
 paper work I must try another avenue than the 
 business office. The result was that I asked to be 
 taken as an apprentice in the printing office. My 
 request was complied with ; and thus I began by 
 learning how newspapers are printed. At the same 
 time I devoted a good deal of my time to shorthand, 
 that I might take up reporting ; the whole idea being 
 one derived from my familiarity with ships and 
 sailors : if I was to get aloft I would do it by the 
 futtock shrouds and not by the lubber-hole. 
 
 There was what is known as a "jobbing office" 
 in connection with the newspaper office where I was : 
 that is to say, besides the newspaper, handbills, 
 placards, pamphlets, and the like were printed. One 
 of the "jobs" was the printing of theatre bills. At 
 that time there was no such thing known in the 
 provinces as a " run " of a piece. Stock companies 
 provided the nightly entertainment. It was no un- 
 common thing to have three or four pieces played on 
 the same night. Many a time have I walked home 
 at one o'clock in the morning, as soon as the night's 
 performances at the theatre were over. I have 
 known a company have to rehearse and play in twelve 
 and fifteen different pieces in the course of a week. 
 
 How well I remember the whole course of things 
 at that time. The night was usually begun with a
 
 VI DRAMATIC STOCK COMPANIES 53 
 
 farce. Then before the next piece began, a gentle- 
 man would sing "The Thorn" or some other 
 sentimental song. He usually wore white trousers 
 and a dress-coat. He carried a piece of music, which 
 he held in both hands down to his knees and only- 
 raised it between the verses as if to refresh his 
 memory. Or we had two young girls to sing a duet, 
 or to dance for ten minutes. Then came the 
 melodrama. Then more singing ; and then perhaps 
 another melodrama or another farce. It was not 
 unusual to have two such pieces as " The Wreck 
 Ashore" and " Susan Hopley," or " The Miller and 
 His Men" and " Marie the Maid of the Inn," on one 
 night. I am afraid that quantity rather than quality 
 was most regarded by the comparatively few theatre- 
 goers of that day. I do not mean that there was not 
 good acting. On the contrary, I believe the sort of 
 training afforded by the work of a stock company in 
 those days laid the foundation of the success of our 
 greatest actors. Even now I should like to know what 
 Sir Henry Irving and Mr. Toole think on this point. 
 Sometimes the ordinary course of performances 
 was broken by the advent of a "star." Then the 
 stock company had to play up to that "star," and 
 prove their mettle. I can remember a perfect galaxy 
 of these stars. Macready, the younger Kean, Phelps, 
 Vandenhoff, Creswick, Charles Mathews, Helen 
 Faucit, Ellen Tree, the sisters Cushman, Madame 
 Vestris, Madame Celeste, and I know not how many 
 more. There used to be rejoicing over the coming 
 of the Leclercq family, because of their exquisite
 
 54 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 dancing, and over the Viennese dancers— young 
 people who grouped themselves most charmingly. 
 There were, too, operatic stars ; but for them the 
 stock company had to stand aside. 
 
 In all this I am wandering away from the story I 
 had to tell. Let me go back to it. As the theatre 
 bills were printed in the office where I was, it became 
 part of my duty to take a proof of the next day's 
 bill to be revised by the manager. He was at the 
 theatre : consequently I went there, and had access 
 behind the scenes. The manager was John Langford 
 Pritchard, an actor of much merit and of fairly high 
 repute. He was the lessee of the York theatrical 
 circuit, which comprised the theatres at York, Leeds, 
 and Hull. It was at Hull I met him. I suppose he 
 must have taken a liking for me. At any rate he 
 made me free of the theatre, and had me to dine with 
 him once or twice a week. How well I remember 
 those dinners. They were almost invariably the same 
 — a steak and, for him, a pint of port. Of course 
 when they began I was drifting out of the printing 
 office a little, and doing work as a reporter. 
 Anyway, I was behind the scenes most nights, and 
 saw all the great actors of the time. If I did not 
 observe them to profit, it was my own fault. I know 
 I used to compare their acting ; to seek for opinions 
 to strengthen or correct my impressions ; to read the 
 plays and note the points. These things I did that I 
 might be able in the future to criticise intelligently. 
 If I did not succeed it was not for want of effort. 
 
 One evening I was behind the scenes when
 
 VI STAGE INCIDENTS 
 
 55 
 
 Madame Celeste was playing Miami in "The 
 Green Bushes." She has to shoot somebody at one 
 point of the piece. I was standing in the wing, and 
 had been speaking to one of the company. I looked 
 towards the actress just as she was levelling her rifle. 
 To my horror I saw that it was pointed straight for 
 me — I seemed to see down the barrel. Without a 
 moment's hesitation I ducked my head, as she pulled 
 the trigger. It was too much for her — she laughed 
 consumedly, greatly to the astonishment of her 
 audience ; and when she came off she gave me a 
 good-humoured scolding. 
 
 Mr. Pritchard had enlisted a new member of his 
 stock company, a gentleman named Bruce Norton. 
 There may be old theatre-goers who remember him 
 as a respectable actor on the heavy side. He had 
 been billed as a great tragedian, and he made his 
 d^biU at the Theatre- Royal as Virginius, in the play 
 of that name. I watched his performance from 
 behind the scenes for some time, and I am afraid I 
 did not think him brilliant. Anyway, my interest in 
 him had waned, and I was laughing with and talking 
 to one of the young girls of the company in the third 
 or fourth wing from the front. It will be known to 
 those who have seen Virginius that he kills his 
 daughter rather than give her to the tyrant Claudius. 
 Much is made of the killing. The father is torn with 
 anguish : the daughter clings to him and sheds many 
 tears. Mr. Bruce Norton, following, I suppose, a 
 well-worn tradition, had lugged his daughter to the 
 back of the stage, apostrophising him.sclfand her, and
 
 56 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 the gods, in tragic tones. The laughter of myself 
 and my companion disturbed him, and no wonder. 
 Gradually he worked up to the wing where we stood, 
 and with his daughter fainting in his arms, and his 
 head bowed over her in momentary silent agony, 
 he hissed out, " D — you, you young beggars, get 
 out of that and be quiet." We got out of that, but I 
 am afraid my laughter was heard in the front. The 
 incongruity between the tragic sorrow of Virginius 
 and what Sir William Harcourt would probably 
 characterise as the " cursorary " anger of Mr. Bruce 
 Norton was too much for me. 
 
 There must be some theatre-goers now who have 
 seen a little interlude called The Manager in Distress. 
 For the benefit of those who have not, I may briefly 
 outline it. The manager comes before the curtain 
 and announces that there is a strike in his company. 
 They one and all, he says, refuse to go on with the 
 performance promised for the evening. In these 
 circumstances he can do no more than return the 
 money of those who have paid for admission ; unless 
 some of the ladies and gentlemen present will volun- 
 teer to do something in the way of acting to amuse 
 the audience. All this is said with much solemnity. 
 Then one of the members of the company who has 
 been planted in some part of the house, rises, and 
 speaking as one of the audience, after abusing the 
 manager, offers to try to act a part, and so prevent 
 everybody from being disappointed. Then another 
 member of the company rises in another part of the 
 house and makes a similar offer ; and so it goes on,
 
 VI 'THE MANAGER IN DISTRESS' 57 
 
 till the manager declares he is ready to accept 
 the volunteers and try to go on with the night's 
 programme. Of course there is a good deal of 
 "gagging," and with clever actors the piece can 
 be made infinitely amusing. 
 
 One night it was put out at the Theatre-Royal, 
 and it beo^an and ran its course. I remember all the 
 actors well. One of them was the low comedian 
 familiarly known as " Little Gomersal." He was a 
 son of that Gomersal who, at Astley's and elsewhere, 
 had made a name by his impersonation of Napoleon 
 Bonaparte. On the night of which I am speaking, 
 "Little Gomersal" spoke from the gallery. In 
 recounting his qualifications for amateur acting, he 
 said he could sing a song, and he would give the 
 audience a specimen. He did so, and sang the ditty 
 the refrain of which runs — 
 
 For it's my delight on a shiny night 
 In the season of the year. 
 
 No sooner had he sat down than there arose in the 
 pit an actor who had not been arranged for. This 
 was a local eccentric known as " General Jarvis." 
 
 "Ladies and gentlemen," said he, "this is the 
 vilest imposture I have ever witnessed. The people 
 who have spoken are all actors, not gentlemen and 
 ladies." 
 
 He did not mean exactly what he said ; he only 
 meant that those who had spoken were professionals 
 and not lay members of the audience. He went on — 
 
 "Why, that man who got up there in the pit was 
 Bruce Norton. / knew him. The woman who
 
 58 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Spoke from the boxes was Miss Waverley Scott. / 
 knew her. The man who spoke from the upper 
 boxes was Mr. Tom Hohnes. He ought to have 
 known better. The fellow who has just sung was 
 Little Gomersal. Does he think / did not know 
 him .^^ Ladies and gentlemen, the whole thing is an 
 imposture." 
 
 All this diatribe was punctuated and accentuated 
 by much gesticulation, and by peals of laughter from 
 the audience. The unarranged-for actor made the 
 biggest hit of the night. 
 
 The names mentioned by " General Jarvis " were 
 those of the leading members of the company. 
 There was also a Miss Villars who, I believe, sub- 
 sequently made a high reputation for herself in light 
 comedy in the metropolis. It was a really strong 
 company. I have not often in later years seen a 
 better performance than I have witnessed when the 
 company was led by a star. 
 
 Of the merits of the leading actors and actresses 
 of that day as I recall them I can say little. I have 
 always thought Macready the finest Richelieu I ever 
 saw. I was not greatly in love with Phelps. Cres- 
 wick impressed me favourably. For the younger 
 Kean I had no critical respect. G. V. Brooke, who 
 was at one time a stock actor in another theatre in 
 Hull, I always thought a very unequal actor, and, I 
 am afraid, rather an unpolished one. These were 
 my young impressions, and I have had no opportun- 
 ity of revising them. They may be right or wrong, 
 wise or foolish. Anyway, they were formed in the
 
 VI MUSICAL CRITICISM 59 
 
 course of my effort to educate myself in dramatic 
 criticism. 
 
 For the purpose of musical criticism, I did my 
 best, with limited opportunities, to study vocal music. 
 Perhaps I was not very successful, though I think 
 that at one time I really did know something about 
 singing. Anyway, my knowledge, such as it was, 
 and my thirst for knowledge, which was not easily 
 quenched, brought me into association with many of 
 the exponents of music. I never missed a concert 
 or an opera. I tried — not very successfully — to 
 interest myself in instrumental music. Probably I 
 was as successful in this respect as the majority of 
 those who then went into ecstasies over classical 
 music ; but that is not saying much. Still I knew 
 enough to ensure that if I wrote a musical criticism 
 I did not write absolute and abject nonsense. My 
 experience has been, that of all public performers 
 musicians are the most difficult to satisfy. I never 
 saw a musical criticism that was not denounced by 
 somebody who knew, or thought he knew, a good deal 
 about music. This is not said specially of my own 
 criticisms, but of every criticism I have ever seen. 
 
 In those days of which I have been speaking, 
 the Pyne and Harrison Company were the chief 
 exponents of English opera. Of Miss Louisa Pyne 
 I still love to think as of the sweetest singer I have 
 ever known. Not Patti in all her glory has 
 dethroned my favourite. Grisi, with her magni- 
 ficent dramatic power, I had heard. Titiens and 
 a host of others I can recall with pleasure. Put
 
 6o AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Louisa Pyne, for flexibility of voice and absolute 
 purity of intonation, is with me an abiding and 
 delightful memory. Harrison was a fine actor. He 
 sang a good deal through his nose, and he was 
 generally half-a-note sharp. But you forgot most of 
 this in the dash and go with which he kept the 
 stage. 
 
 Alfred Mellon was the conductor of the company. 
 Of him I have the most pleasant recollection as a 
 genial, kindly gentleman. He once told me a story 
 against himself. He was conducting the orchestra 
 at a Dublin theatre. It was midsummer, and the 
 theatre was excessively hot. He thought that as a 
 help to coolness he would dispense with the white 
 kid gloves he usually wore when he wielded the 
 baton. He took his seat in the orchestra and was 
 beginning the overture, when a voice from the 
 gallery demanded, " Put on your gloves, Misther 
 Mellon ; put on your gloves." A laugh went round 
 the theatre, and he felt some confusion. As the 
 piece went on, the cry came again and again — " Put 
 on your gloves, Misther Mellon ; put on your 
 gloves " ; and the consequent laughter somewhat 
 marred the performance. 
 
 At last the first act came to a close, and in the 
 interval Mellon thought he would compromise with 
 his tormentor. Therefore he put a glove on his 
 right hand before he went into the orchestra again, 
 thinking that this would suffice. It would not do. 
 No sooner did the performance begin again, than 
 the voice from the gallery sounded forth — "Ah, now
 
 VI THE PYNE-HARRISON COMPANY 6i 
 
 Misther Mellon ; put on your other glove ; put on 
 your other glove." All through the act the cry was 
 repeated, to the immense amusement of everybody 
 save Mellon himself and the singers on the stage. 
 
 Between the second and third acts, Mellon put 
 on both his gloves, resolved if possible to silence his 
 critic. The hope was vain. No sooner had he 
 taken his place than the voice came again — " Bhoys ! 
 Three cheers for Misther Mellon ; he's put on both 
 his gloves." The cheers were given ; and at every 
 pause during the act they were again demanded and 
 given. Said Mellon to me, " After that, I never went 
 into an orchestra in Ireland without having put 
 on my gloves." 
 
 One peculiarity of the Pyne and Harrison Com- 
 pany in those days was that they carried their 
 musical critic with them when they were on a 
 provincial tour. Possibly this was a measure of 
 self-protection. Assuredly some of the musical 
 criticism — so-called — in the provincial papers was 
 fearfully and wonderfully made. As in such cases 
 it could not be improved by the resources of the 
 paper itself, there was prudence and considera- 
 tion for readers in having a skilled critic as part 
 of the company. William Brough filled this post 
 at one time. No doubt he had other duties ; but 
 he certainly wrote criticisms of the performances. 
 
 One evening that I spent with the principal 
 members of the company is fresh in my mind even 
 now. The dinner-party consisted of Miss Louisa 
 Pyne, her sister Susan Pyne, a light sweet contralto,
 
 62 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, vi 
 
 Harrison, Mellon, Brough, Ferdinand Glover, and 
 myself. Glover was the baritone of the company. 
 He had a beautiful voice, and I do not doubt would 
 have achieved a high reputation if he had lived. 
 Unhappily not long afterwards he died of small-pox. 
 
 In the course of the evening I said something as 
 to reading at sight. Conversation on the subject 
 ensued, and Harrison said, " Let us see what we can 
 all do. Brough, will you write us a short sonnet ? 
 Alfred shall set it in four parts, and we (that is, him- 
 self. Glover, Louisa Pyne, and Susan Pyne) will sing 
 it." Brough, with some show of reluctance, consented 
 to his part, and so did Mellon. " But," said Brough, 
 "you must give me a subject." Harrison proposed 
 that I should choose, and I suggested that it should 
 be in connection with music. " Make it," said 
 Harrison, "in praise of music." 
 
 Brough went out of the room, and was away for 
 about twenty minutes. He brought back with him 
 a poem of eight lines. I remember only the first 
 two. They ran — 
 
 " Hail, Music ! To mortals of Eden bereft. 
 Of pleasures, the purest, the sweetest that's left." 
 
 Mellon sat down at the table along with all of us, 
 and in a very short time produced a four-part song, 
 which was at once sung. The performance was 
 repeated. I think of it now with pleasure and 
 admiration.
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 
 Journalism before the abolition of the stamp — Growth of newspapers 
 out of London^ — Their influence — Journahstic prospects — The 
 impressed stamp — Michael James Whitty. 
 
 This is not a history of British journalism. It is 
 nothing so ambitious. But what has been written 
 will serve to show something of the condition of 
 British journalism in the years immediately preceding 
 1855, when the impressed stamp was removed. 
 Most of what was best in that journalism was to 
 be found in London. Not all. Even then there 
 were journalists in the provinces who might have 
 been fitly compared with any of their brethren 
 in the English metropolis. Some of them I could 
 name, and may do so if the opportunity arises. 
 But daily newspapers were practically non-existent 
 in the provinces. The wants of readers were met 
 by weekly papers, and in some cases, in large places, 
 by papers published twice or three times a week. 
 Those papers were to a great extent dependent 
 upon the London dailies for facts outside their 
 own locality, and in many cases, if not in most, for 
 their opinions on general politics. To them the 
 parish was everything ; outside affairs nothing. I
 
 64 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 remember one weekly paper in the provinces that 
 recorded the coup d'dtat in France thus : " President 
 Louis Napoleon has put down the French Republic, 
 It is reported that he will be proclaimed Emperor. 
 This may be of great importance to France." 
 Alongside of this announcement was a three-column 
 report of a squabble in a Board of Guardians, and a 
 learned leading article on that squabble. 
 
 If it be said that this was an exceptional case, 
 I reply that it was not ; that at most it only ex- 
 aggerated the usual disproportion of attention given 
 to great public events and to small local matters. 
 It is not wonderful that with such a state of things, 
 writers on the history of newspapers have almost 
 exclusively confined their researches to London 
 journalism and treated their subject as if there 
 was nothing worth saying about it out of London. 
 No such excuse exists now. I venture to say that 
 since the abolition of the stamp duty and of the 
 paper duty journalism out of London has made 
 vastly greater strides than journalism in London. 
 I am not thinking of the circulation of newspapers. 
 No doubt some of the London dailies, with a 
 population of four millions at their doors, print and 
 sell more papers than any like number of news- 
 papers out of London. But in all that goes to the 
 making of good journalism — in culture, in intelligent 
 discussion of current events, in the collection of 
 news, in literary merit — there has been a growth 
 in the provinces that has not been equalled in 
 London.
 
 VII PROVINCIAL NEWSPAPERS AND ELECTIONS 65 
 
 It is a natural consequence of this growth that 
 newspapers out of London should have increased 
 in influence. In such a matter as a general election 
 they have far more influence than the London news- 
 papers. It is in accordance with the fitness of 
 things that they should have this influence. Their 
 conductors are better able to gauge public opinion 
 in their neighbourhood than are their London 
 brethren. The talk of the clubs and Pall Mall is 
 highly interesting ; but it does not always reflect 
 what the elector in the country, or even in London, 
 is thinking. In 18S0, shortly after the general 
 election of that year, I was talking with Mr. John 
 Morley. The leading London newspapers had all 
 predicted that the result of the election would be a 
 great triumph for Lord Beaconsfield. I know two 
 or three Liberal statesmen who had been of that 
 opinion. To me it had seemed certain that Mr. 
 Gladstone would have a large majority ; and the 
 result of the election showed that I had been rioht. 
 
 o 
 
 Mr. Morley asked me what were the grounds of 
 my confidence — what reason had I for expecting 
 a Liberal triumph ? I told him, what was true, that 
 I had diligently read the provincial papers — the 
 papers of Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Birmingham, 
 Bristol, and others — and their tone, and the reports 
 of proceedings which they gave, had convinced 
 me that the London papers were wrong in their 
 anticipations. Mr. Morley was interested, and, 
 whether he thought I was right or wrong — as to 
 which he said little — he admitted that the London 
 
 F
 
 66 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 newspapers had misunderstood the signs of the 
 times. 
 
 This incident is only mentioned by way of 
 illustration of the point I wish to enforce — the 
 growth of influence of the provincial newspapers. 
 That is indeed beyond controversy. Some time before 
 the stamp duty was abolished, the newspapers in the 
 country had, so to speak, been straining at their 
 bonds. Railways had given them a wider field. 
 It was no longer the parish that required attention 
 — it was several parishes. The electric telegraph 
 had still further widened the area from which they 
 drew their contents. It had brought to them the 
 world beyond the parishes. I remember how it 
 began. I remember the scraps of news it brought. 
 When Parliament was sitting it became part of my 
 duty to go to the telegraph office after midnight 
 on the night before publication and write the brief 
 report that then came to hand, as the clerk slowly 
 read it off from his clumsy ticking needles. The 
 telegraphic news in any paper of that day rarely 
 exceeded a column in length. 
 
 The appetite for this telegraphed news grew by 
 what it fed upon. More and more was demanded. 
 Newspapers with capital began to find it to their 
 interest to employ the telegraph wires to an ever- 
 increasing extent. The field from which news was 
 drawn was widened. Telegraphing was expensive ; 
 but it was soon found to be profitable alike to the 
 newspapers and to their readers. More companies 
 came into the field, and the competition which at
 
 vn SPECIAL WIRES 67 
 
 first arose increased the demand for telegraphed 
 news. Speeches in Parliament and elsewhere, which 
 had previously been forwarded by post or railway 
 train, were now sent over the wires. At length 
 "special wires" came into vogue. The Scotsman 
 was the first to make a proposal on the subject to 
 the telegraph companies, and it was promptly joined 
 in the movement by other papers which could not 
 allow such a step in advance to be taken and 
 remain behind. An arrangement was made with 
 the companies, and correspondents in London got 
 together and sent the news the wires were to carry. 
 For the "special wires" were from London to the 
 place of publication. As London was the centre 
 of imperial interest : as it was more or less the 
 point to which news from all parts of the world 
 found its way — manifestly it was desirable to 
 tap it as freely as possible. I was the London 
 correspondent first appointed by the Scotsman, and 
 I hope that, without being accused of excessive 
 vanity, I may say that I did something to indicate 
 the best use to which special wires might be put. 
 There were difficulties innumerable. One of the 
 most formidable of them was the generally shaky 
 condition of the wires, and the conditions on which 
 they were worked. Many a time have I been 
 grievously disappointed because the "copy" I had 
 prepared could not be got through. 
 
 On one occasion my messenger had taken a batch 
 of copy for the special wire which was worked, 
 if I remember rightly, by the United Kingdom
 
 68 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Telegraph Company. Its offices were, I believe, 
 in Broad Street. When the messenger arrived he 
 could not get admission : the porter was fast asleep, 
 and bell-ringing failed to awaken him. Again and 
 again the effort was unsuccessful, and the messenger 
 returned to me in despair. After thinking the 
 matter over, I sent a message by the Electric 
 Telegraph Company to the Scoisi7ian, asking that 
 the telegraphist of the United Kingdom Company 
 in Edinburgh should signal to the telegraphist in 
 London that the porter was not to be found at 
 the doors, where copy was waiting for admittance. 
 This was done. The porter who slept too soundly 
 to be awakened from his door was awakened from 
 Edinburgh. The copy obtained admittance, and 
 was in due course telegraphed. I believe that 
 about the same time the correspondent of another 
 Scottish paper had a similar experience. 
 
 Soon afterwards the telegraphs were taken over 
 by the Government, and then another expansion of 
 telegraphic news took place. Mr. Scudamore, who 
 managed the transfer for the Post Office, was a 
 shrewd man. He was ably supported by Mr. 
 Edmund Yates. He arranged terms as to special 
 wires, and as to news copy, which were lower than 
 the terms charged by the companies. Indeed the 
 "press rates" had in view an enormous extension 
 of the use of the wires by newspapers, and the 
 estimates of that extension were soon exceeded. 
 While, little more than a quarter of a century ago, 
 the telegraphic news in a paper out of London
 
 VII GROWTH OF PROVINCIAL NEWSPAPERS 69 
 
 rarely exceeded a column in length, it is now 
 measured by many columns. It is not uncommon 
 — often for weeks together it is a daily occurrence 
 — for the Scotsman to go to press with thirty to 
 forty columns of news that has been telegraphed. 
 
 It was inevitable that with all this pressure of 
 news, which began very slightly before the stamp 
 duty was abolished, and has continually increased 
 since, the provincial papers should grow in import- 
 ance. Some of them had the foundations for expan- 
 sion well laid. They had been conducted by able 
 men, whose journalistic influence was fully recognised 
 in their own spheres, and who only wanted the 
 opportunity for exerting it more widely. The 
 opportunity came to them with railways and 
 telegraphs. The papers they conducted soon had 
 less and less of what may be called a second-hand 
 character. They began to get their news as early 
 as the London papers, and they commented upon it 
 with as much readiness, and with as much ability. 
 At this time no newspaper of standing in the country 
 would dream of taking its news or its opinions at 
 second hand from London papers. It will discuss 
 questions with those papers, commonly in a spirit of 
 perfect independence, and with as much knowledge 
 of the subject. How could it be otherwise .'* It is 
 true the London newspaper of standing is, as to time 
 and place, more closely in touch with ministers and 
 statesmen. But the advantage is more seeming 
 than real. No minister or statesman would think 
 of ignoring the leading newspapers out of London.
 
 70 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 The editor of such a newspaper may not deal with 
 statesmen so frequently as his London brother ; but 
 the chances are he knows as many of them, and is in 
 as frequent communication with them. They trust 
 him as much as they trust his brother in London ; 
 and they keep him as well informed as to matters 
 that may be known. The representative in London 
 of the provincial newspaper can get almost every 
 piece of information that is given to the London 
 newspaper. Parliamentary debates are reported at 
 greater length in leading provincial newspapers 
 than in most of those in London — the Times 
 excepted. Foreign news is pretty nearly the same 
 in London and country newspapers. The latter 
 give far more of general news than do the former. 
 It is indeed scarcely an exaggeration to say that 
 nine-tenths of the progress of newspapers in the last 
 thirty-five years has been on the side of journals 
 published out of London. 
 
 There is now no considerable town in Great 
 Britain that has not its daily newspaper. In the 
 larger cities and towns there are more than one. 
 Of course they are not all of the same standing and 
 influence. Once, in conversation with the late John 
 Macdonald of the Times, I made some remark on 
 the multiplicity of daily newspapers, which elicited 
 from him an expression of opinion for which there is 
 much to be said. He insisted that while daily 
 newspapers might and indeed must increase, there 
 would always be one in every district that in influ- 
 ence and position would be head and shoulders
 
 VII AN OPINION OF AN EXPERT 71 
 
 above its rivals. " There will be one great news- 
 paper in London," he said. " It may not have the 
 largest circulation ; but it will be the paper whose 
 opinions are most thought of, if not most respected, 
 on the continent, in London, and in England. It 
 will be the same in the different districts of England 
 — one paper will overtop the others. It will be the 
 same in every town in England — one paper will 
 overtop the others. It will be the same in Scotland. 
 And," he added, " it will be for these leading papers 
 to take care that by the judicious use of their capital, 
 by their enterprise, by the fair use and not abuse 
 of their influence, they not merely maintain but 
 strengthen their position." It is possible that here 
 I may seem to be trenching on controversial sub- 
 jects. Newspapers are, most properly, jealous of 
 their position relatively to their rivals. I would only 
 remark, that with the principle of Mr. Macdonald's 
 statement I entirely agree. Every journalist is at 
 liberty to assume that his newspaper is the most 
 important and influential of all the newspapers 
 published in his district. All I seek to enforce is, 
 that no history or sketch of the newspaper press at 
 this time can have any title to be considered full and 
 complete and fair which does not with adequate 
 knowledge take into account the growth and present 
 position of the provincial press. 
 
 It is a noteworthy fact that here and there in the 
 country, journalists were opposed to the removal of 
 the stamp on newspapers. Long inquiry preceded 
 legislation on the subject. A Select Committee — I
 
 72 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 am not sure that there were not two or three — took 
 much evidence. It is not necessary to recite the 
 arguments for and against the proposed removal of 
 the stamp. It is enough to say that the anticipa- 
 tions of those who desired the repeal have been 
 vasdy more than realised ; while the fears of those 
 who opposed it have been shown to be groundless. 
 Nay, in several cases the men who opposed the 
 removal of the stamp were greatly enriched by their 
 defeat. They met the new state of things with 
 energy and enterprise, and their journals flourished 
 exceedingly — flourished to an extent that would 
 have been impossible to them had the stamp been 
 retained. 
 
 One of the warmest advocates of the abolition of 
 the stamp, and of the freeing of newspapers, was 
 Michael James Whitty. He gave evidence before a 
 Select Committee, and, I am afraid, was regarded as 
 absurdly enthusiastic. Yet even he did not imagine 
 the progress that has since been made. He was an 
 extraordinary man, and, surely, a born journalist. I 
 think he started the Liverpool Journal. If he was 
 not its founder, he bought it when it was in a poor 
 way. He made it an excellent property. Then he 
 sought for and obtained the post of Chief Constable 
 of Liverpool, and sold the Journal. Without his 
 guidance it faded, and in a few years it was in straits. 
 In the meantime he had tired of playing policeman. 
 He was hankering after newspaper work. He 
 threw up his post, bought back the Journal, and 
 began to build it up once more. Of course he
 
 VII MICHAEL JAMES WHITTY 73 
 
 succeeded. He had all the qualities that were 
 necessary for success in newspaper work, and 
 perhaps some that might have been dispensed with. 
 As soon as the stamp was doomed, he started the 
 Liverpool Daily Post, and gave it a reputation 
 which is not likely to suffer in the hands of my old 
 friend and colleague Sir Edward Russell. 
 
 When I first knew Whitty the stamp had not 
 been removed. He was one of the brightest talkers 
 I ever met. Those who have admired the brilliant 
 writing of his son Edward Whitty — at one time on 
 the Thornton- Lewis Leaded' — may form an idea of 
 what his talk was. The son was more incisive than 
 the father, but not more witty. To me he was 
 always kind.
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 Change to London — The Reporters' Gallery in the House of Com- 
 mons — ^Some experiences there — " Big - Endians and Little- 
 Endians " — Old reporters — A debate on the Address. 
 
 It was in 1861 that I went to try my fortune as a 
 journalist in London. The growth of provincial 
 journalism had then begun ; but it had not affected 
 to any extent the journalism of Hull. Grudging 
 use was made of new opportunities. What had 
 been was to be. That, at least, seemed to me to be 
 the feeling and the prospect. Little foresight was 
 needed to understand that in the race then begun, 
 standing still meant retrogression. The Manchester 
 dailies were making great running. The public 
 wanted daily newspaper fare ; and as it was not 
 supplied by local purveyors, it was taken from the 
 other side of the island. Our weekly papers were 
 slowly dwindling. It would have been as reason- 
 able to try a race in the old Arctic whaler Truelove 
 against what has since come to be known as a 
 "greyhound of the Atlantic," as it was to imagine 
 that the old weekly in a large place could hold its 
 own against the daily intruders from other parts. 
 Besides, what chance was there for the individual
 
 CH. VIII A TRAINING SCHOOL FOR JOURNALISTS 75 
 
 journalist who could spread all his thinking — if he 
 did any — over a week, against the journalist who was 
 accustomed to think more rapidly, and to show the 
 results of his thoughts every day ? Stopping in Hull 
 meant dulness and decay. Going elsewhere might 
 not drive away the dulness, but it would arrest the 
 decay, and perhaps convert it into growth. It was 
 an experiment worth trying. It might mean failure : 
 the risk was worth running. I ran it, and have 
 never had cause for regret. 
 
 After comparatively little looking about, I got an 
 engagement on the Parliamentary reporting staff of 
 the Morning Star, and I entered upon my new 
 duties on the day Parliament opened in 1 861— the 
 5th February. For me it was a trying experience. 
 I had never been in the House of Commons before. 
 I knew none of its forms. I did not know more 
 than half-a-dozen members by sight. All these 
 difficulties soon disappeared, and I came to love the 
 " Gallery " better than anywhere else in connection 
 with newspapers. There are few men who have 
 been reporters in the Gallery who have not felt the 
 same love. As a training school for journalists it 
 has no equal. Not that the work is hard : it is not. 
 But every debate — every question almost — is educa- 
 tion in journalistic work. I have long been of 
 opinion that there is no school like to it for a news- 
 paper man who wishes to rise in journalism. Yet, 
 curiously enough, comparatively few conductors of 
 newspapers come out of it. Men leave the Gallery 
 to go to the floor of the House of Commons. They
 
 76 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 leave for the bar, and, later, the bench. They leave 
 it for the work of book-making. But they do not, to 
 any extent, go into the indoor work of newspapers. 
 They think of that indoor work as drudgery, 
 and they prefer the comparative ease of the Gallery. 
 This is not wonderful. It is, indeed, but another 
 proof that with many men there is a dislike 
 of the striving by which success is attained. In 
 1 86 1, when I went into the Gallery, it was not the 
 comparatively luxurious place that, I understand, it 
 is now. The architect in making his plans had 
 evidently put aside considerations as to the health 
 and comfort of reporters. The Gallery itself within 
 the House of Commons was well enough. We were 
 no worse off in it, so far as sanitary surroundings 
 were concerned, than were the members of the 
 House of Commons themselves. But when you got 
 out of the Gallery you went into cells. There was 
 a centre room from which you entered the Gallery. 
 Probably it had been designed as a waiting-room for 
 reporters who were not at the moment engaged 
 in reporting. At each end of this room was a writ- 
 ing-room, with only artificial light. All the rooms 
 were low-ceilinged, dark and dismal. If you re- 
 mained in them for half an hour you were tortured 
 with headache, if you had a head that could ache. 
 To get to these rooms you had first to climb a 
 narrow winding stair from Palace Yard below, then 
 to pass through a sort of anteroom, and then along 
 a dark passage. The anteroom was the only 
 refreshment room. The purveyor was Wright the
 
 VIII 
 
 THE OLD GALLERY 77 
 
 Dorter, I never saw his bill of fare change. It was 
 ham or corned beef, or ham and corned beef. Of 
 course there was bread ; and he made tea and coffee, 
 I think — I am not sure about the coffee. Whisky 
 there was and other drinks. I hear that now the 
 Gallery can dine and rest itself on luxurious couches, 
 and smoke in fine rooms, and enjoy a library, and in 
 short lead a life of glorious ease. Happy Gallery ! 
 Is the work better done by better men than in the 
 old days that I remember ? 
 
 As it was impossible without deadly consequences 
 for all the reporters to write out their turns in the 
 dens behind the Gallery, one of the committee rooms 
 upstairs, No. i8, was put at their disposal for the 
 preparation of their copy. As everybody knows, the 
 manner of reporting the proceedings in Parliament 
 is simple enough. Each paper has a staff of so 
 many reporters. Each of these takes a " turn " of a 
 quarter or half an hour. That is to say, for such a 
 time he goes into the little box provided for him in 
 the Gallery and takes notes of what is done. At 
 the end of his " turn " another takes his place while 
 he goes out of the Gallery to write his report. As 
 a rule he found his way to No. i8. As most of the 
 reporters had " turns " of the same length, they came 
 together to their writing out, and usually they com- 
 pared notes. This, at any rate, was the practice 
 with many of them. Some few had confidence in 
 their own note-taking. Some had to write a longer 
 report of a particular speech than had the others. 
 Some did not think it quite fair that there should be
 
 78 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 a sort of joint transcription of notes. Nobody made 
 much of objections or objectors ; the practice went 
 on without alteration. On more occasions than one 
 I have known questions arise as to what a member 
 had said. The acoustic properties of the House of 
 Commons are not as good as they might be. Many 
 members do, or did, not know how to speak so as to 
 make themselves heard : they spoke in a colloquial 
 tone, or they turned their backs to the Speaker, or 
 they faced him too directly. Lord Playfair once 
 told me that he had been assured by Mr. Gladstone 
 that the best way of securing that you should be 
 heard in the Gallery, if not also in the House, was 
 to speak straight across the Chamber. It can 
 scarcely be said that Mr. Gladstone practised what 
 he preached in this respect. No member turned in 
 more directions during a speech than he did. Lord 
 Playfair had, he said, tried Mr. Gladstone's theoret- 
 ical plan, and had found that he was always heard. 
 
 This is more or less of a digression. What I 
 want to have understood is that the comparison of 
 notes by reporters in No. i8 was not altogether 
 unnecessary. I remember one curious illustration 
 of this truth, which had its ludicrous side so far as I 
 was concerned. It will not be forgotten that when 
 the new Foreign Office and other offices were to be 
 built in Parliament Street, some four or five or more 
 architects competed, and a prize for the best design 
 was awarded to one of them ; I forget who it was. 
 Lord Palmerston was premier at the time. He did 
 not like any of the plans, and he set them all aside
 
 VIII 'THE BIG-ENDIANS AND THE LITTLE-ENDIANS' 79 
 
 in favour of one that commended itself to him. Of 
 course there was an outcry, and it was carried into 
 the House of Commons. Mr, Beresford Hope led 
 the crusade against Palmerston's choice, and one day- 
 he had made a speech and moved a resolution on 
 the subject. He had been as severe as, what Mr. 
 Disraeli called his " Batavian graces," would permit, 
 and there was much curiosity to know what 
 Palmerston would say in reply. Thus, when he rose, 
 there was a rustling as of loose papers, and the sound 
 of men seeking to be comfortable in their seats. 
 Palmerston took no heed of this, but began : "We 
 have all heard," he said, "of the battles of the Big- 
 Endians and the Little-Endians. We have all 
 heard of the battle of the gauges. Now we are to 
 have a battle of the styles." I was in the box, and I 
 caugrht his first allusion rather than his exact words. 
 I sat down in No. 18 to write my turn, and I soon 
 found that nobody else had been as successful as 
 myself. I was young in the Gallery, and modest 
 about talking of my knowledge ; and while I desired 
 to speak out, I did not like to begin. At that 
 moment George Clifford, a member of the staff of 
 the Times, and one of the truest gentleman that ever 
 lived, came to me. I had known him through his 
 brother Frederick, and he had been kind to my 
 inexperience in the Gallery. 
 
 " Did you catch what Palmerston's first words 
 were ? " he asked. 
 
 " Yes. He said, ' We have all heard of the battles 
 of the Big-Endians and the Little-Endians.'"
 
 So AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 " Big-Endians and Little-Endians," said Clifford. 
 " What did he mean ? " 
 
 " You have read Gulliver s Tj'avels, have you 
 not ? " said I. 
 
 "Oh, of course ; I see now." 
 
 In a minute or two the explanation went round, 
 and every reporter had got the allusion correctly. 
 Now comes my misfortune. I wrote the speech 
 out ; it went to the printers. Those intelligent 
 gentlemen — perhaps it was the "readers" — did not 
 know of Big-Endians and Little-Endians. They 
 had never heard of such beings. They had heard of 
 battles in Western America among the Indians there. 
 So they took pity on my ignorance and altered " Big- 
 Endians and Little-Endians" into "big Indians and 
 little Indians." Thus the report appeared in the 
 Morning Star. 1 1 was cruel ; but even then I had 
 learned to cultivate patience in dealing with printers. 
 Bad language has no effect upon them. To tear 
 your own hair over their blunders is only to make 
 yourself prematurely bald without curing them. I 
 kept on my hair when I saw the report, and said 
 nothing : my feelings were too deep for utterance. 
 
 One mischievous consequence of comparing 
 notes in No. i8 was that occasionally, when the 
 comparison had resulted in error, it was difficult for 
 the member who was misreported to set himself 
 right. All the reports or almost all were the same, 
 and the public naturally thought that where there 
 was such general agreement in them, they must be 
 right and the member wrong. Experience has con-
 
 VIII OLD PARLIAMENTARY REPORTING 8l 
 
 vinced me that nothing is more hurtful to the pubHc, 
 so far as reporting is concerned, than the collabora- 
 tion of the representatives of different newspapers 
 in the production of a report. Any report appearing 
 in a score or a hundred newspapers, if it has a 
 common origin, may and often does lead to mischief. 
 Independent reports correct each other. They can 
 be compared, and errors in one can be shown by 
 reference to another. 
 
 Again I have got into a digression which is only 
 indirectly connected with the Gallery as I knew it 
 in 1 86 1. The men who reported then were worthy 
 of its reputation. I do not mean to cast any reflec- 
 tion on the Gallery now. No doubt to my great 
 loss, I have few acquaintances among the reporters 
 there. Some two or three of my old friends are, I 
 believe, still at work for their papers : most of the 
 reporters are, so far as my knowledge goes, new 
 men. Perhaps there is more good shorthand now 
 than there was in 1861 ; I do not believe there is so 
 much good reporting. Some of the men of my day 
 had reported speeches in the old House of Commons. 
 Many of them were barristers. I should not like to 
 say that every man was a gentleman in the true 
 sense of the word ; but I am sure that every man 
 was jealous of the reputation of the Gallery. All of 
 them had real reporting to do. Every newspaper 
 that had a staff of reporters in the Gallery published 
 good if not full reports. The Times had then, as it 
 has now, the fullest accounts of debates ; but the 
 others had columns of speeches. All this is pretty 
 
 G
 
 82 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 much altered now. At that time the London news- 
 papers alone had admission to the Gallery. About 
 this there is a story yet to be told. Having a 
 monopoly, these London papers more or less abused 
 it. Bit by bit most of them have given up report- 
 ing Parliamentary debates ; and now what they call 
 reports are more like a transcript of the official 
 " Parliamentary Proceedings " than anything else. 
 
 Whatever else the Morning Star may have done 
 or left undone, it gave attention to reports of 
 Parliamentary doings and sayings. Its reporting 
 staff was not more than half the size of that of the 
 Times, and was smaller than that of any other 
 paper. Yet its reports were often as long as those 
 of the Times, and were almost invariably longer 
 than those of any of its other contemporaries. The 
 chief of the staff then, and, I believe, till the close of 
 the career of the paper, was a tall gaunt man named 
 Edwards. He was a good reporter. He was a 
 most uneasy man. Intensely anxious that the work 
 should be done well, he worried the members of his 
 staff with incessant suggestions. They were good 
 enough in their way ; but most of them were as 
 little necessary as would be advice given by the 
 Speaker to the Leader of the House not to make 
 a long speech with his hat on his head. 
 
 Yet Edwards was helpful. He taught his recruits 
 how to do Parliamentary reporting on the principle 
 of teaching a boy to swim by flinging him into deep 
 water. When he found that a man could do his 
 work, he took care to give him plenty to do. That
 
 vin GALLERY EXPERIENCES 83 
 
 was not a bad way : though sometimes it seemed a 
 Kttle unfair. He had, from the reporting view, a 
 contempt for the House of Lords which would have 
 satisfied even Mr. Labouchere. No skilled man was, 
 in his opinion, or at least in his practice, required to 
 report the debates in the Upper House. But the 
 House of Commons was wholly different. If there 
 had been an editor of the Star at that time who had 
 dared to cut down a Commons report, woe would 
 have been his lot. There was no such editor. 
 When, later, in sheer desperation I used to cut 
 down a Commons report, I had to be invisible to 
 Edwards for a week afterwards. 
 
 On the first day I was in the Gallery — it being 
 the first day of the session — Edwards gave me 
 the first "turn" of public business. Thus all the 
 " Notices of Motion " fell to my lot. Such notices 
 are not usually given very distinctly. I was not 
 accustomed to the House. As I have previously 
 said, I did not know half-a-dozen members by sight. 
 No reporting experience of mine was ever more 
 trying. Somehow I got through it. 
 
 In another respect those were happy and sensible 
 days. The prolongation of. debates on the Address 
 had not then begun. Members kept their resolutions 
 and their speeches for private members' nights. It 
 was not usual to repeat the same thing a dozen times. 
 If there was anything to be said, it was said and had 
 its effect. Business was done, not scamped. It is 
 a remarkable fact that talk has increased as the 
 reports of speeches in the London newspapers have
 
 84 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, viii 
 
 decreased in length. This is a phenomenon which 
 may be commended to the study of those who have 
 been in the habit of thinking that there is no worthy 
 journalism, — that there are no newspapers deserving 
 the name out of London. 
 
 That night when I began my London career, the 
 debate on the Address in the House of Commons 
 was over by half-past ten o'clock. The Address 
 was moved ; the leader of the Opposition made a 
 speech ; the leader on the Government side replied 
 to him ; two or three unofficial members spoke ; 
 Mr. Bright, who had no great love for Lord 
 Palmerston and as little for Mr. Disraeli, com- 
 mented impartially and forcibly on the shortcomings 
 of both ; and there was an end. The Address was 
 voted, and the House next day got to business. 
 
 At the close of the session I was asked to do 
 sub-editorial work for the Star, and early in the next 
 year I was installed chief — and only — sub-editor of 
 the paper.
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 
 Sub-editorial work long ago — William Black — " Liners " — " Fire 
 Fowler " — The hangman's liner — The garrotting liner — The 
 political liner — The ecclesiastical liner — Count Carlo Borromeo. 
 
 Thirty-five years ago the work of a sub-editor on 
 a daily newspaper in London was not light. I 
 don't believe it is light now, or ever will be. But 
 I suspect that at the time of which I am writing the 
 duties were more onerous in some respects than 
 they are now. For one reason, there were fewer 
 men to do the work ; and for another, more atten- 
 tion was then paid to London-local and provincial 
 news. There was less of telegraphic news, which, to 
 some extent, requires little skill in condensation, 
 and more of manuscript from the fluent penny-a- 
 liner. I was the sole sub-editor of the Morning 
 Star for several years, except for a few weeks 
 when I had the benefit of the assistance of William 
 Black. The opinion may be hazarded by me that 
 he did not like the work. At any rate, he gladly 
 accepted a commission from the Star to go as 
 special correspondent to the Prusso- Austrian war ; 
 and when he returned from that expedition he never 
 resumed sub-editorial work in earnest. It was a
 
 86 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 short and sharp war. If I remember aright, he was 
 absent only some six weeks. When he came back 
 I asked him how he had got on with German while 
 he was away. He laughingly replied, " Oh, I did 
 so much with it, that when I got home I had almost 
 forgotten my English ! " He has regained it to some 
 purpose since. 
 
 Mention has been made of " liners," For a long 
 time I kept many specimens of their wonderful 
 productions. Unfortunately these are now lost. 
 So far as London was concerned, the work was 
 fairly divided among different men. That is to say, 
 some men took one kind of news, and some another. 
 Fires were a specialty then of a liner named Fowler, 
 If he did not invent "the devouring element," he 
 made frequent use of it. He was also, if I remem- 
 ber aright, the inventor of another phrase which has 
 almost become classic in the hands of grammarians 
 — " He was a policeman, but his name was Smith." 
 The smallest fire furnished him with the material 
 for pages of flimsy copy, through which the sub- 
 editor had to wade to discover if there was any- 
 thing in it worth printing. 
 
 Other liners looked after inquests, others after 
 street accidents. One was famous in ecclesiastical 
 matters. The word "famous" is not improperly 
 used, as will be seen by and by. Another of the 
 fraternity, named Butterfield, was the chronicler of 
 executions. He took every hanging, whether in 
 London or the country, under his care. His 
 customers were, to begin with, the evening papers.
 
 IX THE HANGMAN'S LINER 8; 
 
 They received the first draft of his copy. It was 
 simply done. The story of the crime was told, and 
 some conventional phrases were used as to the be- 
 haviour of the convict on the way to the scaffold. 
 All this was written beforehand ; but Mr. Butter- 
 field usually arranged for a telegram from the place 
 of execution when the hanging had taken place. 
 Sometimes the telegram did not arrive ; but the 
 copy was sent in all the same. On one occasion he 
 was premature. A man was to be hanged at some 
 northern assize town. If I am not mistaken he was 
 a tailor, who had killed his wife. On the morning 
 appointed for the execution he had gone to a closet. 
 Over his head was an open cistern of water. He 
 got to this and drowned himself in it. Butterfield 
 knew nothing of this, and sent his copy to the even- 
 ing papers. In it he had some edifying phrases as 
 to the behaviour of the convict on the scaffold. 
 These were printed before the news of the suicide 
 came to hand. Butterfield was looked on with dis- 
 favour by sub-editors after that. He was not greatly 
 abashed by it : he demanded payment for the copy 
 that had been used. 
 
 There was another story told of this man, which 
 I believe to be true. A woman was to be hanged at 
 Glasgow. There had been hopes that she would 
 be reprieved. Even when she was on the way to 
 the scaffold these hopes had not died away. Just 
 as she got there, a telegraph messenger was seen 
 trying to get near. He was waving a telegram. 
 The execution was stopped to let him deliver his
 
 88 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 message. It was addressed to the governor of the 
 gaol, and everybody hoped it was the expected 
 reprieve. The governor quickly opened it and 
 found it was from " Butterfield, London," asking 
 him to telegraph the fact of the execution when 
 it had taken place. The poor, wretched woman, to 
 whom a ray of confident hope had come, had then 
 to be hanged. 
 
 It will not be forgotten that some thirty years 
 ago a garrotting scare got up in London. Day by 
 day the papers contained accounts of attempts to 
 garrotte and rob foot passengers. Occasionally 
 specific details were given. There was no mistake as 
 to the alarm that prevailed. Letters were written 
 to the newspapers complaining of the inefficiency of 
 the police. It is the usual thing for the alarmed 
 Briton to blame the poor police for everything they 
 do and for everything they leave undone. I am 
 not prepared to say that no persons were garrotted 
 and robbed in London at that time. Possibly, nay, 
 probably there were some. If there had not been, 
 the scare could not have arisen. But that scare 
 was, in the main, the production of liners, and 
 principally of two of their number — brothers, I 
 believe, named Geary. They furnished most of the 
 reports of garrottings, and distributed the supposed 
 outrages in the most impartial manner over London. 
 No district was safe, if these reports were to be 
 trusted. The brothers reaped a rich harvest while 
 the scare lasted. It would have continued longer if 
 they had not overreached themselves. One night
 
 IX GARROTTING AND POLITICS 89 
 
 they wrote a telling story of a garrotting outrage in 
 St. Paul's Churchyard. They killed the gentleman 
 who was robbed : that is, they stated that he had 
 died of the injuries he had received. The city 
 police had never heard of the affair, and they were 
 anxious to get particulars of it from the newspapers 
 that had printed the story. They got all that could 
 be given ; but it was not much. There had been 
 no murder, no robbery, no disturbance of the peace 
 of any kind. The whole report was an invention. 
 From that time little more was heard about garrot- 
 ting in London. 
 
 Another "liner" at that time worked a special 
 field. He was engaged in political affairs. I forget 
 his name, but I knew him very well ; for many times 
 I saw him about reports he had sent in. He was one 
 of a sort of joint-stock company. The others formed 
 the meetings and made the speeches ; he wrote the 
 reports. He got the remuneration; they got notoriety. 
 It will not be forgotten that there was a good deal 
 of political ferment about that time — before the 
 Reform Bill of 1867 was passed. Close observers 
 of what took place could not fail to note the large 
 number of new leagues and associations that were 
 started. Nor could they fail to note that the same 
 men seemed to be at the head of all these leagues. 
 I am not speaking of that Reform League of which 
 the late Mr. Beale was the figure-head. I am 
 speaking of a number of other associations with 
 more or less kindred professions, but not connected 
 with Mr. Beale's League. All these associations
 
 90 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 held their meetings in one place. It was, I think, 
 in Wine Office Court, in Fleet Street. They met 
 almost nightly and talked high politics. Their 
 speeches were reported, and, in some cases, com- 
 mented upon. The liner who furnished the speeches 
 had handsome reward at the end of each week. At 
 last a curious person connected with a newspaper 
 made inquiries, and found that the men who made 
 the speeches did so in conclaves of half-a-dozen in a 
 small room. Those who were not speaking were 
 smoking. One night they were representing this 
 " league." The next night they were representing 
 that "association." It was a manufacture of copy 
 for the liner. I am not prepared to say that the 
 reports he produced had no effect upon the politics 
 of the time. I believe they had. It was generally 
 believed that the associations were real, and that 
 there was a weight of opinion behind them. The 
 truth was what I have told. Possibly there may 
 have been political movements later with as little 
 substantial basis. But I am not sure that they have 
 been of much profit to any industrious and ingenious 
 liner. 
 
 Mention has been made of the ecclesiastical liner. 
 He was a well-educated man. I believe he had had 
 a University career, and that he had been intended 
 for the Church. He could write well ; and it 
 was beyond doubt that he knew all current ecclesias- 
 tical questions pretty thoroughly. In newspaper 
 offices he was known as the " Bishop-maker." The 
 story ran thus : when a See became vacant, the
 
 IX . THE 'BISHOP-MAKER' 91 
 
 liner always sent to the papers, within two or three 
 days, a short paragraph something like this : — " It is 
 stated that the Bishopric of so and so will be conferred 
 
 upon the Very Rev. Canon or the Rev. Dr. 
 
 . The name of the Rev. Mr. is also men- 
 tioned in connection with the appointment." The 
 next day another paragraph would be sent putting 
 the matter a little stronger, as — " There is a decided 
 manifestation of feeling in ecclesiastical circles in 
 favour of the choice of" (a clergyman previously 
 named) "to fill the vacant see." Lord Palmerston 
 was at that time the great dispenser of ecclesiastical 
 patronage, and the popular belief was that he was 
 largely guided in his selections for bishoprics by the 
 Earl of Shaftesbury. The theory arose that the 
 latter was influenced by the paragraphs in the papers. 
 He thought they represented a real body of opinion, 
 and in this belief he recommended one of the 
 clergymen named. Of course I do not mean to say 
 that this was actually the case, I know nothing about 
 the matter. But the theory as to the liner's work 
 was as I have stated it ; and as a matter of fact clergy- 
 men whom he had named were chosen for bishoprics 
 on more occasions than one. Hence the title of 
 " Bishop-maker"bestowed upon the ecclesiastical liner. 
 Once this ingenious purveyor of news achieved a 
 higher flight. There was some question agitating 
 the Church at the time — I forget what it was. The 
 liner took advantage of the fact and made many 
 pounds out of it. He began by writing paragraphs 
 describing the rise of a movement among some of
 
 92 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 the clergy, whose names were not given on the 
 ground that as they were going to deal with the 
 doings of their ecclesiastical superiors, it was not 
 desirable that they should be individually known. 
 The paragraphs were printed. They increased in 
 number and grew longer. Then the anonymous 
 clergymen began to hold meetings and to make 
 speeches. These were duly reported. They were 
 certainly interesting, and soon they furnished topics 
 for leading articles. I forget how the fraud was 
 discovered ; but discovered it was. There was no 
 such movement as that described. There had never 
 been such a movement. No meetings had been held : 
 no speeches had been delivered. The reports were 
 the invention of the liner. They were clever. He 
 had contrived to introduce variety into them. While 
 they were directed to the same end they did not 
 advocate the same methods, and they were not in 
 the same style. In short they might have been 
 genuine : only they were not. 
 
 Yet the ingenious gentleman who prepared these 
 bogus reports was only an imitator. He was not 
 the inventor of the plan of action which he 
 adopted. Some years previously, when the affairs of 
 Italy were being much discussed, and when public 
 feeling ran high against the Dukes and Princes and 
 Kings that ruled over separate States in Italy, 
 Count Carlo Borromeo made the acquaintance of 
 the London newspapers, or they made his acquaint- 
 ance. He came to them with stories of a move- 
 ment by Italian patriots in London. They were
 
 IX COUNT CARLO BORROMEO 93 
 
 exiles from their native land ; driven out of it by the 
 oppression of its tyrants. They were engaged in 
 planning the enfranchisement of their much-loved 
 country. Count Carlo Borromeo was empowered 
 by them to ask the London papers to print an 
 account of their doings. As the police spies of the 
 hateful Italian potentates were everywhere, it would 
 be dangerous for the patriots to be known, even 
 in London. Their place of meeting must be kept 
 secret, while what they said might be published. 
 
 Count Carlo Borromeo's offer was accepted, and 
 for some weeks he furnished — of course for "the 
 usual remuneration " — reports of meetings of the 
 patriots. They never talked wild nonsense. There 
 were no threats of bloody reprisals in their speeches. 
 Everything they said was moderate yet firm in 
 tone. Plainly they were men who were in earnest, 
 and who might be trusted to carry out the designs 
 they avowed. It was all a fraud. There were no 
 Italian patriots. Count Carlo Borromeo was not a 
 Count, not even an Italian. The exposure of his 
 misdoing came about in this way. 
 
 One afternoon the Count called for some purpose 
 at the office of the Morning Star. He was shown 
 into the room of the sub-editor of the Evening Star, 
 who at that time was a gentleman named Mannock. 
 He was an Irishman. The Count began his story, 
 and Mr. Mannock at once discovered in his English 
 a strong flavour of Cork. When the interview was 
 over, Mr. Mannock told Mr. Baxter Langley, who 
 was then the manager of the Star, that he was sure
 
 94 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 the Count was no Italian but an Irishman. Langley 
 resolved to have the matter investigated, and, having 
 got hold of the Count, demanded to be told the place 
 of meeting of the patriots. The Count demurred. 
 Langley insisted, and threatened to hand the Count 
 over to the police if he did not give the address. It 
 was in Wimpole Street, said the Count. "What 
 number?" asked Langley. The Count did not know, 
 but he could show the house. That, said Langley, 
 would do, and they would go there at once. Again 
 the Count demurred ; and again Langley was 
 resolute. They started : they got to Wimpole 
 Street ; the Count made pretences as to not being 
 able to find the house. The whole imposture was in 
 short exploded, and Count Carlo Borromeo dis- 
 appeared. 
 
 Some months afterwards, Baxter Langley found 
 himself in Reading, with no occupation for the 
 evening. The only entertainment in the place so 
 far as he could discover was a lecture on Mesmerism 
 and Electro-Biology, with experiments, by a Doctor 
 whose name he had never heard. I foro^et it now. 
 Langley went to the lecture. It had begun when 
 he got to the hall. No sooner did he see the 
 lecturer than he identified him as Count Carlo 
 Borromeo. The lecturer soon saw Langley, and 
 for the moment was greatly disconcerted. In a 
 minute or two he recovered and then took a bold 
 course. Pointing to Langley, he denounced him as 
 a persecutor of the innocent. The hall rang with his 
 denunciations. The audience, or some of them,
 
 IX THE END OF A CAREER 95 
 
 turned fiercely on Langley, and he had to get out as 
 quickly as he could. Before he could muster the 
 police, the lecturer had fled. 
 
 Again years passed without any more trace 
 of the Count. One day a certain Dr. Pritchard, a 
 man of venerable appearance, was accused of abduct- 
 ing a girl from her parents. He had taken her to a 
 coffee-house on the Westminster Bridge Road, and 
 there she was found. He was sent to the Surrey 
 Sessions for trial, and he was convicted. In the 
 court Langley saw him. He was the former Count 
 Carlo Borromeo.
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 Samuel Lucas — Cobden and the Tunes — The Morning Star's 
 editorial stafif — -Washington Wilks — Editorial teas — Want of 
 supervision — Revising an article — Justin M'Carthy — Leicester 
 Buckingham — Slow writers — Sala and easy writing — Cardinal 
 Manning on Sala — F. W. Chesson. 
 
 While I was sub-editor of the Morning Star I had 
 for a colleague Mr. Justin M'Carthy. He was 
 known in the office as the Foreign Editor. In 
 truth, for a long time he did little else than write a 
 leading article every day. The nominal Editor was 
 Mr. Samuel Lucas, brother-in-law of Mr. Bright, 
 and brother of that Edward Lucas who had become 
 a convert to Roman Catholicism and founded the 
 Tablet. Mr. Samuel Lucas was a Quaker — that is, 
 he was of a Quaker family. But there was little of 
 what is usually associated with Quakerism in his 
 politics. In that region he was decidedly militant. 
 Cobden was his dear friend, and I think Cobden's 
 death brought his life to an end. At the time, Mr. 
 Lucas was in poor health, and was living at Brighton 
 in the hope of recuperation. The news of Cobden's 
 death brought him to London, and to my room. 
 He was ghastly in his paleness ; and as he spoke
 
 CHAP. X COBDEN AND THE TIMES 97 
 
 tears were in his voice. He sat with me for a 
 long time and spoke of Cobden, — of their long 
 friendship and close association in the great work 
 Cobden had done. Cobden, he said, was one of the 
 kindest men he had ever known. I said, " Did he 
 not sometimes say unkind things of others — 
 Palmerston and the Times, for instance ? " 
 
 "Yes," he replied, "he did, and he was right. 
 But in truth what he said was proof of his kindness. 
 His heart was set on great things — on the alleviation 
 of the condition of the people ; and he resented the 
 action of those who more or less obstructed him." 
 
 "But," said I, "does not that mean that he could 
 not brook opposition } Might he not have given 
 them credit for bein^ as honest and as desirous of 
 the public welfare as himself.'*" 
 
 " He could not do that," replied Lucas, "he saw 
 that they attributed dishonest motives to him. He 
 saw that while they could not attack his policy — at 
 least of later years — they did attack his motives. 
 Why," said he, with a burst of indignation, " do 
 vou not remember how the Times attacked him for 
 his pecuniary misfortunes! He had lost his money 
 in working for the public, and, because those who 
 recognised the great work he had done subscribed 
 money for him, the Ti^nes spoke of him as if he were 
 a begging-letter impostor. It was shameful. No, he 
 was right to strike back. It was a case, if ever there 
 was one, where St. Paul's advice applied — ' Be angry, 
 and sin not.' Cobden did not sin in being angry. 
 He was one of the kindest men I ever knew." 
 
 H
 
 98 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 The conversation showed Lucas in his true light 
 — a real staunch friend, with an affectionate dis- 
 position ; a hater of those who despitefully used his 
 friend. If I am not mistaken he died within a fort- 
 night after that conversation. 
 
 The editorial staff of the Mornino; Star consisted 
 of Justin M'Carthy, Washington Wilks, Leicester 
 Buckingham, Frederick William Chesson, myself, 
 and the gentleman named Mannock before mentioned. 
 Later it was joined by Mr. (now Sir) E. R. Russell, 
 who subsequently edited, and still edits, the Liver- 
 pool Daily Post, and Mr. E. D. J. Wilson, now one 
 of the leader writers for the Times. William Black's 
 connection with it I have already mentioned. Before 
 the paper was absorbed into the Daily News, I had 
 removed to Scotland. Justin M'Carthy had gone on 
 a lecturing tour in the United States. Washington 
 Wilks was dead ; Leicester Buckingham was dead. 
 Mr. John Morley was Editor at the time of the 
 absorption, and had been in that position for about 
 three months. 
 
 At the time when I joined the editorial staff, it 
 was a very free-and-easy affair. Mr. Lucas, as I 
 have said, was the nominal Editor. He never came 
 to the office after dinner, and there was an under- 
 standing that supervision of the articles and the 
 matter generally was in the hands of Washington 
 Wilks. It was an understanding and nothing more. 
 He rarely saw anything save his own article, and 
 not always did he see that. He was a strange 
 fellow, with more liking for public platforms than
 
 X WASHINGTON WILKS 99 
 
 for editorial rooms. I do not mean that such a 
 preference is strange. Most people who have had 
 experience of editorial rooms, and who could make 
 speeches on platforms, would probably have it. 
 Wilks was strange in his disregard of dress, in his 
 disregard of accuracy, in his disregard of many 
 social amenities. I have not a shadow of doubt 
 that if he had lived he would have been a member 
 of Parliament for an Irish constituency, and a 
 follower, if not a rival, of Parnell. Mr. Sexton 
 would not have been equal to him in verbosity and 
 grandiloquence. Mr. Healy would have had a 
 rival in plain speaking who would have run him 
 close. Wilks seemed always anxious to live up to 
 his name. How far he succeeded as to Washington 
 I am not prepared to say ; but he did well with 
 Wilks. He had been editor of a paper in Cumber- 
 land, and had been brought to the bar of the House 
 of Commons for breach of privilege in having made 
 an accusation of corruption against a member of the 
 House. It is said by good Americans that Wash- 
 ington never told a lie. Perhaps he did not. If he 
 did not, there was a difference between him and 
 Washington Wilks. On one occasion I pointed out 
 to him that a statement he had made in a leading 
 article was not true. 
 
 "Is it picturesquely stated ? " he asked. 
 
 " Yes ; but what of that ? " 
 
 " My dear fellow," was his reply, " if the 
 picturesque and the truthful come in contact, the 
 truth must always go to the wall."
 
 loo AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Wilks died suddenly on a platform at a public 
 meeting which he was about to address. 
 
 It will be understood that practically the Morning 
 Star did not get much editorial supervision in those 
 days. Yet the work was well done. Every after- 
 noon there was a meeting of the editorial staff. 
 Tea was served in one of the rooms at half-past five 
 o'clock. When Mr. Lucas was well, he used to be 
 there. Topics for leading articles were suggested. 
 Each topic was discussed, and finally the writer of 
 each article was arranged. In this way each writer 
 got help from all the others, and the result was 
 excellent. Those were pleasant gatherings. I 
 think of them now with the kindliest remembrance. 
 Sometimes a stranger would be present. I have 
 seen John Bright there. No restraints prevented 
 the free expression of opinion. Differences there 
 were, of course. Even these were useful ; for they 
 enabled a writer to understand arguments against 
 the position he was to take up. Anyway, it is safe 
 to say that the writing in the Moriting Star at that 
 time was as good as that in any newspaper in the 
 United Kingdom. I am free to say this ; because 
 I did not then regularly write articles. 
 
 The want of supervision, however, had an un- 
 fortunate effect at times. When Mr. Lucas was 
 away, the articles were settled as usual at tea-time. 
 After that everybody did what seemed good in his 
 own eyes. On one occasion, while Mr. Lucas was 
 at Brighton, Mr. Mannock wrote an article on some 
 subject — I think it was a labour question. His
 
 REVISING AN ARTICLE loi 
 
 article was dead in the teeth of the poHcy of the 
 paper, and in the teeth of whafharl been said at tea- 
 time. Mr. Lucas wrote to' me in great anxiety, and 
 told me to urge Mannock to •wTiLe'd.nother'article by 
 way of undoing what he had done. He wrote as 
 requested, but began in one strain and ended in 
 another. Mr. Lucas was furious. He was too ill 
 to come to town, and he requested me to see that 
 the mischief was undone bv Mannock, I told that 
 gentleman what was required of him, and he wrote 
 once more. In accordance with the request of Mr. 
 Lucas, I got a proof of the article and revised it. 
 Mannock had made it worse than ever. The time 
 was near when the article must go to press, and it 
 was not possible for me to rewrite it. I remembered 
 the story of the sinner who advised that the " nots " 
 should be taken out of the Commandments and put 
 into the Creed, and I peppered " nots " into the 
 article, negativing every argument and almost every 
 statement of the writer. Mannock was not in the 
 least displeased ; he had no convictions as to the 
 subject that could be hurt. Mr. Lucas was satisfied, 
 Wilks was, in one sense, the most forcible writer 
 on the Morning Star at that time. Justin M'Carthy 
 was by far the most scholarly and persuasive. It 
 used to be said of Macaulay that he was a book in 
 breeches. The same might be said of Justin 
 M'Carthy. He had read widely ; and he re- 
 membered everything he had read. I never knew 
 a man with such a marvellous verbal memory. 
 Rarely have I seen him use a book of reference.
 
 I02 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 yet his articles would often be studded with quota- 
 tions, and; they.* were- always correctly made. He 
 had -an- easy,, grace of, s-tyle which is not common. 
 He always knew -his slibject ; and thus he wrote 
 with great effect. Many things have happened 
 since the days when we were colleagues to drive us 
 apart ; yet my friendship for him has not abated. I 
 have regretted and criticised the course he has 
 taken, and I have no doubt he has done the same 
 as to myself. I do not think he can ever attain the 
 highest eminence in anything. He is always pleasing, 
 but never convincing. I mean that what he says 
 and does leaves no lasting impression. What he 
 wanted was a spice of the devil. If he could have 
 got angry, he would have been a great man. Some- 
 times in his writing he seems to be getting nearly 
 red hot ; if he could get to white heat he would 
 be the foremost writer of his time. In politics 
 it is the same. He has more knowledge of the 
 world and more constructive ability than all the rest 
 of the party to which he adheres. But he cannot be 
 angry ; he cannot get into a passion ; he cannot 
 even simulate one. Thus he has been made a 
 figure-head, and vastly inferior men are regarded as 
 real leaders. He would have done better to have 
 kept to literature. 
 
 At one time he was Editor of the Morning Star. 
 About that appointment there is something to be 
 said, which can do no harm if I say it now. When 
 Mr. Lucas was failing in health he saw that there 
 must be some editorial authority in the office while
 
 X THE OFFER OF AN EDITORSHIP 103 
 
 he was absent. He was living then, if I remember 
 rightly, in Gordon Street, Tavistock Square. One 
 day he asked me to call upon him at his house, and 
 I went. He asked me to take the acting Editor- 
 ship of the paper. I told him that I did not think 
 I was the fittest man for the post, and that Justin 
 M'Carthy, who had been on the paper before me, 
 was the man to whom he ought to look. He told 
 me that he had thought the matter over and had 
 fixed upon me, for various reasons, one of which 
 was that I was a more practical-minded man than 
 M'Carthy. All this was very complimentary and 
 pleasant ; but there was another reason in my mind 
 which made the appointment impossible. I told 
 him what that reason was. While I agreed with 
 most of the policy of the paper, there was some of 
 it from which I differed ; and I could not make my- 
 self even theoretically responsible for a paper which 
 was bound to advocate some views that I con- 
 scientiously disapproved. He argued with me that 
 the responsibility would be his, not mine. But I 
 stuck to my refusal, and he appointed M'Carthy. 
 It is my pleasant conviction that the step was a wise 
 one. It is a still more pleasant conviction that Mr. 
 Lucas showed afterwards in his personal intercourse 
 with me that I had his hearty respect. 
 
 Leicester Buckingham was one of the most hand- 
 some men I have ever seen. Finely moulded 
 features were crowned with a head of dark curly 
 hair. He was tall, carried himself well, and bore in 
 every lineament the stamp of good breeding. He
 
 I04 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 was a slow writer. His caligraphy was exquisite at 
 first sight and most difficult to decipher. He wrote 
 with care, and, I believe, thought out every sentence 
 before he penned a word of it. This slowness of 
 composition made him troublesome to the printers ; 
 for his article was always late. That trouble affected 
 me, for I had the responsibility of getting the paper 
 to press. Night after night the difficulty arose. 
 Buckingham would begin about seven o'clock and 
 on pressure finish his article by half-past eleven. 
 The leader pages had to go to press at twelve. 
 Fortunately he made few corrections, and therefore 
 no time was lost with his proof. He was the 
 dramatic critic of the paper, and in that capacity did 
 most excellent work. The day had no charms for 
 him ; it was the night he loved, and when he lived. 
 After finishing his work on the paper he usually went 
 to the Arundel Club. Most of its members were 
 actors and dramatic writers. The Club-house was in 
 a street off the Strand — I forget which of them. At 
 it he spent the remaining hours of darkness, and in 
 the summer time, two or three hours of daylight. I 
 remember he told me that he generally took " supper " 
 when he got home ; and he added that his favourite 
 supper then was cold beefsteak pudding! He died 
 comparatively young. 
 
 While he was in the full flush of his press and club 
 life he wrote several plays — adaptations from French 
 pieces. They were always clever ; but I doubt 
 whether anybody remembers one of them now. 
 Several times he described to me his manner of
 
 X WRITING A PLAY 105 
 
 working on these plays. He would think about an 
 Act till he had got it shaped in his mind. Then he 
 would close the shutters in the window of his room, 
 light the gas, provide himself with a few biscuits, 
 and two or three dozens of pints of Bass. One of 
 these pints he took every hour. He walked about 
 till a speech or a sentence, which he uttered aloud, had 
 been framed. Then he wrote it down. An Act 
 usually occupied him nearly thirty hours — during 
 which time he had no sleep, and, as I have just said, 
 a pint of Bass per hour ! For months before his 
 death he was a wreck. He had been away to recover 
 his health, and came into my room two or three 
 weeks before he died. I never saw a more beautiful 
 face ; but the name of Death was writ large upon it. 
 His fine luminous eyes were bright ; he was ghastly 
 in his pallor ; his teeth were clenched, and he spoke 
 through them as if he had not strength to open his 
 mouth. He was cheerful, and talked of being back 
 to his work in a few days. I never saw him again. 
 Buckingham's slowness of composition was often 
 discussed amongst us. Naturally he held that 
 writing to be good must be thought over ; and he 
 would repeat a common saying that easy writing 
 makes hard reading. The two propositions may 
 both be true, but they are misleading. What is 
 written ought to be thought over ; but there is quick 
 thinking and there is slow thinking. My experience 
 of writers has convinced me that your slow thinker 
 is generally a dull thinker. No doubt there are 
 exceptions, but few of them have come my way. As
 
 io6 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 to "easy writing," there may be many opinions. 
 Your fastidious — perhaps I should say, your over- 
 fastidious — man is apt to mistake sound for sense, 
 smoothness for effectiveness, elegance for force. 
 He polishes and polishes till he rubs out the quality i 
 
 that would make his writing effective for its purpose. 
 My point may be illustrated by reference to public 
 speaking. Some of our statesmen write their 
 speeches : I know, for I have seen the manuscripts. 
 Others do not, but make notes for points and speak 
 as the words come. Mr. Gladstone takes this latter 
 course; Sir George Trevelyan takes the first. Which | 
 
 is the more effective? Every sentence of Sir George's 
 is framed well and has regard for the rules of 
 grammar. Almost every sentence of Mr. Gladstone's 
 is loose in structure, parenthetical, and often in 
 defiance of grammar. It tells with an audience 
 because it comes with freshness and vigour, and con- 
 veys a sense of earnestness that arouses sympathetic 
 response. The written speech does not, unless the 
 speaker is a good actor. The polish of the written 
 speech is like rouge on the face of a woman : it is 
 meant to simulate aglow of health, and it is not equal 
 to nature's efforts in that direction. 
 
 I remember on one occasion travelling from 
 Windsor in the same compartment with several other 
 newspaper men. If I am not mistaken, we had all 
 been to the funeral of the Duchess of Kent. George 
 Augustus Sala was there, and Nicholas Woods, and 
 Godfrey Turner, and two or three others. The 
 conversation on the journey turned upon this subject
 
 X SALA ON EASY WRITING 107 
 
 of easy writing. Sala quoted the saying about easy 
 writing being hard reading. Nicholas Woods thought 
 that there was a medium that was the best — that 
 could not be spoken of as difficult writing and that 
 yet was easy reading. Godfrey Turner chimed in 
 with the assurance that he wrote easily. " I don't," 
 said Sala. " How do you write ? " somebody asked 
 of him. " I write in agony and bloody sweat," was 
 the forcible if almost blasphemous reply. This was 
 a blow for the opponents of the " easy writing, hard 
 reading " theory ; for no one then or since could 
 compare Turner's writing, for force or thought or 
 elegance, with Sala's. But it really only showed that 
 at the time Sala wrote with difficulty ; and I suspect 
 it was only comparative difficulty. He was writing 
 at most times under pressure ; and if he did not get 
 on as fast as he desired, he no doubt thought he was 
 slow. I believe that of late years he dictated his 
 productions. That does not mean slow writing. It 
 is the resource of a quick thinker and a quick 
 writer. My impression is that for all that makes for 
 good work and easy reading, Sala's latest productions 
 may be compared without disadvantage with his 
 earlier writings. 
 
 Perhaps while I am speaking of Sala I may relate 
 another conversation in which he was mentioned. I 
 was talking with Cardinal Manning (he was then 
 only Archbishop), and our talk turned on literary 
 men of the day. I asked him what he thought of 
 Sala. " I have a o;reat admiration of him," was the 
 reply. I was a little surprised; for, though, personally,
 
 io8 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 I believed with all my literary heart in Sala, I did 
 not think he would have similar admiration from an 
 ascetic Churchman. 
 
 " May I ask why you admire him ? " I said to the 
 Archbishop. 
 
 " Because he is so thorough. He knows almost 
 everything well. He never writes of what he does 
 not understand. If he is going to write on any 
 subject he makes himself thoroughly acquainted with 
 it from the bottom upwards. For instance : if I 
 wanted an account of that table " — pointing to one in 
 the room — " and asked Mr. Sala to write it, he would 
 tell me of what wood it was made ; where the wood 
 was grown ; what were its qualities ; how it was 
 handled. If it was foreign wood he would tell how 
 it was shipped to this country. He would trace it to 
 the cabinetmaker's shop, through the saw-yard. He 
 would tell how every part of the table was made — 
 with what tools and appliances. And he would be 
 strictly accurate throughout. Those are the qualities 
 in him as a literary man that I admire." 
 
 Few who know Mr. Sala's work — and who does 
 not.'* — will question the soundness of the Archbishop's 
 opinion. 
 
 But I have strayed from the editorial staff of the 
 Morning Star. Frederick William Chesson, whose 
 name I have mentioned as one of that staff, was the 
 gentlest, most amiable, most earnest, and most 
 persistent man I have ever known. He had married, 
 while young, a daughter of a certain Mr. Thompson, 
 who was known through the length and breadth of
 
 F. W. CHESSON 109 
 
 the land as an Anti-Slavery and Free-Trade lecturer. 
 This connection had brought Chesson into communi- 
 cation with Cobden, Bright, the Sturges, and a host 
 of men prominent in political and philanthropic 
 affairs. At the time of which I am writing, he was 
 Secretary to the Aborigines Protection Society. I 
 believe he continued to hold that post till his death. 
 He was chiefly concerned with philanthropic and col- 
 onial movements, and when they were written about 
 in the Star, he was given the work. He wrote neatly 
 and well. It is not uncharitable to say that he 
 admired what he wrote. There was almost a touch 
 of pathos in the way he read his proofs. He dwelt 
 on them with loving eyes. So to speak, he caressed 
 his sentences. If there was any one in the room 
 with him he would read out a passage here and there, 
 and expect to have it approved. It always got 
 approval. If it was not forceful it was full of good 
 intention. If it was not rhetorical — and it never was 
 — it was always sincere. He was a good fellow, who 
 fought his fight fairly and with courage. A better 
 man never lived.
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 
 The Morning Star — The Dial and the Star — John Bright- — His 
 opinion of Palmerston, Cornewall Lewis, Lord John Russell, 
 Peel, Disraeli, Gladstone — Bright on Trade Unions — As an 
 orator — Gladstone and Hennessey — Bright on Ireland. 
 
 At the Morning Star office I saw a good deal of 
 John Bright. He was, at that time, a director of 
 the paper. Its position was pecuUar, Years before, 
 it had been started to support the principles of what 
 was known as the Manchester School. John Bright 
 had shares in it ; but if I am not mistaken the chief 
 part of the property belonged to a Mr. Henry 
 Rawson of Manchester. I think he was a share- 
 broker. Some time after it had been started it 
 was amalgamated with another undertaking, about 
 which a word or two may be said. 
 
 A Nonconformist minister in one of the suburbs 
 of London, the Rev. Dr. David Thomas, found, or 
 thought he found, that the newspapers of his day 
 were rather a power for evil than for good. Other 
 ministers have had, and perhaps some of them still 
 have, a similar opinion. Dr. Thomas was a re- 
 former, and seeing this great evil he set about 
 removing it. He insisted that a newspaper ought
 
 CHAP. XI A RELIGIOUS NEWSPAPER iii 
 
 to be a help and not a hindrance to the cause of 
 rehgion. I am not discussing his opinions, nor am 
 I questioning them : I am simply stating his views. 
 He took action in furtherance of those views, and 
 several other good men, some of them ministers, 
 some laymen, joined him. He went all over the 
 country, holding public meetings, and crying for a 
 righteous daily newspaper. It was not to confine 
 itself to sermons : it was not to ignore the news of 
 the day. It was to be a paper that would fill the 
 place of any other newspaper as containing what 
 may be called secular news. But it was to be 
 permeated with the spirit of religion. It was to 
 be written by godly men for godly men. It was 
 to uphold the highest standard of morality, and to 
 eschew everything that those who agreed with Dr. 
 David Thomas thought wrong. It could not be 
 produced without money ; therefore pious men must 
 take shares in it. I believe Dr. Thomas was 
 successful in getting nearly if not quite a hundred 
 thousand pounds subscribed to a company to realise 
 the splendid ideal. 
 
 Getting the money subscribed was found to be 
 less difficult than getting a daily newspaper started. 
 Anyway, it was resolved to begin with a weekly 
 paper. The world ought not to be kept waiting 
 for a light to dispel its darkness, until the daily 
 could be arranged for. It would be as wise to sit 
 in the dark because the electric light was not 
 installed, while a candle was available. The weekly 
 was named The Dial. It was edited, if I remember
 
 112 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 aright, by Mr. Peter Bayne, an able man who had 
 been associated with what is known as rehgious 
 journahsm. Sad to say, the Dial did not succeed. 
 It was ready to point the way. It had for motto 
 " Righteousness exalteth a nation " ; but its right- 
 eousness did not exalt it, in a pecuniary sense. It 
 had not learned a lesson that has been sedulously 
 taught in some directions since, that sensationalism 
 in religious journalism is a tower of strength. There 
 might be some interesting speculations on this point ; 
 but this is not the place for them. 
 
 The Dial had been intended as a sort of pre- 
 cursor of the great daily that was to come. It 
 failed to convince the religious world that more 
 money could with profit be given for the realisation 
 of Dr. Thomas's ideal. What were the directors to 
 do ? They had many thousands of pounds, though 
 not as many as would enable them to carry out the 
 original idea. The weekly Dial would in time have 
 drained the money all away ; but a weekly paper 
 was not what had been promised. There must be 
 a daily. A thought flashed into the mind of some 
 director, and stayed there. It was that a brand 
 plucked from the burning is worth more than a 
 brand that has never been scorched. It would be 
 better to convert a worldly paper to the paths of 
 righteousness than to start one that should need no 
 conversion. The Morning Stai^ was approached, 
 and eventually the Dial Company and the Star 
 Company were amalgamated. 
 
 I have reason to know that some of the pro-
 
 XI RIGHTEOUSNESS AND WORLDLINESS 113 
 
 jectors of the Dial did not think the result satis- 
 factory. There might be righteousness in the 
 paper ; but there was a good deal of worldliness. 
 The sporting news was an abomination. There 
 were frivolous articles at times. Even prize fights 
 were recorded. The strict Dial men could not 
 see any difference between the Star and other 
 dailies that were not associated with righteousness 
 in joint-stock wedlock. Perhaps they were right. 
 Everybody knows the story of the parrot bought 
 by a pious old lady. It used the language of the 
 forecastle, and she was shocked. She consulted her 
 minister as to what she should do with the unholy 
 bird. The minister had a parrot that sung psalms 
 and said its prayers. " I will send my parrot to 
 yours, Madam," said the minister, " and it will soon 
 be taught goodness." The pious parrot went to the 
 bad one. They were left in the same room ; and 
 before long the pious bird was using bad language 
 and never uttering a prayer ; while the bad one had 
 learned no prayers, but stuck to its bad language. 
 I am afraid the attempt to convert the Star to Dial 
 ways failed in like manner. Before long the weekly 
 Dial was also transferred to the Star office, put into 
 the hands of Mr. Chesson, and — withered away. 
 
 This digression has taken me a long way from 
 Mr, Bright and his directorship in the amalgamated 
 companies. It need scarcely be said that in regard 
 to the policy of the paper he and the politicians 
 were stronger than the Rev. Dr. Thomas and his 
 colleagues. Indeed, John Bright was stronger than 
 
 I
 
 114 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 most men. He used to come into my room and sit 
 for an hour or two, smoking all the while and talking 
 as few men could talk. It was true of him that to 
 know him was a liberal education. He has some- 
 times been spoken of as a narrow man. No charge 
 could be more unfounded. I never met a man with 
 wider sympathies, or with a kindlier toleration for 
 those who did not agree with him. His Quaker 
 education had not destroyed his fighting spirit. 
 He did not turn his other cheek to the smiter. A 
 Scottish Judge once said that he interpreted a well- 
 known injunction thus — •" If a man smite thee on 
 one cheek, smite him on the other also." I am 
 inclined to think that, in effect, John Bright read 
 the passage in the same way. He was often filled 
 with fierce indignation because of the doings and 
 sayings and neglects of those from whom he differed. 
 He believed that he himself was in the right. Did 
 any man ever accomplish a great work, or any work, 
 who did not believe the same of himself? If he was 
 right, those who opposed him or obstructed him were 
 wrong, and he spoke out against them. But I never 
 heard him say an obviously unjust thing : I never 
 heard him say an uncharitable thing of an opponent. 
 I have heard him scores of times excuse those who 
 assailed him. 
 
 Looking back at those times, and at what came 
 afterwards, I think it may be truthfully said that no 
 statesman ever was more nearly right in all that he 
 did and proposed than was John Bright. He lived 
 to see his greatest project realised and blessing the 
 
 i
 
 XI JOHN BRIGHT ON POLITICS 115 
 
 country, and experience has shown how sound were 
 his conclusions and how wise were his proposals for 
 the welfare of the people. That was his one over- 
 powering consideration. He left selfish motives 
 aside in political affairs. He felt keenly for the 
 sufferings of the poor, and he thought without ceasing 
 how they might be removed or alleviated. 
 
 In the course of our many talks, Mr. Bright 
 spoke freely of the statesmen and politicians of the 
 day. His pet aversion seemed to be Lord Palmer- 
 ston. He found little to admire in him. " He is 
 an aristocrat to the tips of his fingers," he once 
 said; adding, " I do not think that a sin; because 
 I believe this country owes much to its aristocracy, 
 and may in the future owe more. But his aristo- 
 cratic feeling makes him contemptuous of those who 
 do not agree with him. I should not like to say 
 that he has no sympathy with the poor ; but I am 
 sure he thinks the country ought to be governed by, 
 if not for, his own class." 
 
 I suggested that Lord Palmerston had on several 
 occasions shown by his policy that he put what he 
 believed to be the interests of the Empire before all 
 other considerations. "Yes," was the reply, "he 
 has ; but the interests of the Empire in his mind 
 are associated not so much with the material wel- 
 fare of the people as with the greatness of the 
 Empire as a Power." 
 
 I asked if he thought that the welfare of the 
 people would be advanced if Great Britain sank in 
 the scale of nations.
 
 ii6 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 " No," he replied, " I do not think so. But 
 I do think that with a contented and prosperous 
 people there is more chance of holding our own 
 than there is by an aggressive foreign policy and 
 increased armaments." 
 
 The truth was that Bright hated war and all 
 that pertained to it. But this was not all. Palmer- 
 ston had never tried to understand Bright, and had 
 on some occasions flouted him ; and I suspect the 
 natural man was too strong for the Quaker. 
 
 Bright had a great admiration for Cornewall 
 Lewis, and praised him often as a sincere man of 
 the highest ability. From some things he said I 
 thought he regarded Lewis as a pessimist ; but that 
 did not hinder him from expressing admiration. 
 
 Earl Russell, then Lord John, was not one of 
 Bright's favourites. I used to think that he had 
 a contempt for the little statesman, though he never 
 said in so many words that he had. He used to 
 speak of him as able and cautious, and, in his way, 
 honest. But he always expressed the opinion that 
 Lord John could not see far before him. " He is 
 never thorough," Bright said to me on one occasion. 
 " He is willing to get the good opinion of others ; 
 but he seeks to do so by showy rather than sterling 
 measures." The Ecclesiastical Titles Act was men- 
 tioned by way of proof ; and there was quiet 
 laughter over the contests between Lord John and 
 Palmerston. " There is scarcely a pin to choose 
 between them," said Bright one evening, " but Lord 
 John is the honester of the two."
 
 XI BRIGHT ON DISRAELI 117 
 
 I think Bright never beHeved Lord John to be a 
 convinced Free Trader. He spoke as if he thought 
 the question had been taken up by the Liberal 
 statesman to trump Peel's trick. Of Peel he always 
 spoke highly. " He was far too good to be in the 
 Tory camp," he once said to me, "and that is why 
 they got rid of him." 
 
 From this it may be understood that he was not 
 much in love with Disraeli. I never heard him say 
 anything against the Conservative leader that indi- 
 cated personal dislike ; but he has quietly laughed 
 at him many times. He did not believe that 
 Disraeli was in earnest about anything save his 
 own advancement. 
 
 " He will serve our purposes," said Bright on 
 one occasion, " because he sees personal advance- 
 ment in it." 
 
 I asked if he did not think Disraeli was a 
 democrat. 
 
 "Yes," he replied; "he is, what you may hear 
 more of in the future, a Tory democrat. He has 
 no love for those who now lean upon him. He 
 is a Tory because he is a Jew ; and he is a democrat 
 for the same reason, and because he sees the shallow- 
 ness and worthlessness in a political sense of the 
 old Tory aristocratic government. He has ability 
 above most men of the time ; he is not scrupulous ; 
 and he will use his ability to lead his doubtful friends 
 into ways they have abhorred." 
 
 Let it be remembered that I am telling what 
 Bright said.
 
 Ii8 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone was frequently spoken of. Bright 
 never under-estimated his power. " He is an honest 
 man," said Bright; "he believes what he says. 
 The worst of it is that he too readily believes what 
 he wishes to believe." 
 
 "Is not that," I asked, "something like self- 
 deceit ? " 
 
 " No," was the reply. " Mr. Gladstone sees an 
 object which he thinks of vital importance, and he 
 turns in all directions for arguments in support of 
 it. He finds them, and he becomes unconscious of 
 anything outside of them. That is not self-deceit." 
 
 " But, surely," I said, " that is a dangerous quality 
 in a statesman — that he should only be able to see 
 one side of a question, and that the side he wishes 
 to see ? " 
 
 " No," said Bright, " I don't think it is. Every 
 man who has done anything great in the world has 
 been of that constitution. You cannot do a great 
 thing if you have doubts of your own position and 
 reasons." 
 
 "Still," I urged, "Mr. Gladstone might take a 
 course that was in the opinion of most people likely 
 to be ruinous, what then ? " 
 
 "Oh, then 'most people' would have to fight 
 him." He added, " I see your point and agree with 
 it. Mr. Gladstone is like fire. He is a good 
 servant and may be a bad master." 
 
 That Bright had a strong personal liking for Mr. 
 Gladstone I never could doubt. It seemed to me 
 that the religious feeling of the latter influenced 
 
 li
 
 XI BRIGHT ON TRADE UNIONS 119 
 
 Bright, and appealed to him, who was profoundly- 
 religious. But he admired Mr. Gladstone for other 
 reasons ; and on one occasion at least he stood by 
 his side, though he was more in accord with his 
 opponents. 
 
 It has sometimes been said of John Bright, that 
 outside his own questions — that is, the questions he 
 had made his own— he was more sentimental than 
 practical. That is not my opinion. We discussed 
 many questions — not Free Trade merely, for it was 
 virtually accomplished ; or extension of the fran- 
 chise, which was stirring the country ; but other 
 matters that affected the social as distinct from 
 the political welfare of the people. Bright never 
 allowed sentiment to affect his judgment on these 
 questions. For instance, as to Trade Unionism, he 
 always held that within what he regarded as its 
 proper sphere it was good. He refused to con- 
 demn it because of the excesses that in some places 
 had sprung out of Trade Unions. 
 
 " They have nothing to do with the cause of 
 Trade Unionism," he once said to me ; " they are due 
 to two things — defective knowledge and wicked 
 leaders. There is no reason why Trade Unions 
 should not help forward the industries of the 
 country. There are many reasons why they should. 
 As education spreads, as the best men come for- 
 ward as leaders, Trade Unions will become of great 
 benefit to the workmen and to the employers also." 
 
 "But," I said, "does not much depend upon 
 the leaders ? Trade Unionism is good in itself as
 
 I20 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 promoting the means by which workmen can pro- 
 vide against sickness, want of employment, and 
 possible oppression by employers. But if they go 
 outside these things, what then ? " 
 
 " I do not think they will go much outside these 
 things," said Bright; "though I think they may 
 try to use their influence for political purposes ; and 
 I don't know that I should blame them if they did, 
 though it might weaken them somewhat in their 
 proper sphere. They have a right, if not a duty, to 
 demand that the legislature shall not favour em- 
 ployers at their expense, or put them under any 
 improper restraints." M 
 
 " Still," I urged, " they may be induced to think 
 that they can by legislative means fasten their rules 
 and their wishes upon workmen who, without the 
 compulsion of law, would not consent to submit to 
 them." 
 
 " Perhaps they may," he replied. " I should not 
 be surprised if they did ; for it is the tendency of all 
 earnest men to try to get legislative support for 
 what they desire." 
 
 " How should you regard such attempts ? " I 
 asked. 
 
 " All would depend upon what was demanded. 
 If they asked for legislation to compel all workmen 
 to belong to their Unions, I should oppose them to 
 the utmost. They might seek to get a legal limita- 
 tion of the hours of work. If they did, I should 
 oppose them. I do not believe the Trade Unions 
 of skilled artisans, as we know them, will propose
 
 XI BRIGHT AS AN ORATOR 121 
 
 such laws; but if Unions arose among unskilled 
 workers, they might. Still, the stronger their Unions 
 the less excuse would there be for demands for 
 legislative interference. They could get what they 
 wanted for themselves without the interposition of 
 Parliament." 
 
 "You would not interfere with the Unions by 
 law ? " I asked. 
 
 " Not unless they sought to invade the liberty of 
 others. The whole matter is really very simple. 
 Remove restraints ; give freedom so that masters 
 and men can make their bargains without the inter- 
 ference of law. If this be done, and we are doing 
 it, the workmen can fight their own battles as well 
 as the masters." 
 
 This was indeed Bright's great principle. The 
 theory that all men are equal before the law, he 
 sought to make into hard fact. He would no more 
 have supported the proposals that have become so 
 common of late, to impose restraints upon men 
 capable of judging for themselves, than he would 
 have thought of fixing by law a certain wage for all 
 men. 
 
 No man in public life ever made more impression 
 upon me than Bright. To my thinking, he was the 
 greatest orator of his time. I place him distinctly 
 before Mr. Gladstone. I heard Bright in his early 
 Free-Trade days, and I heard him later, and I never 
 saw reason to alter the opinion just stated. I have 
 heard Mr. Gladstone speak on many occasions. 
 No man has ever succeeded better in impressing
 
 122 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 those who heard him. I remember on one occasion 
 — ^I think it was on a Wednesday afternoon — Mr. 
 Pope Hennessy, who then sat as a Conservative 
 for an Irish constituency, made an attack upon 
 Mr. Gladstone for his famous NeapoHtan letters. 
 Nothing of the sort had been expected. It was the 
 springing of a mine. Mr. Gladstone rose when 
 Hennessy sat down, and spoke in reply for more 
 than an hour. It was a magnificent speech. He 
 was cheered to the echo. So enthralling was the 
 speech, that men seemed to lean forward towards the 
 orator, and some of the reporters in the Gallery 
 forgot to make their usual " turns." 
 
 Yet to my thinking that speech was not so fine as 
 one made by Bright in the same place. If I am not 
 mistaken it was at a Saturday sitting. There was 
 a bad state of things in Ireland, and the House of 
 Commons had been asked to sit to pass a Bill 
 suspending habeas corpus, or something of the kind. 
 Mr. Gladstone was a member of the Government. 
 Bright rose in a crowded House, not to oppose the 
 Bill, but to implore the Government and Parliament 
 to try some other means of governing Ireland than 
 the one method of repression. He did not deny 
 that crime must be put down and punished ; but he 
 insisted that causes of discontent should also be 
 removed. It was in that speech he said he had 
 sometimes thought that if Ireland could have been 
 unmoored from her fastenings in the deep, and 
 floated two thousand miles farther to the west, how 
 different might have been the state of her people.
 
 XI BRIGHT IN LATER TIMES 123 
 
 It is safe to say that in the crowded House there 
 were not twenty men who did not think that Bright 
 was making mischief. Yet, as they Hstened, his 
 words told with them. There was no loud 
 cheering ; but from every quarter of the House 
 came increasing approvals. At the time it seemed 
 to me as if Bright's speech was like a mighty and 
 irresistible wind sweeping over the sea, keeping 
 down the great waves, but tearing from them inces- 
 sant sprays of spindrift. Under Mr. Gladstone the 
 waves rose. He was delighting those who heard 
 him. Bright was convincing them. I have never 
 doubted that from the speech on that Saturday 
 have sprung many, if not most, of the remedial 
 measures for Ireland that have been passed of late 
 years. 
 
 When I left the Morning Star, Bright at his 
 own instance wrote me a letter, the kindliness of 
 which I can never forget. Two or three years 
 afterwards I met him in Edinburgh one Sunday 
 morning as he was returning from the Friends' 
 Meeting-House to Newington House, where he was 
 staying with his brother - in - law — Mr. Duncan 
 M'Laren. We got into conversation, and he spoke 
 a good deal about the British policy in the East. 
 He no more liked the turn matters were then 
 taking in that direction, than he had liked the 
 Crimean War. Many times afterwards I met 
 him, and always found my admiration of him 
 strengthened. 
 
 The last time I spoke to Mr. Bright, we had met
 
 124 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xi 
 
 in the lobby of the House of Commons. It was 
 after Mr. Gladstone had adopted a Home Rule 
 policy. I shall not soon forget the warmth of 
 Bright's congratulations that he and I were in the 
 same camp against the Irish demands and Mr. 
 Gladstone's concession. " I am," he said to me, 
 "for full measure of justice to Ireland. Nay, I 
 think, when I remember our past misgovernment of 
 her, we might go beyond the strict claims of justice, 
 and bestow favours. But I am not for making 
 Ireland master of England, and I am not for hand- 
 ing over the government of Ireland and the interests 
 of her people to men who have apologised for crime, 
 if they have not encouraged it, and who have taught 
 Irishmen not to pay their debts and not to obey the 
 law."
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 
 Reform days — Lowe and Horsman — The " Ten Minutes Bill " — 
 Household suffrage — Mr. Gladstone and the Bill— The Tea-Room 
 Conference — Mr. Gladstone resigns leadership — Mr. Bright's 
 attitude — The Reform League — Mr. Beale, Bradlaugh, the 
 League, and Mr. Walpole — The agitators — Sir W. Adam on 
 popular movements — Garibaldi in London — The Princess of 
 Wales's arrival — Hard descriptive work — Disembarkation of the 
 Princess — Meeting of the Royal couple. 
 
 It is a matter of political history that in 1865-66 
 and 1867 the Reform agitation was at its height. 
 Lord Palmerston had died just after a general 
 election that had given him a large majority. Ex- 
 tension of the franchise had been played with for 
 years before. Lord John Russell had shed his 
 historic tears when his Bill had been withdrawn. 
 He and Mr Gladstone had taken up the reins when 
 Palmerston died. They brought forward a Reform 
 Bill, and it was defeated. Those were the times 
 when Robert Lowe made a great reputation as an 
 orator, which reputation he did not retain in after- 
 years as a financier. It was of him and Horsman, 
 and those who went with them, that Bright said they 
 made a political cave of Adullam. It was Lowe 
 and Horsman who were described by Bright as
 
 126 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 leaders that reminded him of a Skye terrier — you 
 could not tell which was the head and which the 
 tail. Horsman, by the bye, had previously been in 
 a Government as Secretary for Ireland, and had 
 resigned the post on the ground that it was an office 
 in which there was nothing to do ! If he was right 
 then, there has been a great change since. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone, then, had been defeated on the 
 question of Reform, and Lord Derby and Benjamin 
 Disraeli had come into office. They were in a 
 minority in the House of Commons, and the 
 agitation for Reform was increasing in the country. i 
 
 They could not avoid the question, and personally I 
 do not believe that Disraeli desired to avoid it. 
 Their early efforts are matters of history. Most 
 men who have read the records of that time, or who 
 lived through it, will remember the famous " Ten 
 Minutes Bill." I was in the Gallery of the House 
 of Commons and heard the speech made on the 
 introduction of that measure. When it was finished, 
 one of the older reporters said to me, "That is an 
 end of your friends. That measure will dish them." 
 My " friends " were the reformers. I ventured to 
 express doubts on the subject, and offered a wager 
 that the Bill would never be read a second time. It 
 never was. Disraeli had desired household suffrage. 
 He had prepared his Bill. It was objected to at a 
 Cabinet Council, and, on the pressure of some of his 
 colleagues, it had been altered in "ten minutes" to 
 the measure actually produced. He knew it would 
 not do ; but he had to convince his friends — to
 
 XII THE 'TEA-ROOM CONFERENCE' 127 
 
 " educate " them, as he afterwards said ; therefore he 
 went through the farce of presenting, as if it were 
 serious, a Bill that could not be accepted. 
 
 An immediate effect of this course was to intensify 
 the agitation in the country. About that agitation 
 I shall have something to say presently. It is not 
 too much to assert that in the House of Commons 
 the Bill was laughed out of existence ; and then 
 Disraeli produced his own Bill basing the franchise 
 in boroughs on household occupation. It had many 
 supposed safeguards in what Mr, Bright called 
 " fancy franchises." It is often forgotten that Mr. 
 Gladstone opposed the Bill, or rather sought to 
 have it converted into a rating franchise Bill. He 
 was the leader of the Liberal party in the House of 
 Commons, and he wished to move an amendment to 
 the Bill which would have destroyed its principle 
 and greatly narrowed its scope. Then it was that 
 the "Tea- Room Conference" was held. Several 
 members of the Liberal party desired household 
 suffrage. They said, " Let us take the Bill in 
 principle. It will give household suffrage. We 
 can knock away the ' fancy franchises ' and make it 
 what we desire." This view prevailed. They 
 refused to support Mr. Gladstone's amendment, and 
 in disgust he threw up the leadership of the party. 
 Mr. Crawford, one of the members for the City of 
 London, was the medium of communication between 
 Mr. Gladstone and the party ; and in the end Mr. 
 Gladstone resumed his position on the Tea- Room 
 party's terms.
 
 128 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 If these sketches were in the nature of poHtical 
 essays or discussions, much might be said as to this 
 incident, which had a counterpart in the affair of 
 1874-75. But it is no business of mine here to 
 express opinions on party questions. The incident 
 is mentioned because it helps to make intelHgible 
 much that follows. 
 
 At that time Mr. Bright stood by Mr. Gladstone, 
 though assuredly he thought him wrong. As I 
 have before said, Bright did not believe in Mr. 
 Disraeli's honesty of purpose, and he did believe in 
 that of Mr. Gladstone. That is to say, he believed 
 that throuo^h Mr. Gladstone at the head of the 
 Liberal party a more effective Reform Bill would be 
 got than through Disraeli. Events showed that he 
 was wrong, at least on the latter point. His 
 influence with the Mo7'ning Star was not allowed to 
 interfere seriously with its attitude. It was for 
 household suffrage ; and, while it found excuses for 
 Mr. Gladstone, it did not disguise its real sympathy 
 with the Tea-Room men. The office was, indeed, 
 one of the consulting places of those who were 
 managing the chief Reform agitation in London, 
 and there I saw several of them. 
 
 The Reform League, as it was called, had for its 
 chairman a Mr. Edmond Beale. He was a barrister, 
 and in later days he was made a County Court Judge. 
 At the time he would have thought it an insult to 
 be told that he was only the figure-head of the 
 movement. I thought him rather a dull man, who 
 was very much in earnest about Reform and who
 
 XII THE HYDE PARK RIOT 129 
 
 could make speeches that at least served to pass 
 time. He did not manaoe the movement : it 
 managed him. There were other and, I was going 
 to say. less scrupulous men who kept up the 
 agitation in a skilful manner. They knew what 
 they were doing, or what they meant to do, and his 
 movements were arrano^ed for him. That he was 
 honest I never doubted ; neither did any one who 
 knew him. Of course he thought he was riding the 
 whirlwind, and he also thought he was directing the 
 storm. He attended Hyde Park meetings, and 
 made speeches, and was denounced by those who 
 did not believe in the agitation. It will be re- 
 membered that one of the events of that agitation 
 was the throwing down of the Hyde Park railings. 
 Meetings in the Park had been prohibited, A 
 crowd marched in procession to the Park. The 
 railings were thrown down, the crowd entered, and 
 there was some scuffling with the police. I have 
 never been sure that the throwinof down of the 
 railings was premeditated. My belief is that it was 
 an accident. The crowd was great, the pressure 
 tremendous, and the railings rotten. Hence what 
 happened. 
 
 In connection with this incident a story was told 
 me by one who is, at the time I write, a member of 
 the House of Commons, and has been for nearly 
 twenty years. He had good means of knowing the 
 doings of the " inner circle " of the Reform League, 
 and it is on his authority that I give the story : — 
 
 Charles Bradlaugh was a member of the "inner 
 
 K
 
 I30 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 circle," So was the Baxter Langley whom I have 
 mentioned in an earHer chapter. There were five 
 or six others more or less like unto Langley. They 
 had resolved that there should be a riot in London, 
 so as to convince Ministers that there must be no 
 trifling with the question of Reform. One feature 
 of the demonstration was to be the firing of London 
 in various places. The whole matter had been 
 arranged. Greek fire, or something of the kind, 
 was to be carried by chosen men in a procession 
 to Hyde Park, and was to be used when conflict 
 with the police arose. 
 
 Bradlaugh became alarmed about this, and he 
 went to Mr. Walpole, who was then Home Secretary, 
 and divulged the plot to him. The good and wise 
 old statesman did not rush into extreme measures. 
 He informed the impeached men that he had heard 
 from Bradlaugh what they proposed to do. He 
 warned them that he would take steps to thwart 
 their schemes ; and that if any fire took place he 
 would have every man of them arrested and made 
 responsible. They were disgusted, and they de- 
 nounced Bradlaugh for what he had done. There 
 was no fire. Mr. Walpole had disposed soldiers 
 and police so that there was no serious riot. 
 
 That is the story as it was told to me, and I have 
 no shadow of reason to doubt that it is true in all 
 respects. 
 
 Many of the more or less prominent leaders of 
 the agitation were not, as I thought, honestly intent 
 on getting an extension of the franchise as a means
 
 XII THE REFORM AGITATION 131 
 
 of benefiting the country. There was a flavour of 
 self about all they did which to me was not satisfy- 
 ing. Perhaps it is the same in all agitations. 
 
 On one occasion a politician, then prominent and 
 now in retirement, was discussing this very point 
 with me. Perhaps I was more enthusiastic, if not 
 also more credulous, than I am now. I expressed 
 the opinion that in really great popular agitations 
 the best men took the lead. " The cream always 
 comes to the top," I said. " So does the scum," 
 was his pithy rejoinder. He was in favour of the 
 agitation because he sincerely desired extension of 
 the franchise ; but he regarded many of those who 
 put themselves forward in the movement as nothing 
 more or better than useful tools. 
 
 In an earlier chapter it has been told how an 
 industrious penny-a-liner made " copy " and money 
 out of the sayings and doings of men who called 
 themselves this "League" or that "Association." 
 So far as I know, they received no direct help from 
 the Reform League ; but assuredly they were part 
 of its stage army. Through reports in the papers 
 they marched on with trumpets blaring and flags 
 flying, now as this body, now as that. The noise 
 they made was great, and people thought there must 
 be strong popular opinion behind them. To me, 
 thinking over it all since, the imposture, for it was 
 nothing else, has seemed infinitely amusing. 
 
 Once I was discussing the matter with Mr., 
 afterwards Sir William Adam, who died Governor 
 of Madras. No one knew more than he did of the
 
 132 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 secret springs of agitation. He was at the time the 
 whip of the Liberal party. 
 
 " What a sham most of these so-called popular 
 agitations are," I had said. 
 
 "In one sense they are," he replied. "In another 
 and a most important sense they are not. You may 
 take it for granted that people who do not suffer 
 from actual and visible oppression will not of them- 
 selves rise in agitation. A political reform is not 
 enough to stir them. They may think it desirable 
 if they think of it at all, but they will not of them- 
 selves insist that it shall be granted. Therefore 
 some one, who sees the good it will effect, must 
 move them." 
 
 "All that is obvious," I said, "but it does not 
 prove the necessity of sham Associations and clam- 
 orous false pretences." 
 
 " Oh yes, it does," he replied ; " though I should 
 scarcely use the descriptions you give of the means 
 adopted to rouse the country in 1866-67. Mankind, 
 and especially British mankind, are so constituted 
 that they will follow the strongest battalions. Of 
 course there are many exceptions ; but that is the 
 rule. If you make them believe that there is a 
 general uprising for a particular object, depend upon 
 it there will be a general uprising. Sham Associa- 
 tions become real, and before long the movement is 
 actually what it professes to be. Making believe, 
 and especially making other people believe, is a vital 
 part of the politician's armoury." 
 
 " If that be adopted as a general principle," I
 
 XII MR. ADAM ON AGITATION 133 
 
 said, " it must apply as much to bad objects as to 
 those that are good." 
 
 " No doubt it does," replied Mr. Adam. " Do 
 you suppose that no bad objects have been furthered 
 by what I suppose you would call manufactured 
 agitation ? The worst of the method is that it can 
 be adapted to bad objects as well as to good ones. 
 But that is no reason why those who have a good 
 object should not use it. You might as well say 
 that I ought not to ride in a railway carriage because 
 it can be used by card-sharpers." 
 
 I was not convinced of the validity of this justi- 
 fication, but that it is held in very common belief 
 no one can doubt. How else can we account for 
 many of the phenomena of political agitation that 
 we have witnessed in these later days .'* The 
 appearance of general feeling, and not the reality, 
 has effected many changes in our laws and institu- 
 tions which have not been of unmixed advantage to 
 the country. Perhaps there will be more in the 
 future. 
 
 These political moralisings have taken me far 
 away from my Morning Star experiences. Let me 
 glance back at more of them. For some reason, 
 though I was sub-editor of the paper, I was 
 frequently asked to write descriptive reports of 
 public events. As a descriptive writer I was 
 present at the funeral of the Prince Consort, as 
 previously I had been present at the funeral of the 
 Queen's mother, the Duchess of Kent. I witnessed 
 the arrival of Garibaldi in London. Only on one
 
 134 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Other occasion did I ever see such enormous crowds 
 as had gathered to welcome him. He alighted at 
 the Vauxhall Station, and a carriage was to convey 
 him along the streets to the Duke of Sutherland's 
 house in Cleveland Square. There was to be a 
 procession of carriages, and of course the pressmen 
 had one or two. It was to be an easy ride to the 
 Duke's house ! Vain expectation. Garibaldi was 
 late in arriving. The procession was late in 
 starting. The crowds were enormous. Nothing 
 the police could do could prevent the enthusiastic 
 people from breaking in on Garibaldi's carriage and 
 between it and the other carriages. The procession 
 was broken up. Hours were spent in getting to 
 Cleveland Square, and some of the carriages never 
 did get there. But the demonstration was magnifi- 
 cent. The enthusiasm of the people knew no 
 bounds. Every house along the route was decorated. 
 Every window was occupied. Almost every roof 
 had its onlookers. Men cheered till they were 
 hoarse. Women waved handkerchiefs and flags. 
 It is not wonderful that Garibaldi was delighted 
 with his reception. 
 
 Yet, a few days afterwards, there were difficulties 
 arising out of the visit. Some foreign Powers were 
 angry, or professed to be, that Garibaldi — soldier of 
 fortune, conspirator, and what not — should be treated 
 so royally. Uneasiness arose among the friends of 
 Garibaldi and Mazzini. There was a meeting at 
 the office of the Morning Star, at which Mr. Joseph 
 Cowen and three or four others were present. They
 
 XII ARRIVAL OF THE PRINCESS OF WALES 135 
 
 were full of the " intrigues of Palmerston " to get rid 
 of Garibaldi. They professed to know all about it, 
 and spoke bitterly. I do not believe they knew 
 much for certain, but they thought they did. They 
 could do nothing ; and nothing, so far as I know, was 
 done. But Garibaldi's visit was shortened. 
 
 It is in reference to his visit that a story is told 
 of Lord Palmerston. Ministers were troubled as to 
 what they should do to avoid complications arising 
 out of Garibaldi's welcome in this country. " Let us 
 get him to marry the Duchess of Sutherland," said 
 Palmerston. " But," objected one of the Ministers, 
 "he has a wife already." "Oh," was Palmerston's 
 reply, " we'll get Gladstone to explain her away ! " 
 
 When the Princess Alexandra of Denmark came 
 to E norland to be married to the Prince of Wales, 
 the demonstrations of enthusiasm were in excess of 
 those that greeted Garibaldi. The crowds were as 
 o-reat, and the other marks of delight and welcome 
 were greater. Even as to the crowds there was, in 
 one respect, no comparison between those that 
 welcomed Garibaldi and those that welcomed the 
 Princess. Garibaldi only travelled in London from 
 Vauxhall to Cleveland Square. The Princess 
 travelled from the Bricklayers' Arms Station on 
 the Kent Road to Paddington. The length of 
 Garibaldi's line of march might be two miles ; that 
 of the Princess could not be less than six. At any 
 given point, the crowd was as great in the one 
 case as in the other ; but think of the additional 
 miles of people who greeted the Princess !
 
 136 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 The coming of the Princess is fixed in my mind 
 because it was the occasion of as hard a piece of 
 work as ever I did. About ten days before the 
 day of arrival, I was asked to take the matter in 
 hand. The time of arrival, the line of route, and 
 other matters had been settled. What was asked 
 of me was that I should go to all the points of 
 interest along the route, note the preparations, 
 and write such a consecutive account of them as 
 would, with a few words from men stationed along 
 the line, make a long report of the event. It was to 
 be used in that way in the Eventing Stm', and the 
 facts in it were to be used by different reporters 
 of the procession, in the Morning Star. 
 
 The day of arrival was a Saturday. I began my 
 task of note-taking on the previous Monday. I was 
 at work as sub-editor till three o'clock every morning. 
 I lived two miles away from the office. By nine 
 o'clock in the morning I had to be out on my 
 mission, and the work of that mission usually 
 occupied me till four or five o'clock in the afternoon. 
 Then I began my sub-editing again. In the five 
 days up to Friday night I went to Windsor at the 
 one end and Gravesend at the other. I noted 
 all the decorations at Paddington and Bricklayers' 
 Arms, and on every foot of the way between. On 
 Friday evening, a colleague took up the sub-editing, 
 and I set to work to write out my notes. I am 
 afraid to say how many columns I wrote in the next 
 nine or ten hours. It was four o'clock in the morning 
 when I had done. Then I went home with no time
 
 XII THE ARRIVAL AT GRAVESEND 137 
 
 to sleep ; for I had to be down at London Bridge or 
 some pier near there early in the morning to get on 
 board a steamboat chartered to take a party of us 
 down to Gravesend to witness and describe the 
 disembarkation. 
 
 That was one of the pleasantest sights I ever 
 witnessed. Men-of-war had not then become ugly, 
 kettle-like structures. They had masts and yards, 
 and sailors who could stand on the yards. Some of 
 them were lying off Gravesend. The yacht on 
 which the Princess had crossed the sea was moored 
 to the pier. When the train arrived bringing the 
 Prince to meet his bride, the ships of war fired 
 salutes, the yards were manned, fresh bursts of 
 bunting rolled out, and cheers, as the reporters say, 
 " rent the air." It was a spectacle to be remembered. 
 The big ships towered up ; the river swarmed with 
 steamboats ; the steamboats swarmed with passen- 
 gers. There was not a point from which anything 
 could be seen even with a telescope, that was not 
 occupied. The crowds cheered as the men-of-war's 
 men cheered. Handkerchiefs, flags, anything and 
 everything that would make a show, were waved 
 and flaunted hither and thither. The colouring was 
 superb in its glow ; for women had donned their 
 best and brightest, and men had got out of sombre 
 clothing. 
 
 Fine as all this was, one incident remained which 
 for me was the most impressive. Our steamboat 
 had floated to the side of the royal yacht, which had 
 a deck-house or saloon the sides of which were glass.
 
 138 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xii 
 
 Thus we in the boat could and did see what passed 
 in the saloon. The Prince boarded the yacht and 
 entered the saloon. The Princess came from her 
 cabin to meet him, and in an instant she was locked 
 in his arms and being kissed by him. We are often 
 told that marriages of princes are affairs of policy 
 with which personal affection has nothing to do. 
 Here was an exception. The demonstrations of joy 
 in all directions were not mere fashions of loyalty. 
 They were not rejoicings over the union of monarch- 
 ical interests. They were the glad recognition 
 of the fact, universally accepted, and proved by the 
 incident I have described, that the union was one 
 of hearts. 
 
 When the Princess had disembarked, our steam- 
 boat crossed to Tilbury, and we took rail to Fen- 
 church Street. As I passed under London Bridge on 
 my way to the newspaper office, the Royal Procession 
 had not arrived, but the crowds assembled were 
 enormous. Late that afternoon I left the office in a 
 downpour of rain. No cab could I get ; and when 
 I arrived home I was perhaps the most weary man 
 in the three kingdoms.
 
 CHAPTER XIII 
 
 The paper duty — Its abolition — The Star's diseases — " Readings by 
 Starhght " — Richard Whiteing — Severance from the Star — John 
 Gorrie — Last days of the Star. 
 
 Since the days of which I have been writing there 
 has been an enormous growth in the value and im- 
 portance of most newspaper property. The penny 
 morning paper has become a prosperous institution. 
 One reason for this is not far to seek. Thirty-six 
 years ago there was a heavy duty on paper. A 
 short time previously the advertisement duty had 
 been repealed, and the impressed stamp, which 
 formerly had been obligatory on all newspapers, 
 had been made optional, for postal purposes only. 
 It is now altogether abolished. The paper duty 
 raised the price of paper not merely to the extent 
 of the duty, but by narrowing the field of manu- 
 facture. High-priced paper was not compatible with 
 low-priced newspapers. There were several sold 
 at a penny ; but they depended solely upon their 
 advertisements for their profit, and there was no 
 margin for profit on circulation. The result was 
 that newspaper enterprise was crippled ; the public 
 were deprived of news of great interest to them ;
 
 I40 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 and, as a matter of fact, the cause of education 
 suffered. 
 
 In i860 Mr. Gladstone, being Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer, proposed the abolition of the paper 
 duty, and carried his Bill through the House of 
 Commons. It had been opposed on the ground 
 that there were other taxes pressing on the food 
 or comforts of the people that ought to be placed 
 before it for repeal. The House of Lords took 
 this view and rejected the Bill. Instantly from all 
 the penny daily newspapers there went up a cry 
 against the House of Lords. What could be more 
 natural? In the Star there was printed every day 
 in large type above the leading articles the state- 
 ment that so many thousands of pounds were being 
 extracted that day from the pockets of the people 
 on the sole authority of the House of Lords. It 
 was not quite true ; for nobody pretended that the 
 penny newspapers would be sold at less than a 
 penny if the tax were repealed. It was their pro- 
 prietors, then, rather than the taxpayers generally 
 who were suffering. But it was a good weapon 
 for its purpose, and that purpose was good. 
 
 It is a matter of history that the next year Mr. 
 Gladstone again carried his proposal, and by making 
 it a " tack " to the general finance Bill, compelled 
 the Lords to pass it. The result has surpassed all 
 expectations. Paper can now be bought for little 
 more than the amount of the duty then levied. 
 Cheap newspapers are printed in thousands in place 
 of hundreds. Every city and town in the United
 
 XIII THE TAXES ON KNOWLEDGE 141 
 
 Kingdom of any importance has its two or three 
 or more daily papers. The production of paper has 
 enormously increased, and thousands of additional 
 workers have been employed in the industry. It 
 is not for me to estimate the beneficial educative 
 results. I believe them to be enormous. 
 
 While the agitation for the removal of the 
 stamp duty and the paper duty was going on, 
 the obnoxious imposts were always spoken of as 
 "taxes on knowledge." It was a correct descrip- 
 tion of them : for surely, in so far as knowledge 
 is obtained through the medium of printed matter, 
 to tax the paper upon which that matter is printed 
 is to tax knowledge. I do not believe that any 
 newspaper worked more strenuously for the removal 
 of the paper duty than did the Star, and I do not 
 believe that any newspaper did better service in 
 the cause. I am speaking of newspapers in Lon- 
 don. In a previous chapter I have spoken of the 
 efforts of some newspapers in the country, and 
 especially of the efforts of Michael James Whitty 
 in Liverpool. There was a difference. He fought 
 mainly for the removal of the impressed stamp 
 upon newspapers ; the Star was fighting for the 
 removal of the paper duty. It had, I think, only 
 come into existence on the abolition of the stamp, 
 which was the worst of all the taxes on newspapers, 
 though all — advertisement duty, stamp duty, and 
 paper duty — were bad. The stamp had been at one 
 time sevenpence, subsequently fourpence, and finally 
 a penny. When it was a penny it carried a news-
 
 142 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 paper not more than a certain size through the post 
 free. But every newspaper had to be stamped 
 whether it was to go through the post or not. 
 Thus the charge was a clear addition to the cost 
 of the paper. The purchaser had to pay, say, two- 
 pence for a pennyworth of news, and the State 
 took half the money. It was a heavy toll, and of 
 course it made large circulations impossible. 
 
 With the abolition of the paper duty there was 
 a chance that the Morning Star might be profit- 
 able, and I believe it was profitable in two or three 
 years. But it had a disease that was fatal. Perhaps 
 I should say it had a complication of disorders. 
 First there was the ill-omened union with the Dial 
 proprietary. There was frequent, almost constant, 
 friction. The policy of the paper, its news — 
 every department — was complained of by the Dial 
 directors, who could show to their shareholders 
 neither adequate profit nor such proofs of right- 
 eousness in a newspaper as they had promised. 
 Perhaps there were not many shareholders who 
 complained, though there may have been some. 
 But the Reverend Directors were hurt in a tender 
 place. They said that their "consciences" would 
 not permit them to sanction such a newspaper 
 as the Star was made. With them it was the 
 application of what has since come to be spoken of 
 as the "Nonconformist conscience" to journalism. 
 No doubt they were greatly moved. They had 
 given assurances that the righteousness they ap- 
 proved was compatible with newspaper prosperity.
 
 XIII THE DISEASES OF THE STAR 143 
 
 They had foretold Puritanism in print accompanied 
 by dividends in cash. They had got neither the 
 one nor the other. 
 
 I do not want to be misunderstood. The Sta7' 
 was a well-conducted newspaper. It taught what 
 it believed to be the truth. It countenanced no 
 immorality ; it preached none. But it sought to 
 give the news of the day, including the sporting 
 news ; and the Reverend Directors could not 
 stomach this, when there were no dividends. 
 Perhaps their argument was not altogether un- 
 sound. On the part of the management of the 
 paper it was urged that not to give the news, 
 including sporting news, would be to deprive the 
 paper of all chance of profit, and it could not do 
 the good it was doing in other directions if it lost 
 money. In short, the argument so far was that the 
 pill of good teaching should be sugared with the 
 iniquity of horse-racing news. The answer of the 
 Reverend Directors was in effect — " If you sold 
 more pills because of the sugaring, something might 
 be said for your argument. But you don't. You 
 give almost as much sugar as pill ; yet the returns 
 are nothing. You have not even the comfort of 
 profit to solace you in the sin." All this was 
 true ; though as a matter of morality it might be 
 questioned. 
 
 The truth was that practically there was no head 
 to the paper after Mr. Lucas died. The manage- 
 ment had fallen into the hands of Mr. Alfred 
 Hutchinson Dymond, who had been Mr. Lucas's
 
 144 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 assistant in that department. He was a capable 
 man — more capable perhaps under another than as 
 himself the head. But I believe he was utterly 
 discouraged by his difficulties with the directors. 
 He could not open out new fields because of those 
 difficulties, and he seemed to become content to let 
 everything in connection with the paper move on 
 old lines. All the time other penny dailies were 
 pushing forward, and of course the Star was left 
 behind. I verily believe that if it had been 
 managed with spirit it would have taken a first 
 place among the metropolitan newspapers. As it 
 was, there was steady loss of blood. 
 
 If I remember aright, it was before Mr. Lucas 
 died that an effort was made to give the Mortiing 
 Star an impulse by the introduction of a new 
 feature. This was the publication on every 
 Monday morning of a column of gossip about 
 society and literature and things in general. I 
 do not remember who started the idea, but it was 
 acted upon, and Mr. Edmund Yates, then in the 
 Post Office, and winning, outside his official work, 
 an increasing literary reputation, was invited to write 
 the gossip, and consented. This weekly article was 
 headed "The Flaneur." It was well done. Yates 
 could not have done a thing of the kind badly. He 
 was of Bohemia. He knew everybody. He heard 
 everything. Thus he made his weekly article light, 
 bright, gossipy, and cynical. I have sometimes 
 thought that he may have found in it the root 
 idea of the World, which he founded subsequently,
 
 XIII 'THE FLANEUR' 
 
 M5 
 
 or helped to found, and which made him a rich 
 man. After a time increasing engagements com- 
 pelled Yates to give up "The Flaneur." It had 
 been successful, and the desirableness of keeping it 
 up was admitted. \\' ho was to succeed Yates ? 
 Eventually it was put into the hands of Mr. Hain 
 Friswell. He had written some books, the very 
 names of which are now forgotten. He was a dull 
 dog, who wrote without much regard for grammar. 
 That might have been pardoned if the quality of 
 his writing had been good. It was rubbish. Com- 
 pared with the writing of Yates it was as Zoedone 
 to Heidsieck. Indeed there was more effervescence 
 in Zoedone than in his productions. One thing 
 he did better than Yates — his handwriting was good. 
 Yates wrote detestably : Friswell wrote like print. 
 The printers said prayers backward for Yates : they 
 counted Friswell among the angelic host. It may 
 be suggested with much confidence that the reading 
 public took an opposite view — they put Friswell 
 below, and Yates high above. 
 
 Another effort to galvanise the property of the 
 Star into prosperous life was made in connection 
 with the Evening Star. A series of essays and 
 short stories was begun in it under the title of 
 " Readings by Starlight." Some really capital 
 papers were written for this column ; and I strongly 
 suspect that certain features of present-day London 
 journalism had their origin or suggestion in these 
 " Readings." One discovery was made as soon as 
 they were begun ; it was that there need be no fear 
 
 L
 
 146 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 as to want of material. There were plenty of young 
 fellows who thought they could write stories or 
 essays, and experience showed that they were not 
 mistaken. To my thinking, the most original of 
 them was Richard Whiteing. There was a strong- 
 vein of humour in him. What he wrote showed 
 that he saw the seamy side of society, and could 
 laugh at it and pity it. No man in my time has 
 ever given so much promise of originality and literary 
 talent as Richard Whiteing gave then. Why that 
 promise has not been fulfilled I cannot say. White- 
 ing subsequently wrote a book — he may have written 
 more than one ; but if he has done so, they have not 
 come my way. If I remember rightly, in that book 
 he had a socialistic Utopia, or something of the kind. 
 Possibly his undoubted genius may have been 
 swamped in a socialistic bog, as the genius of other 
 men has been swamped. Anyway, I lost sight of 
 Whiteing for many years, until recently I heard by 
 chance that he was engaged in journalism. 
 
 Another of the contributors to the " Readings by 
 Starlight" was Archibald Forbes. He had not then 
 become a war correspondent. He had not done 
 much writing. But he showed that he could write, 
 and write well. Still another of the writers was Mr. 
 George Manville Fenn, who produced short stories. 
 He has written long novels since then. Justin 
 McCarthy wrote some of the articles, and there were 
 other writers whose names I do not recall. Their 
 efforts were vain. The Evening Star could not be 
 galvanised into prosperous life by " Readings," clever
 
 XIII SEVERANCE OF OLD TIES 147 
 
 as most of them were. The evil was too deep- 
 rooted. Nothing but a new birth could save the 
 Stars. They were still bright for those who saw 
 them ; but comparatively few did see them. There 
 was no harmony in the management : there was no 
 active head to the paper, though M'Carthy was 
 recognised as the Editor. But he was thinking of 
 other fields of work, and he could have little heart 
 in what he was doing. 
 
 It was at this time — early in 1868 — that the 
 opportunity came for me. The suggestion was 
 made from Edinburgh that I should become assistant 
 to Mr. Alexander Russel, Editor of the Scotsman. 
 It was what I wished. The offer made to me was 
 accepted, and my connection with the Star was 
 severed. 
 
 There was much that was painful in the severance 
 of what had become old and dear ties. Some of my 
 earlier colleagues of whom I have spoken were dead. 
 But, as I have just said, Justin M'Carthy remained, 
 and Chesson ; and we had been joined by Mr., now 
 Sir E. R. Russell, Mr. John Gorrie, and others. 
 Never were better comrades than these. Rarely 
 could be found abler men, taking them all round. I 
 think that in his capacity to produce good work, 
 Russell is one of the ablest newspaper men I have 
 ever known. John Gorrie had been an advocate in 
 Edinburgh. He had unwisely neglected his pro- 
 fession to dabble in municipal and imperial politics. 
 He had spent his money on a newspaper which 
 failed. He was known to Mr. Bright through Mr.
 
 148 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Duncan M'Laren, on whose side he had been in 
 municipal and other matters ; and Mr. Bright intro- 
 duced him to the Star. If he could have subordin- 
 ated secondary considerations to those of first 
 importance, he would have been a successful man. 
 Being what he was, he seemed to be doomed to 
 eventual failure. Through Mr. Bright's influence he 
 was appointed Attorney-General of Mauritius. In 
 a short time he was promoted to a puisne judgeship 
 there. Then he was promoted to be Chief- Justice 
 of Fiji, where he did splendid work in connection 
 with the settlement of the land question. After- 
 wards he went as Chief- Justice to Trinidad, and was 
 subsequently removed to another post in the West 
 Indies. There some dispute arose; a commission 
 of inquiry was ordered, and I believe it reported 
 against Gorrie, who had long before been made Sir 
 John Gorrie. He came home to defend him_self, and 
 died soon after he landed. I had a great liking for 
 him. There were not many questions on which we 
 agreed ; but he was a gentleman, and differed from 
 you in the spirit of a gentleman. The last time I 
 saw him he was home from the West Indies on 
 furlough. He had earned the right to retire, and he 
 thought that he might be put upon the Scottish 
 Bench. I did not think so, and told him what I 
 thought. Subsequently he was ready to become a 
 candidate for the St. Andrews Burghs. It was his 
 great desire to get into Parliament. But in the last 
 letter I had from him he told me that the people of 
 the Island where he was wished him to remain with
 
 XIII THE END OF THE STAR 149 
 
 them for some time longer, and in their interest he 
 gave up hopes of Parliament for the time. The 
 melancholy end of it all I have told. 
 
 About the time when I was leaving the Star, 
 M'Carthy resolved to leave it. The paper, I 
 believe, got rid of the Dial incubus and became 
 absolutely the property of Mr. Rawson of Man- 
 chester, whose name has been previously mentioned. 
 It was under him that Mr. John Morley was in- 
 duced to become Editor of the paper, only to see it 
 extinguished as a separate entity some three months 
 afterwards.
 
 CHAPTER XIV 
 
 The Scotsma7t — Its history as a feature of British journaUsm — Its 
 foundation — Tory domination of the time — A subservient Press 
 — The ideas and promises of the founders — Charles M'Laren — 
 William Ritchie — John Ritchie — The prospectus — Early days 
 and difficulties — Progress of the paper in size, in circulation, and 
 in advertisements — The penny. 
 
 In an earlier chapter I have mentioned the fact 
 that I was the first correspondent of the Scotsman in 
 London in connection with " special wire " work. 
 There will be more to tell on that matter presently. 
 It is only recalled here because it enables me to say 
 that, in 1868 when I came to Edinburgh, the Scotsman 
 was well known to me. In truth it had been known 
 to me long years before any thought of association 
 with it arose. In Hull I had read it : in London it 
 had been regarded by me as the best index of Scottish 
 political feeling, and as the best newspaper that came 
 to hand. It was not altogether as a novice in its 
 affairs that I joined it in Edinburgh. At that time 
 it was forging ahead, and giving abundant proofs of 
 the vitality and force that directed some newspapers 
 out of London. I do not think it would be possible 
 to find better evidence that the history of London 
 journalism alone is not in any sense a history of
 
 CHAP. XIV FOUNDATION OF THE SCOTSMAN 151 
 
 British journalism, than is to be found in the story 
 of the Scotsman. It was founded as a political and 
 literary newspaper : it has never changed its political 
 character ; it has ever kept literature in the forefront. 
 But it has done far more ; and I propose to show 
 some of the things it has done. If I, who have been 
 so long its child and its guide, feel proud of it, who 
 can wonder ? 
 
 The Scotsma7i\i2iS founded in January 181 7. Its 
 first number appeared on the 25th of that month. 
 It had been planned some months before, to secure 
 a hearing for protests against the heavy oppression 
 of Toryism, which then bore even more heavily on 
 Scotland than on England. There were newspapers, 
 but they dare not call their souls their own. Perhaps 
 it is a large assumption to speak of souls in connec- 
 tion with them. They had bodies which were 
 usually prostrate at the feet of those who carried on 
 the policy and the iron rule of the first Lord 
 Melville. Not a spark of independence ever 
 glimmered for a moment in their pages. The Tories 
 of that day were not bad fellows. It is told of them 
 by a competent authority that they were very good 
 fellows socially. How could it be otherwise when 
 they numbered among them Walter Scott, and 
 many others who, without his genius, emulated his 
 good fellowship? It was their Toryism that was hard 
 and unbending. It was their theory of government 
 that made them oppressors. The earth might be 
 the Lord's, but the fulness thereof, and especially 
 the offices thereof, were for those who already
 
 152 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 possessed good things and held to Toryism. It was 
 in the pohtical sphere what Roman Catholicism is 
 in the spiritual sphere : it was the truth, and nobody 
 must be allowed to question it. 
 
 Of course corruption followed in the train of 
 Toryism — became part of it indeed. There is room 
 for the exercise of charity here. Probably those 
 who enjoyed the fruits of corruption never thought 
 it wrong. They knew of no moral law that prohibited 
 Toryism from getting what it could, wherever getting 
 was possible. Therefore they took what they could, 
 and were resolute in their prosecution and persecution 
 of anybody and everybody who did not admit that 
 Toryism was a divine revelation, and that, being the 
 child of Heaven, it ought to have all the good things 
 of Earth. In a leading article in the Scotsman in 
 1867, in celebration of its jubilee, it was written — 
 " The men of the present day are not able even to 
 imagine the things of the former day. A sordid, 
 servile, and self-seeking Toryism . . . was every- 
 where predominant, insolent and merciless." To 
 have said less would have been to palter with the 
 truth. 
 
 Previous to 181 7 there was practically no right of 
 public meeting in Scotland for those who were not 
 of the ruling party. If at any time two or three 
 were gathered together to protest against misgovern- 
 ment, what they said was not reported, and they 
 were as often as not prosecuted. The Tory idea of 
 the way to keep political rights and political know- 
 ledge from the people was to silence speakers, or to
 
 XIV TORY DOMINATION 
 
 '3J 
 
 suppress what they said. The newspapers of course 
 were Tory. They reported nothing that had not the 
 hall-mark of Toryism upon it. In short, a black 
 cloud of political oppression brooded over the country, 
 and threatened to draw every atom of true manliness 
 out of the people. It was at this point that the Scots- 
 man came into existence. The Tories, as we shall see, 
 hated it, but they professed to despise it and to speak 
 of it with the contempt that strong men feel for 
 vicious weaklings. It was but a feeble light at first ; 
 but it was strong enough to break through the Tory 
 clouds. It grew and grew ; and before many years 
 were over, the clouds had disappeared, and men were 
 revelling in light and freedom. 
 
 Not one of those who founded the Scots7nan could 
 have dreamed of the great work it would do in the 
 political sphere. The very idea of starting the news- 
 paper was not generated by any direct act of political 
 oppression. In August or September 1816, Mr. 
 William Ritchie, a Solicitor of the Supreme Courts, 
 practising in Edinburgh, had been requested by 
 friends and clients to draw up a statement in regard 
 to the mismanagement of the Royal Infirmary. He 
 complied. Of the facts there could be no doubt. 
 They were set out with fairness and moderation, but 
 with perfect plainness. The conductors of the local 
 newspapers were asked to publish the document. 
 They refused. Did not the statement reflect upon 
 some of the Tories of the day } and were such 
 reflections likely to be tolerated? What was the 
 mismanagement of the Royal Infirmary compared
 
 154 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 with the evil of exposure of the mismanagers ? I 
 have heard people argue in this fashion even in 
 these later days — people who are not Tories, at 
 least who say they are not, but make loud professions 
 of Liberalism. 
 
 The attempt to burke the statement seems to 
 have been too much for Mr. Charles M'Laren. He 
 was a friend of Mr. Ritchie's, whose tastes were in 
 many respects akin to his own. At the time, he was 
 engaged in the Customs department of the Public 
 Service. He was about t,^ or 34 years of age, and 
 a man whose reading, which had been extensive, 
 and whose thinking, which had been vigorous, had 
 made him an ardent believer in the principles of 
 constitutional liberty. He resented the hurtful 
 domination of Toryism : he believed in well-ordered 
 liberty. He had special tastes — as for mechanics, 
 geology, and other branches of science. He was a 
 clear thinker, and, as he was to prove, a clear and 
 vigorous writer. His humour was not demonstrative. 
 He it was who, years later, in conversation with Mr. 
 J. R. Findlay, confessed that he joked with difficulty. 
 Cockney humourists have caught up the saying, have 
 tortured it in various ways, including the misspelling 
 of words in what they suppose is the Scottish fashion. 
 And they are for ever bandying it about as if it were 
 the expression of a national peculiarity. They are 
 indebted for it to Mr. Charles M'Laren. If he was not 
 given to joking himself, he has furnished many poor 
 fellows since his time with a joke that, after their 
 fashion, they mostly contrive to spoil.
 
 XIV WILLIAM RITCHIE AND THE SCOTSMAiY 155 
 
 Mr. M'Laren, disgusted with the treatment of 
 Mr. WilHam Ritchie's statement as to the Royal 
 Infirmary, conceived the idea of establishing a journal 
 that would have the courage to be free. He talked 
 the matter over at first with a Mr. John Robertson, 
 a bookseller ; but soon Mr. William Ritchie was 
 taken into council, and, as Mr. M'Laren said later, 
 William Ritchie it was who, " after a little reflection, 
 entered into it warmly." He converted the idea into 
 practical action. " He assisted in forming the plan, 
 suggested the title, drew up the prospectus, and by 
 his exertions and personal influence contributed 
 more than any other individual to establish the 
 paper." If William Ritchie had done nothing more 
 than invent the title of the paper, he would have 
 done his full share. For, surely, never was title of 
 a newspaper more happily chosen ! Sometimes I 
 have wondered what was the train of thought in 
 William Ritchie's mind that led up to the Scotstitan. 
 We know that the times were out of joint for Liberal- 
 minded people. We know there was intolerable 
 domination by the Toryism of the time. We know 
 that wrongs could not be righted, and that grievances 
 could not get a hearing or redress. We know that 
 Scotsmen never have borne wrongs meekly. William 
 Ritchie was a Scot in the truest sense — courageous, 
 thoughtful, intolerant of wrong-doing. His sense of 
 justice and right must have been revolted by what 
 he saw around him, and by what he experienced. 
 Did he recall what Burns had written — "Scots wha 
 hae wi' Wallace bled " ? Did he find his suggestion
 
 156 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 there in that magnificent war-song of a race against 
 tyranny and oppression ? The speculation is perhaps 
 of little use. The fact remains that William Ritchie 
 found the name of the Scotsman, and it was destined 
 to be a chief instrument in driving away the hateful 
 Tory domination, and in giving to Scotsmen a 
 vehicle for the exposure of wrongs or grievances 
 and the free discussion of public questions. 
 
 So far we have the idea of the paper and its title. 
 It had to be carried further : the idea realised, the 
 title printed. Mr. M'Laren, Mr. William Ritchie, 
 and Mr. John Robertson could not do all that was 
 required. Therefore they took counsel with others 
 that they might get the necessary capital. First 
 Mr. William Ritchie's elder brother, Mr. John 
 Ritchie, was approached. He was a draper who 
 had a shop in the then fashionable thoroughfare of 
 Nicolson Street, in Edinburgh. He was a quiet, 
 thoughtful man with excellent business knowledge 
 and experience. He shared the political views of 
 his brother. I often met him in 1868-69, shortly 
 before he died. Then, stricken with many years and 
 feeble with decaying strength, he was still shrewd 
 and business-like in his conversation. It was not 
 difficult to conceive what he must have been fifty 
 years before, when he was in his prime. He joined 
 his brother, Mr. M'Laren, and Mr. Robertson. 
 Three other recruits were obtained — Mr, James 
 M'Donald, silk merchant; Mr. A. Abernethy, 
 printer ; and Mr. J. M'Diarmid, who, then connected 
 with the Commercial Bank, subsequently became
 
 XIV THE PROSPECTUS OF THE SCOTSMAN 157 
 
 editor of the Dttnif^'ies Courier. These were the 
 projectors and original proprietors of the Scotsman. 
 How and why they came together have been 
 described. 
 
 On the 30th of November 1816 the prospectus of 
 the new journal was issued. A more moderately 
 toned document of the kind was never put before 
 the world. The age of limited liability companies 
 had not then arrived. True, there had been painful 
 experience in company-making in Scotland and in 
 France and elsewhere. But the professional "pro- 
 moter" had not come into existence, and prospectus 
 writing had not become one of the fine arts. Thus 
 there was no flourish of fine words in the announce- 
 ment made by the earnest, honest, straightforward 
 men whose names have been set forth. They said 
 what they meant and what they believed, and they 
 said no more. There was no railing in the pro- 
 spectus ; the projectors simply declared their belief 
 that " nothing of a very spirited or liberal nature 
 can find its way through the Edinburgh daily or 
 weekly press ; that many political matters and trans- 
 actions in Scotland are thus never generally known ; 
 and that the conductors of the Edinburgh press act 
 editorially as if they dreaded nothing so much as 
 the idea of being thought independent." 
 
 This was in the nature of preamble. What 
 followed was an announcement of the intention to 
 publish the first number of a paper to be called the 
 Scotsman in the first week of the next January. 
 After this announcement came the assurance that
 
 158 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 the new paper would be political, literary, and honest 
 in the news it published. " The conductors," said 
 the prospectus, " do not mean to confine their 
 journal to the discussion of politics. They will 
 endeavour also, by making it a reflector of morals 
 and literature, to multiply the sources of rational 
 amusement." They "pledge themselves for im- 
 partiality, firmness, and independence." Finally 
 there was a declaration of political principle. " The 
 Editor and his immediate Associates are lovers of 
 their country. . . . They wish to preserve constitu- 
 tional liberty equally from the encroachments of 
 power and the destructions of anarchy. At present, 
 they conceive, there are dangers to be apprehended 
 from both ; for an unfortunate estrangement, they 
 fear, has taken place between the people and those 
 who hold office over them." Holding these views, 
 the projectors looked for improvement to a firm 
 application of the principles of constitutional govern- 
 ment as formulated in the treatises of Burke and 
 Sir James Mackintosh. 
 
 It may be doubted whether a more modest, a 
 more temperate, or a firmer and clearer statement 
 of objects and principles was ever made in the 
 prospectus of a new journal. There were no im- 
 possible promises; there was no "fine" writing. 
 In clear, terse, vigorous English, principles were 
 affirmed. It is indubitable that the promises and 
 vows thus made in the name of the infant paper 
 have been kept in both letter and spirit. Soon after 
 it appeared it had made its mark. Mr. M'Laren
 
 XIV DIFFICULTIES OF EARLY DAYS 159 
 
 had a resolute purpose, a clear grasp of principles, 
 and a gift of clear exposition. He laid the founda- 
 tion of the paper's character ; he justified its exist- 
 ence. Lord Cockburn spoke of the Scotsman as 
 "the first Scotch newspaper which combined inde- 
 pendence with intelligence, and moderation with 
 zeal." That was the general opinion, at least among 
 those who were not of the dominant political sect. 
 Liberals had got a mouthpiece ; they could make 
 themselves heard. 
 
 It must be said that many of those who in its 
 early days sympathised with the Scotsman and re- 
 joiced in its appearance week by week were careful 
 not to make any outward and visible manifestations 
 of their satisfaction. To have been known as a 
 reader of the paper would have been fatal to the 
 business of some of them. For the ban of the 
 " authorities " was on the new venture, and remained 
 on it until changed times brought other " authorities " 
 who had some belief in freedom. The administra- 
 tion of the old order could not love a journal that 
 preached doctrines which they had declared to be 
 Anathema ! Contact with it was the touching of 
 pitch in their eyes. Reading it was moral degrada- 
 tion. Its doctrines led to anarchy — the subversion 
 of all good government ; and of course the govern- 
 ment of that day was good in all respects ! There- 
 fore it was that men hid the fact that they read the 
 Scotsman. It has been told, and is true, that 
 ** respectable " men who were Liberal in sentiment 
 got their clerks to subscribe to the paper that it
 
 i6o AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 might be smuggled into their own houses ; the 
 clerks had nothing to lose, the masters had. 
 
 A curious piece of evidence as to the conditions 
 under which the paper was published is found in an 
 agreement among the proprietors, signed at a meet- 
 ing some ten days after the first number had appeared. 
 As part of the first head of agreement it was written : 
 
 "As several literary gentlemen are to take an interest in 
 supporting the Scotsman who do not wish their names to be 
 generally known, even among the Proprietors, and as it is thus 
 requisite, with the view of ensuring success by able literary con- 
 tributions, to vest the Editorship ostensibly in such of the sub- 
 scribers as have some connection with, and enjoy the confidence 
 of those literary friends, the Editorship of the Scotsma?i is hereby 
 vested in " Mr. Charles M'Laren, Mr. John M'Diarmid, and 
 Mr. W. Ritchie. 
 
 Absolute power was given to these gentlemen. No 
 shares could be held without their leave. They 
 were subsequently spoken of as " ostensible Editors," 
 the reason being that Mr. Charles M'Laren was the 
 real practical working Editor. The others were 
 most useful for the purpose mentioned in the agree- 
 ment. It is needless to enlarge upon the evidence 
 afforded by the arrangement of the terrorism exercised 
 to prevent the new paper from getting a hearing. 
 
 Still it did make way. The projectors had only 
 reckoned on 300 subscribers to make it pay. They 
 were finely indifferent to advertisements. Announce- 
 ments of books would be accepted ; but nothing else. 
 Needless to say, this arrangement did not last long. 
 The paper grew in circulation, and business people 
 found courage to advertise in it, while the proprietors
 
 XIV GROWTH OF THE SCOTSMAN i6l 
 
 became less strict in drawing the line at literary 
 announcements. There are few newspapers in 
 existence of which it can be said that they began to 
 prosper with their first number. This can be said 
 of the Scotsman. No doubt it had its troubles; 
 but it always advanced. It began with a weekly 
 sheet of eight small pages of three columns each, in 
 all equal to about twelve columns of the paper at 
 present. In 1823 it was published twice a week, 
 still in its original form. At the beginning of 1831 
 the paper was enlarged. In 1855, on the 30th of 
 June, when the impressed stamp was removed, the 
 first daily issue appeared, the twice a week publica- 
 tion still continuing. More than forty years have 
 passed since then. The small daily has become a 
 great sheet. From a weekly issue of twelve columns 
 it has grown to a daily issue of never less than 64 
 columns and often of 128. Not only has the first 
 restriction on advertisements not been maintained, 
 but there has been marvellous growth in that depart- 
 ment. The original idea was that the advertise- 
 ments were never to exceed two columns in length 
 in any number. Now they are often close upon 80 
 columns, and have been over 86 columns, in a single 
 issue. 
 
 When the Scotsman was first published the price 
 of it was lod., of which 4d. was required for the 
 Government stamp. Subsequently, in 1823, the 
 price was lowered to 7d., of which 4d. was for the 
 stamp. In 1836 there was a further reduction of 
 the stamp duty to id. and the price of the paper 
 
 M
 
 i62 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xiv 
 
 became 46.., and it was afterwards increased to 4^d. 
 In 1855 the impressed stamp was removed, or at 
 least was made permissive for postal purposes, and 
 the price of the paper fell to id. Roundly speaking, 
 it is now ten times as large as it was in 181 7, and it 
 is sold for a tenth of the price. 
 
 How all this expansion has come — the methods 
 that have been adopted to make it possible — is a 
 story, or a series of stories, eminently worth telling.
 
 CHAPTER XV 
 
 Editor V. Business Manager— -The management of the Scotsman — 
 Romance in business — Growth of circulation of the paper — 
 Conservatism of the Scots — How to enlarge the circulation — 
 The causes of restriction — Railway carriage and middlemen 
 — A great alteration— The Caledonian Merairy — A social 
 revolution. 
 
 No one will believe that the growth of the Scotsman 
 which is described in the last chapter could have 
 been achieved if there had not been strong hands 
 at the helm in earlier days. There were, in truth, 
 strong hands and strong heads available. I do not 
 believe that the prosperity and usefulness of a news- 
 paper depend solely, or even mainly, upon the 
 Editor. Perhaps this is heresy : be it so ; I am 
 prepared to defend it. An Editor who is stupid or 
 deficient in tact can unmake a paper in the sense of 
 destroying its prosperity ; an Editor who is wise 
 and tactful cannot by his own exertions make a 
 paper prosperous. If there be not energy and 
 wisdom in the business management of a news- 
 paper, vain will be the efforts of the Editor. What 
 is the use of preparing a commodity for sale if you 
 cannot get it to the knowledge of the public } No 
 matter how good it may be, no matter how much
 
 i64 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 the public would enjoy it if they had the oppor- 
 tunity, if it be not within their reach it might as 
 well never have been made. 
 
 There was careful management of the business 
 of the Scotsman in its early days. I am free to say 
 there has been most able and enlightened manage- 
 ment of its affairs in later years. The result is — 
 prosperity, such as the projectors and first producers 
 of the paper could never have dreamed of. 
 
 It will not be difficult to bring forward proof of 
 the accuracy of the general propositions just made. 
 If romance ever could be associated with a news- 
 paper — and I am far from saying it cannot — then 
 the story of the growth of the Scots7nan in one 
 department alone, and the methods by which that 
 growth was brought about, might be described as 
 romantic. In one way it was certainly revolu- 
 tionary. It has been said that revolutions are 
 rarely beneficial to those who make them. That 
 may be so ; but the possibility of exceptions is 
 admitted, and the management of the Scotsman 
 provides one of them. 
 
 It has already been told that the originators of 
 the paper were modest in their expectations. They 
 had counted the cost of producing a news sheet, and 
 they found that if they could sell 300 copies they 
 would not be losers. It is not to be supposed that 
 they were indifferent to possible profit, but they did 
 not see where it was to come from, and, plainly, 
 they did not care. They wanted to produce light 
 in politically dark places, and it may be that the
 
 XV INCREASE OF CIRCULATION 165 
 
 idea involved in Mr. Robert Lowe's motto for his 
 match tax came into their mind — Ex luce hicellu^n. 
 Be this as it may, it is certain that no expectations 
 of the beginning could equal the realisation of later 
 years. From the first the circulation of the paper 
 exceeded the calculations. It grew with almost 
 every week. Practically no provision had been 
 made at the beginning for the payment of an 
 Editor. The profits soon made such remuneration 
 possible. 
 
 At least ten years may be passed over in this 
 story — the ten years from 181 7 to 1827 — as being 
 comparatively uneventful in the way of increased 
 circulation of the Scotsman. It had grown all it 
 could grow in the circumstances. There were no 
 railways : communication between Edinburgh and 
 other parts of Scotland was certainly slow and often 
 difficult. The price of the paper was comparatively 
 high. Yet the circulation had steadily increased 
 till it stood at about 1700 for each publication. 
 That was a great circulation for those days. But it 
 soon grew, though still slowly. Twenty-eight years 
 later, in 1855, the circulation had risen to about 
 3400 a day. The Crimean War was raging then, 
 and it created a demand for newspapers — wars 
 always do, though they bring little or no profit, 
 because of the cost of obtaining the news. Special 
 war correspondents are not as inexpensive as the 
 first Editor of the Scotsman. That Crimean War, 
 by the bye, saw the commencement of the reign of 
 the " special war correspondent." William Russell,
 
 i66 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Nicholas Woods, and others whose names I do not 
 now recall showed the way to Archibald Forbes, 
 Beatty Kingston, and a host of others. 
 
 Let me get back to the Scotsman in 1855. That 
 was the year in which it became a daily paper. 
 That was the year also in which its price was re- 
 duced to a penny. The lower price and the Russian 
 War increased the sale of the paper, which went up 
 from 3400 to about 6000 per day. This was too 
 much of growth for the time ; at least that seems 
 to have been the impression. If it was, a remedy 
 for the supposed evil was soon forthcoming. The 
 Russian War ended and the circulation fell to about 
 4000 per day. 
 
 Some wise man has said in recent times that the 
 Scots are the most conservative people in the 
 world, with the possible exception of the Chinese. 
 This wise man put a great truth in an exaggerated 
 form. The Scottish people are conservative, though 
 their conservatism may be breaking down a little 
 in these days. They are conservative in their 
 customs, in their institutions, in the Radicalism of 
 their politics. The Scotsman had a curious illustra- 
 tion of this conservatism when it became a daily 
 paper. Old staunch subscribers who had not 
 strongly disapproved the change from a publication 
 once a week to a publication twice a week, would 
 have nothing to do with the daily issue. Why 
 should they be driven at such a rate } Why should 
 they be troubled every day with the news of the 
 world ? Twice a week was often enough for
 
 XV STEADY PROGRESS 167 
 
 political lessons and world history. Therefore these 
 Conservatives, who were staunch Liberals and had 
 to a man taken part in the battle for political free- 
 dom, would not touch the daily Scotsman. 
 
 The views of these old subscribers were not 
 shared by the public generally. Or, to put it another 
 way, there were many people in the country who 
 were not so conservative as the old subscribers. 
 Newspapers had been rare luxuries to thousands 
 who now found the Scotsman within comparatively 
 easy reach. By 1859 the average sale of the paper 
 had become 10,000 per day ; in 1862 it was 15,000; 
 and it grew till in 1S64 it had become 17,000 per 
 day. Probably there were not many daily papers 
 out of London that had achieved so large a circula- 
 tion. But the Business Head of the paper was 
 resolved that it should be larger, and he had 
 thought out a method by which the desired end 
 could be or might be attained. This method it 
 was that virtually and indeed actually revolutionised 
 the distribution of newspapers in Scotland, and 
 later in England. It is a noteworthy fact that 
 England, in newspaper matters as in other affairs, 
 has followed Scotland. In regard to business 
 details and general effectiveness, what the Scotsman 
 adopted to-day, all English and Scottish journalism 
 adopted on the morrow. 
 
 In 1865, the unpleasant fact that stared the 
 management in the face was that the circulation 
 of the paper was mainly confined to Edinburgh 
 and its immediate neighbourhood. What were the
 
 i68 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 causes of this, and how could they be removed ? 
 That was the problem to be solved. 
 
 It was not difficult to discover the causes of 
 limitation. They were to be found in the cost of 
 getting the newspaper to purchasers at a distance ; 
 and secondly, in the then only available method of 
 general distribution through wholesale newsvendors. 
 As to the cost — a paper could only reach a distant 
 part of the country as a railway parcel, or through 
 the post. If it went through the post the charge 
 was a penny per copy. In other words, the price 
 of the paper was doubled to the subscriber. If it 
 went by railway parcel — well, it could not go that 
 way in small numbers ; the cost was prohibitive. 
 
 Nothing was more certain than that in all parts 
 of the country there were people who would read 
 the paper, and who desired to read it, if they could 
 get it. In the old days, with the impressed stamp, 
 newspapers were posted again and again. The first 
 purchaser read his paper, sent it on to a second, 
 who sent it on to a third ; where the process ended 
 nobody could say. Perhaps it was this re-posting 
 and passing from hand to hand that brought the 
 word "circulation" into use in connection with the 
 number issued of a newspaper. I make the curious 
 in such matters a present of the suggestion. The 
 last thing any newspaper desires is "circulation" in 
 the sense in which the word came to be used. Just 
 as the watchword of some politicians is " One man, 
 one vote,' so the cry of the newspaper man is "One 
 man, as many newspapers as he can get, but at least
 
 XV NEWSPAPER DISTRIBUTION 169 
 
 one to himself." This is not so epigrammatic as 
 the politician's shibboleth, but it is sound common 
 sense. 
 
 Anyway, the Business Head of the Scotsman 
 in 1865 sought to enable every reader who desired 
 a copy of the paper to get one. He began with the 
 railways. There were more railway companies then 
 than now, and each company exacted its own rate 
 for the carriage of a parcel, however light. Thus 
 the cost of carriage became prohibitive, so far as 
 small towns and large villages were concerned. If 
 the difficulty could be removed or lessened, agencies 
 for the sale of the paper could be opened all over 
 the country where no such agencies then existed, or 
 could exist. Here it was that the second obstacle 
 to be overcome was encountered. 
 
 There prevailed in Edinburgh, as in other large 
 towns, a system of wholesale newsvending. The 
 few vendors who carried on the business in Edin- 
 burgh were, or had been, mainly booksellers. In 
 London they had long been simply wholesale news- 
 agents. For early days the system had its advan- 
 tages : it may have some advantages now ; but it 
 means strangulation of enterprising newspapers. 
 The newsagent in town collects the newspapers 
 he requires. There may be half-a-dozen or more 
 of them all competing with each other. He then 
 makes them into parcels for country agents — each 
 parcel containing some of all the different papers in 
 accordance with the order of the agent to whom 
 they are to be sent. It is obvious that by this
 
 I70 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 course the poorest and least enterprising of the 
 papers gets an advantage partly at the expense of 
 the more enterprising. If in no other way, it gets 
 an advantage in the cost of the carriage on the 
 parcel. No newsagent in the country could pay 
 the carriage on the small parcel that would alone 
 be required for the poor paper ; but when it got 
 tacked on to the skirts of the strong paper it could 
 be ordered and carried. 
 
 Under the wholesale newsagent system, there- 
 fore, the enterprise of a newspaper which might dis- 
 tinguish it above other papers was to a large extent 
 nullified. The system levelled down the strong 
 and gave factitious aid to the weak. Obviously, if 
 it could be dispensed with — if there could be direct 
 connection between the producer and the consumer, 
 the Scotsman would have better opportunities of 
 being known and appreciated. The problem in its 
 general application to all articles of use has come 
 down to us to this day. In all directions there is a 
 growing or full-grown desire to get rid of the middle- 
 man. The desire can never be fully realised — 
 though as to some things the f)arcel-post may help 
 to that end. There must be distributive agencies at 
 points more or less remote from the productive 
 centre. This was fully understood by the Business 
 Head of the Scotsman \n 1865. His object was to 
 increase the distributive agencies — to plant them in 
 every town and large village in the country, and to 
 bring them into direct connection with the office in 
 Edinburgh. If the railways could be induced to
 
 XV RAILWAY CARRIAGE 171 
 
 help him, the middleman could be dispensed with, 
 a network of agencies could be created, and the 
 Scotsman must be more widely read. 
 
 Early in 1865 proposals were made to all the 
 railway companies in Scotland with a view to 
 carrying out the project. The proposal made was 
 that parcels of the Scots7nan might be carried by 
 contract all over the railway systems. The cost of 
 the carriage was to be paid by the proprietors of the 
 paper. They were prepared to guarantee to the 
 railway companies a much greater revenue from the 
 carriage of the Scotsman alone than they had hitherto 
 earned from the carriage of all the newspapers put 
 together. Besides, if the other papers continued, 
 they would still have to send parcels to the country 
 either directly from their own office, or through the 
 middlemen. It is not wonderful that the railway 
 companies agreed to the proposed arrangement. 
 They were clear gainers by it. Before long the 
 system was adopted all over the country, and spread 
 to the provincial centres in England, The Scotsman 
 had pointed out the way to a change which was to 
 have the effect of enormously increasing the circula- 
 tion of most newspapers. 
 
 The effect upon the Scotsman itself was strongly 
 marked in a great growth of the demand for the 
 paper. It could not have been otherwise, unless 
 the paper had been stupid and unreadable, which 
 assuredly it was not. There was little difficulty 
 in getting agents for the sale of the paper in 
 remote places when it was known that the cost of
 
 172 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 carriage of parcels would be paid by the proprietors, 
 and each agent would as to terms be placed on the 
 same footing as agents in town. It was not then, 
 and it is not now the habit of traders or any one in 
 country districts or in towns to despise small profits. 
 What might be made from the sale of the Scotsman 
 would add materially to the comfort of the seller. 
 There was no grudging application of the new 
 system. The object of the deviser of it was to 
 get the paper before the public. He had a well- 
 grounded confidence that if it could be brought 
 within reach of possible readers, they would be- 
 come readers in fact. He believed that if he could 
 let the Scots7nan be tasted, so to speak, the desire 
 for it would spread and increase. Thus it was no 
 part of his stipulation with the agents in the 
 country that they should order as many papers 
 as would cover the cost of the carriage. Wherever 
 three or four were ordered, they were sent free. 
 They were seed sown in notoriously good 
 ground, and they bore fruit in due season. 
 
 Of course there was a great outcry from different 
 quarters. There always is an outcry when any 
 change is made. In this case the cry came mainly 
 from the smaller papers. I was not in Edinburgh at 
 the time, but I was a fairly diligent reader of the 
 Scottish newspapers, and I remember the lament 
 of the Caledojtian Mercury, then nearly at its last 
 gasp. "We have no desire for a change in regard 
 to country agents," was its cry in efTect, and very 
 nearly in so many words. " Restless people are
 
 XV OPPOSITION TO CHANGE 173 
 
 trying to force on a change. We have no sympathy 
 with it. But if any agent in the country would like 
 to have a special parcel of the Mercury on the new 
 plan he can have it." Alas ! it may be feared few 
 agents in the country wanted such a special parcel. 
 The enterprise of the "restless people" was too 
 much for the Mercury. It was an old — a very old 
 paper. It had become strongly Radical in its later 
 years. Yet it illustrated a statement I have made 
 elsewhere, that the Scot is conservative. The 
 Mercury was all for pulling down this institution and 
 that : it was quite ready to take the constitution to 
 pieces without much regard as to how it was to be 
 put together again. But a proposal to get rid of 
 the middleman in the distribution of newspapers 
 was an intolerable offence ! 
 
 Not much heed was paid by the Scotsman to the 
 railings and groanings of the other papers. It had 
 entered upon a course which was to be travelled 
 with steady resolution. The effect was marvellous. 
 All over the country, agents had been appointed 
 after personal acquaintance with them. As they 
 prospered, others presented themselves. In the 
 course of a few months the list of country agents 
 had grown from 80 to upwards of 1000. For a long 
 time the enterprise that broke this new ground was 
 not emulated, and the Scotsman had much of the 
 field to itself. Daily the circulation increased. In 
 February 1865 it had been 17,000 per day. In July 
 1866 it had reached 27,000 per day. In 1870 it had 
 grown to 30,000 per day. Three years later it was
 
 174 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 40,000; and in 1877 it had grown to 50,000. That 
 is to say, in twelve years the circulation had been 
 trebled. It is now much larger than in 1877. 
 
 How much of the growth is to be attributed to 
 the Editors of the paper and how much to the 
 Business Manager, may be estimated by every one 
 for himself. My feeling is that while the Editors 
 planted and watered, the Business Manager gave 
 the increase or made it possible. He did far more. 
 He effected a change which has revolutionised news- 
 paper distribution all over the United Kingdom. 
 The old order of middlemen has almost entirely dis- 
 appeared out of London. The railway companies 
 are the carriers, not for those middlemen, but for the 
 producer and the consumer. Here is a pretty prob- 
 lem for the consideration of the social philosopher 
 — sociologist, I believe he calls himself. There 
 is an enormous growth of newspaper reading in the 
 country. There is a decrease of crime in proportion 
 to the population. There is greater comfort in 
 most homes. In short, Society is better in most 
 ways than it was. Will the sociologist admit that 
 the improvement is in large measure due to increase 
 in newspaper reading ? I have not a doubt on the 
 subject myself, and I do not believe any one else 
 can have who looks at all the conditions. If, then, 
 the sociologist should agree with me, what will he 
 say of the man who did so much to make the exten- 
 sion of newspaper reading possible ? Everybody 
 knows about the great virtue of him who has made 
 two blades of corn to grow where only one
 
 XV NEWSPAPERS MADE ACCESSIBLE 175 
 
 grew before. What is to be said of him who has 
 enabled a thousand newspapers to be read where not 
 ten were read before ? In sober earnest, that is 
 what the Business Head of the Scotsman did when 
 he revolutionised the methods of getting newspapers 
 to readers. The abolition of the paper duty had 
 made the production of newspapers less costly, but 
 it had not brought them nearer to great masses of 
 the people in the country. That was brought about 
 by the Scotsman.
 
 CHAPTER XVI 
 
 Restlessness in effort — Necessary in newspapers — News for the 
 Scotsman — Stirring up the Telegraph Companies — Their inert- 
 ness — Their charges — An impeachment of them — A throttling 
 band — Some newspapers satisfied- — Meetings of newspaper 
 men — Telegraph managers brought to bay — Reduction of 
 charges — -More suggestions — The " Special Wire " offered — 
 The " Malignant Being " — Adoption of special wires — Enor- 
 mous growth of telegraphing. 
 
 Some men never can be at rest so long as they can 
 find anything to do. Where the restlessness is 
 properly directed — where it is under good control, 
 it is an unmixed blessing. The inert dislike it. 
 Even men who are not usually inert are disturbed 
 by it now and then. "You have waked me too 
 soon, let me slumber again," is their complaint, as 
 one of the gifted poets of the order of Dr. Watts 
 has told us is the complaint of the sluggard. No 
 one who has seated himself in a snug chair after 
 some work, and has stretched himself out in luxurious 
 restfulness, cares to be told that he must get upon 
 his feet and take fresh work in hand. 
 
 Those who have to manage newspapers must be 
 restless. They must go from one effort to another. 
 The completion of one task must be the commence-
 
 CHAP. XVI A NEW CAMPAIGN 177 
 
 ment of the next. There are instances in the 
 history of British journaHsm where this has not 
 been remembered, and flourishing newspapers, built 
 up with energy and perseverance, have become 
 wrecks. It will not do to assume that what was 
 good enough for yesterday is good enough for 
 to-day. Not merely do the tastes of the reading 
 public vary, but every day something new, or some- 
 thing old in a new form, is being developed. If the 
 public tastes and the general development be not 
 watched — nay, if they be not helped, decay will set 
 in. Most certainly it is true of newspaper enterprise 
 that to stand still is to go backward. 
 
 In 1865 no one was more thoroughly alive to 
 this fact than the Business Head of the Scotsman. 
 He had rano-ed over the whole of Scotland from 
 John o' Groat's to Berwick and the Solway ; he had 
 corresponded with every railway company ; he had 
 made a close acquaintance with the time-tables of 
 every company, and he had revolutionised news- 
 paper distribution. The moment of success in this 
 matter was the moment for beginning a new cam- 
 paign which was to effect another revolution. In 
 some of its aspects it was objected to by newspaper 
 men who wanted to be allowed rest ; but they had 
 to bestir themselves. 
 
 The object of the new movement was to enable 
 the Scotsman to publish more and later news than 
 at that time was possible. Though the paper was, 
 so far as local news was concerned, the paper of 
 to-day, it was as to most other news the paper of 
 
 N
 
 178 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 yesterday. All that railway parcels, the Post Office, 
 and special expresses could do to remedy the evil 
 was done ; but this was not enough. There were 
 great possibilities in the use of the Electric Tele- 
 graph ; and it was in this direction that the new 
 effort turned. 
 
 In a previous chapter I have hurriedly sketched 
 the growth of newspaper telegraphing. I have now 
 to tell of the first strong impulse given to it. From 
 a short time after its foundation the Electric Tele- 
 graph Company had formed what, if I remember 
 rightly, was called an " Intelligence Department." 
 Under the direction of Mr. C. V. Boys this depart- 
 ment gathered a few items of news, and in the Parlia- 
 mentary session made up a sort of skeleton report of 
 Parliamentary proceedings. Some market news, some 
 Stock Exchange news, and Reuters telegrams formed 
 in addition the staple of what was provided. Rarely 
 did the matter forwarded exceed a column in length. 
 This was not enough for the requirements of a 
 newspaper that desired to be abreast of the news of 
 the day. There was great difficulty in supplement- 
 ing it, for two reasons. First, the lines of the 
 company did not extend to small towns and large 
 villages. Second, the cost of telegraphing news 
 was practically prohibitive. The first difficulty had 
 been somewhat lessened when two rivals of the 
 Electric Telegraph Company — the Magnetic Tele- 
 graph Company and the United Kingdom Telegraph 
 Company — had been started. There had been 
 hopes that the second difficulty would be lessened
 
 XVI TELEGRAPH CHARGES 179 
 
 by their competition. Those hopes were dis- 
 appointed ; the three companies before long agreed 
 to combine against the pubHc in respect of the 
 charges made. 
 
 From time to time there had been complaints 
 and more or less strenuous endeavour to get the 
 telegraph tariff reduced, and to secure a better 
 working arrangement with the companies. These 
 had in no way been successful. The companies 
 knew they had the field to themselves, and they 
 acted on a principle which I have often seen adopted 
 elsewhere and as to other things — the principle that 
 it is better to do a little with a fair profit, even 
 if you do it badly, than it is to do a good deal at 
 lower price, even though it might result in a larger 
 profit. The small business and the comparatively 
 high profit are certainties. Who would rush into 
 ventures that would double or treble the work and 
 might lose the profit ? Some trace of this is to be 
 found in the advice so often given by the leaders of 
 miners to "limit production." Three days' work a 
 week at 4s. a day is worth more than five days' 
 work at 3s. 6d. a day ! This was pretty much the 
 sort of argument that prevailed with the telegraph 
 companies in 1865. 
 
 On the 23rd of June of that year a Memorandum 
 was issued by the Business Head of the Scotsman 
 on the subject of the high rates and ineffective 
 service of the companies. It tells the story of the 
 grievances of newspapers with much clearness and 
 vigour. It tells how a competition which at one
 
 i8o AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 time existed between the Electric Telegraph Com- 
 pany and the Magnetic Telegraph Company for the 
 supply of news had ceased, and the two coming 
 together with the United Kingdom Company had 
 in 1864 announced an advance of rates amounting 
 generally to ^^ per cent. There had been meetings 
 of pressmen to complain of the charges ; but all in 
 vain : the terms had to be accepted. Then comes 
 a paragraph of the Memorandum which, without 
 making any excuse for doing so, I may quote in full. 
 It describes the telegraphic situation and the conse- 
 quent grievances of newspapers with so much 
 intimate knowledge and so clearly, that no para- 
 phrase of it could be so effective as the full text : — 
 
 " Since the increased charges were imposed," says the Memo- 
 randum, "the supply of news sent by the Company, besides 
 gradually becoming smaller in quantity, has been so inaccurate, 
 and so late and irregular in delivery, as literally to disgust the 
 conductors of newspapers with the entire service. No attempt 
 has since been made to secure any united action in remedying 
 their grievances " (that is, since the prices had been increased), 
 " but the proprietors of the Scotsman have been endeavouring to 
 supplement the ordinary supplies of news by special telegrams 
 daily from their own reporters. Here again, they were met by 
 the Electric Telegraph officials in a spirit of opposition and 
 obstruction which is hardly credible. Press messages are 
 declared by the manager to be most unprofitable to the 
 Company, which does not, therefore, wish to encourage them. 
 They interfere, it is urged, with ordinary messages during the 
 day, and they are more inconvenient at night, as they require 
 late clerks, gas-light, etc. The ordinary rate for messages from 
 London to Edinburgh is one shilling for twenty words, and ten 
 words of an address ; and for each shilling thus received the 
 Company's clerk has to grant a receipt, and transmit thirty words 
 of a message, which has to be delivered free of charge at the other
 
 XVI AN IMPEACHMENT OF THE TELEGRAPHS i8i 
 
 end. The proprietors of the Scotstnan offered to use the Electric 
 Telegraph Company's wires systematically to the extent of many 
 hundred pounds a year if they would transmit their news 
 messages at thirty words for a shilling (including address), being 
 precisely the same terms, so far as the number of words to be 
 transmitted is concerned, as are charged to the public ; but this 
 offer, made repeatedly and in various forms, was persistently 
 declined by the Companies.^ The night clerks' attendance and 
 gas-lights being the objection made to night press work, an offer was 
 made to lease one wire between London and Edinburgh for a few 
 hours each night, the Scotsfnafi to provide clerks, etc., and pay the 
 entire working expense ; but this proposal was also declined. In 
 spite of these obstacles, frequent long private messages have been 
 sent for the Scotsman, though no efforts are made to send them 
 quickly, or to render the service in the least degree satisfactory. 
 As an instance, it may be mentioned that, on one occasion, about 
 a month ago, the Scotsman reporter in London gave in a Parlia- 
 mentary report at the Electric Telegraph Company's offices a few 
 minutes after midnight, and no part of it reached the Scotsman 
 office till after 4 a.m., when the paper had been put to press ; 
 and the message had therefore to be thrown into the waste 
 basket. A request was made that the money (some few pounds) 
 should be returned. The Secretary sent a long apology for the 
 delay, but took no notice of the request to return the money. 
 He was reminded that this was what was asked, and not any 
 apology; but no notice has been taken of the letter." 
 
 The Memorandum gives other illustrations of the 
 negligence shown by the companies, and makes a 
 curious statement which everybody who knows any- 
 thing about newspaper work will easily understand. 
 
 " A few months ago," says the Memorandum, " the Electric 
 Telegraph Company transferred, without notice to the news- 
 papers, the work of transmitting their news to the Edinburgh 
 
 ' A definite reason was given for tlie refusal. It was said tli.il if the 
 Scotsman were allowed to use the wires in the way proposed, the result would 
 be that the Caledonian Alercnry would be killed, and the Telegraph 
 Company would lose a customer for its so-called news service !
 
 i82 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 papers. The clerks in the United Kingdom office (to which the 
 transfer was made), having had no previous experience in this 
 kind of work, made such havoc in what was sent that not one of 
 the Stock Exchange quotations could be relied upon for a long 
 time ; proper names were spelled in the most fantastic way ; and 
 in the shipping news one could not distinguish the ship from the 
 port or the port from the captain, the names of each being so 
 incongruously mixed up. This state of matters is now somewhat 
 improved ; but the arrangement is most objectionable, as so 
 dividing the responsibility that it never can be ascertained where 
 the blame of delay lies." 
 
 Here was a pitiful story. To the newspaper 
 man of to-day, who has had no experience of those 
 old times, it will be hard to understand. He has 
 his messages delivered promptly. Perhaps he may 
 think he is a sufferer because of the blunders of 
 telegraph clerks, and in truth they are not even yet 
 as perfect as they might be ; but they are paragons 
 of perfection as compared with their predecessors in 
 the time of the companies. Unquestionably the 
 grievances set forth in the Memorandum from 
 which I have quoted were very real. The tele- 
 graphs, which might have been and ought to have 
 been the fostering parents of enterprise in news- 
 seeking and getting, were converted into a throttling 
 band upon all enterprise. 
 
 There were newspapers that were satisfied. If 
 they could not telegraph they saved expense ! and 
 the public got all it was necessary to give them ! 
 Other men were wiser, and they were galled by the 
 telegraphic restraints. Unquestionably the world 
 was made better by their restlessness. Your 
 suggestive-minded man, if his suggestiveness be
 
 XVI UNWILLINGNESS TO MOVE 183 
 
 backed by action, is a thorn in the side of the 
 supreme and lethargic being. It has always been 
 so, and will be to the end of the chapter. Thus 
 when the Memorandum about telegraphic news 
 went from the office of the Scotsman in June 1865, 
 there were some newspaper men who used the 
 favourite question of Lord Melbourne, and asked, 
 " Why can't you let the matter alone?" It need 
 not be doubted that there would have been more if 
 the full extent of the designs of the writer of that 
 Memorandum had been realised. As it was, his 
 statement was taken as pointing towards a reduction 
 of the charges made by the telegraph companies 
 for what was facetiously called their " news 
 supply." The underlying intention to use the 
 telegraphs in new directions as much as possible 
 was not generally recognised. No doubt some 
 of the managers of leading papers did recognise it, 
 and shared in the desire for greater telegraphic 
 expansion. Anyway, the effect of the Memo- 
 randum was to stir up a fresh agitation, and to 
 worry the managers of the telegraph companies to 
 some purpose. 
 
 Meetings of newspaper managers and pro- 
 prietors were held. There was a general inter- 
 change of views, and the result was the formation of 
 a sort of Bond, calling itself the " Press Associa- 
 tion." It must not be confounded with the " Press 
 Association " of to-day, which was founded at a later 
 period and for another purpose. The Press Associa- 
 tion of 1865 was formed to bring combined pressure
 
 i84 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 to bear upon the telegraph companies. Those 
 companies could play with individual complainers. 
 All the arts of obstructive officialism could be used 
 in such cases. Against an Association which by its 
 existence proved the strong feeling and resolution 
 of the newspaper press out of London, mere obstruc- 
 tion was useless and virtually impossible. At last 
 the managers of the telegraphs were brought face 
 to face with the newspaper men. It was only after 
 a hard fight that this was accomplished. Perhaps 
 nothing but the indomitable perseverance and 
 resolution of the writer of the Memorandum from 
 the Scotsman office could have produced such an 
 effect. He had become the mouthpiece or at least 
 the representative of the Association, and he gave 
 the telegraph managers no rest till he screwed 
 their courage to the sticking-point of meeting the 
 members. 
 
 The effect of the meeting was great. In general 
 discussion the telegraph managers could not defend 
 their charges or the character of the service they 
 gave. On the 23rd of November 1865, Mr. 
 Weaver, manager of the Electric Telegraph Com- 
 pany, wrote a letter, the purport of which will show 
 the nature of the suggestions made by the news- 
 paper men. 
 
 First, Mr. Weaver announced in his letter that 
 the companies were prepared to transfer to the 
 Press Association their contracts with provincial 
 newspapers for the supply of telegraphic news. 
 From this it is plain that one of two things, or
 
 XVI TELEGRAPHIC OFFERS 185 
 
 perhaps both, had happened at the meeting. Either 
 the newspaper conductors had asked to have the 
 contracts transferred to their Association, or the 
 managers of the companies had suggested such a 
 course as the best answer to the complaints made 
 against the news service they supplied. There is 
 no doubt the service was bad. I can vouch for that. 
 It was almost as bad as it could be. Looking back 
 at it now, I am sometimes inclined to wonder how 
 the public could tolerate it. Of course the answer 
 to that question is that the public could get nothing 
 better. As soon as they could, they showed their 
 appreciation of the new fare. It need not be 
 doubted that at the meeting of the newspaper men 
 with the telegraphists, complaints of the badness of 
 the service were many and strong. The newspaper 
 men may have said, " Hand us over the task of 
 supplying news to ourselves, give us a fair tariff for 
 transmission, and our complaints will cease." Or 
 the managers of the telegraph companies may 
 have said, "You complain of the quality and scanti- 
 ness of our news. It is all we can afford to give 
 you for what you pay. If you think you can do 
 better, take the provision of news into your own 
 hands, and we will give you favourable terms for 
 transmission." Perhaps there was something said 
 on both sides that pointed to the same conclusion. 
 
 At any rate, Mr. Weaver, writing for the com- 
 panies, offered, as I have said, to transfer the news 
 supply to the Press Association. In regard to the 
 transmission of the news he stated the terms. First,
 
 i86 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 A reduction of 50 per cent upon the Companies' ordinary 
 public tariff rate, for messages sent during the day between 7 
 A.M. and 7 P.M., and a reduction of 66 per cent, or say two-thirds,^ 
 upon the tariff rate for such news as may be handed to the 
 Companies at night — say between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. 
 
 If the terms were accepted, "the companies 
 would require to be guaranteed an amount of work 
 equivalent to the present income of about ;^ 13,000 
 per annum derived from the Press." At that time 
 ^13,000 a year for the telegraphic news service of 
 all the newspapers out of London was thought a 
 large sum. What would be thought of it now ? It 
 would not pay the bills for news telegraphing of two 
 first-class newspapers. But there was one feature 
 of the offer that showed what may be moderately 
 spoken of as astuteness on the part of the companies. 
 They received ^13,000 a year for gathering and 
 transmitting news to papers out of London. Their 
 neat proposal was that they should be guaranteed 
 the ^13,000 a year and be relieved of the gathering 
 of news ! 
 
 Mr. Weaver's letter further stipulated for restric- 
 tions upon the length of messages, and for other 
 points which were not likely to make the work of 
 news gathering and transmission any easier. 
 
 The offer made in the letter was not accepted. 
 A conference of newspaper conductors was held at 
 Manchester on the 30th November 1865, to consider 
 it, and next day, with their resolutions prepared, they 
 met the managers of the telegraph companies. 
 It is not difficult to understand what must have
 
 XVI THE SPECIAL WIRE 187 
 
 passed at this latter meeting, for it led to the issue 
 of a circular by the telegraph companies, which 
 announced a wholly different set of proposals from 
 those in Mr. Weaver's letter of 23rd November. 
 
 This new circular was dated 30th December 
 1865. It began by setting forth proposed charges 
 for telegraphing news messages. These charges 
 were actually a little higher than those offered in 
 Mr. Weaver's letter ; but they were higher with a 
 purpose. Practically they were expected to apply 
 to local messages, and not to the bulk of the London 
 work. For the first time the words " Special Wire" 
 are used. The circular announces that contracts for 
 special wires from London to newspapers out of 
 London can be made with the companies. These 
 wires are to be available for the newspaper from 
 7 P.M. to 3 A.M. Alternative terms are offered. 
 Either all the messages over the special wire may be 
 paid for at reduced tariff rates, with a guarantee of 
 a certain sum per annum ; or there may be a general 
 hiring of the wire without regard to the quantity of 
 news messages sent. The charges under this 
 system were to be for a wire to a place distant 
 
 Under 100 miles .... ;!^6oo per annum. 
 
 ,, 200 „ .... 675 „ 
 
 Above 200 ,, . . . . 750 ,, 
 
 To Ireland, including Submarine Cable, 1000 ,, 
 
 Here was an opening for enterprise. The 
 pressure upon the companies seemed at last to 
 be telling, indeed to have told. The restless spirit 
 that had brought the pressure to bear — "The
 
 i88 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Malignant Being at the Scotsman office " — as with a 
 bitter-edged good nature he was called by one of the 
 telegraph managers — might rejoice. The conces- 
 sion gained was the opening of a door or of many- 
 doors through which much might be done. There 
 is a letter in existence — I have seen it — in which a 
 newspaper man in London, in full sympathy with the 
 " Malignant Being," warned him that his plans were 
 too comprehensive, and that they never could be 
 realised. They have been realised ; they have 
 been far more than realised. They were far- 
 sighted, and they involved possibilities that no one 
 could measure. It would be ridiculous to assume 
 that those possibilities are exhausted. Great pro- 
 gress has been made ; but far more will be made 
 in the future. 
 
 As soon as the offer of special wires was made, it 
 was accepted by the Scotsman. I am inclined to 
 think that there must have been some initial 
 difficulty as to carrying out the hiring proposal ; 
 for while "special wire" work began early in 
 February of 1866, the agreement for the unlimited 
 use of a "special wire " was not signed till the 27th 
 February. The wire was taken on the ist March. 
 That was the beginning of a system which is now 
 all but universal in Great Britain. For years after 
 it had been adopted in Edinburgh, the London 
 papers knew nothing of it. The Continent is to 
 them what London is to newspapers in the country. 
 Yet they had made no step in the direction of 
 " special wires " to the Continent till long after the
 
 XVI GROWTH OF TELEGRAPHED NEWS 189 
 
 provincial newspapers had got their special wires to 
 London. 
 
 It would be easy to enlarge upon the direct 
 telegraphic consequences of the new departure. 
 They have been far-reaching. Since March 1866 
 there has been a continuous growth of telegraphic 
 or telegraphed news in the papers. This growth 
 was greatly accelerated by the transfer of the 
 telegraphs to the Post Office. Mr. Scudamore, the 
 wise official who managed that transfer, kept a 
 watchful eye on the requirements or possible require- 
 ments of newspapers ; and the result has been 
 enormous expansion. One special wire, in the case 
 of the Scotsman, speedily became two ; and these 
 two now carry scarcely more than half of the news 
 telegraphed from London during the year. In the 
 old days there might be a column of telegraphed 
 news in the paper in one day. Now it is not 
 uncommon to find forty columns, and the daily 
 average must be thirty. For let it be borne in 
 mind the telegraph system now extends to almost 
 every village in the country ; and from these villages 
 come pieces of news, from day to day, most of which 
 would never have been heard of in the old times, or 
 would have got within reach of the printing press a 
 few days late. 
 
 Perhaps the growth in telegraphic news cannot 
 be better shown than by a contrast as to cost. In 
 1864, before the telegraph companies had begun to 
 move or to be moved, the total cost of telegraphic 
 news for the Scotsman for the year was /150.
 
 I90 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xvi 
 
 Last year — -1895 — the cost was over ^9000, and it 
 will be more in the year in which I am writing. 
 Put in brief, the Scotsman is paying 20 per cent 
 more per week for telegraphed news than it paid in 
 the whole year of 1864.
 
 CHAPTER XVII 
 
 Growth of newspapers illustrated by the Scotsman — A London 
 establishment — Collecting news — Comprehensive plans — What 
 should be given to the public — Parliamentary reporting — 
 Difficulties and annoyances — Efiforts to get the Reporters' Gallery 
 opened to newspapers out of London — Objections — The Ser- 
 jeant-at-Arms — His Objections and Answers — Apathy of other 
 papers — Mr. Gladstone — A Select Committee — Victory ! 
 
 To those who care nothing for the growth of 
 newspapers or anything else, except, perhaps, the 
 growth of their own pecuniary means, most of what 
 has been told, and all of what remains to be told, 
 will have no interest. But there are others who are 
 not so completely self-engrossed, and who have both 
 the time and the desire to learn something of the 
 growth of an institution which assuredly has played 
 and must continue to play a great part in public 
 affairs. The growth in force, in influence, in useful- 
 ness of the Newspaper Press of the United Kingdom, 
 I repeat, cannot be properly understood if attention 
 be concentrated on London newspapers ; and it can 
 be illustrated by the story of newspapers out of 
 London. The Story of the Scotsjjian is taken 
 because that paper is, I may be excused for thinking, 
 a proof of growth, and because it is impossible to
 
 192 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 doubt that from its management the impulse to 
 general newspaper progress has largely come. 
 
 In an earlier chapter something has been said of 
 the first use to which the "special wire" of the 
 Scots7iian was put. It bound me to the paper. In 
 February 1866, before the agreement for a wire was 
 signed, I began to act as London agent for the 
 forwarding of news to Edinburgh ; and much was sent 
 during that month, while much more would have been 
 sent if the telegraph wires had been in good order, or if 
 the telegraphists had not been indifferent or careless. 
 My appointment was but the beginning of a further 
 extension which has led to a London establishment 
 far larger than the Edinburgh establishment was till 
 long after the Scots}nan was published daily. 
 
 The work of collecting and forwarding London 
 news to Scotland was not only new to me ; it was 
 new in itself. The "Intelligence Department" of 
 the telegraph companies had been content to give 
 and show as little intelligence as possible ; that is to 
 say, as little as a monopolist could show and a 
 groaning public would tolerate. But the head that 
 had thought out and made possible the special wire 
 had nothing in common with limited intelligence in 
 any sense. The owner of that head had fore- 
 seen great possibilities for the well-conducted and 
 enterprising newspaper. His friends and many 
 journalistic opponents told him he was building 
 Castles in the Air. They spoke of his "dreams," 
 and assured him that they never would be realised. 
 The despondent comforters were wrong.
 
 XVII EFFORTS IN LONDON 193 
 
 But let me get back to the beginning. It was 
 my duty to choose from the London news at my 
 command what I thought hkely to be interesting in 
 Scotland, and to send it through. Experience soon 
 showed that this work w^ould involve an establish- 
 ment in London; and when, in May 1868, I had 
 arranged to leave London for Edinburgh, an office 
 was taken in Fleet Street and a staff appointed. 
 This in itself was a bold venture. It was a new 
 departure in provincial journalism. It was, so to 
 speak, a bearding of the London lion in his den. 
 " What has the Scotsman to do in London ? " was the 
 question asked of me by a prominent journalistic 
 friend there. I suggested that it had to gather news, 
 do business, and show some of its London contem- 
 poraries the way they should be going. Since its 
 London office was taken, the example has been 
 followed in many directions. Now there are far 
 more provincial newspaper offices in Fleet Street 
 and the Strand than there are London newspaper 
 offices. 
 
 Some newspaper conductors were of opinion that 
 there could not be any sufficient work for more than 
 a correspondent in London. I am not sure that 
 some of them do not think so to this day. They 
 are of the men who believe in giving as little to the 
 public as the public will be willing to receive. On 
 one occasion, not many years ago, a most estimable 
 journalist, one of the proprietors of the Manchester 
 Exa7niner and Times, told me that he was convinced 
 the Scotsman was conducted on wrong lines : it gave 
 
 o
 
 194 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 far more than it need give to the pubHc. "We," he 
 added, " take care to avoid that mistake. There is 
 no use in spending money on news that the pubHc do 
 not need." "Who is to judge of the needs of the 
 pubHc?" I asked. "We are," said he. "Well, 
 then, using our judgment, we think the public need 
 many things that you are inclined to withhold 
 from them." He was convinced we were wrong, 
 and his plan was the right one. The Manchester 
 Examiner and Times is dead : the Scotsman lives and 
 flourishes ! 
 
 There was one kind of news as to which the 
 Scotsman had been anxious long before it could be 
 obtained in its fulness. It was a good report of 
 Parliamentary proceedings. One of the objects set 
 forth as to be aimed at when special wires were 
 obtained was the representation of the Scotsman in 
 the Gallery of the House of Commons. The project 
 was derided ; nothing, it was said, would induce the 
 officials of the House to add to their troubles by 
 having reporters from newspapers out of London in 
 the Press Gallery. As a matter of fact, the proposal 
 had to be dropped for the time being ; but the 
 Scotsman was not to be left without Parliamentary 
 reports. It was possible to arrange with the reporters 
 of London newspapers, who would furnish reports 
 when they were desired. They were always desired 
 in the Scotsman after the special wires were obtained ; 
 and long before the Gallery was avowedly opened to 
 the representatives of the paper, longer reports of 
 Parliamentary proceedings than could be found in
 
 XVII PROVINCIAL NEWSPAPERS AND THE GALLERY 195 
 
 Other provincial newspapers appeared with fair 
 regularity. 
 
 Still the system was unsatisfactory. The re- 
 porters were primarily in the employment of other 
 newspapers. They were not at the absolute disposal 
 of the Scotsman. Their services could not always 
 be reckoned upon with certainty. It was their duty 
 to write the reports for their own papers first ; and 
 of course they did their duty. The result was that 
 the Scotsman reports were delayed night after night. 
 Sometimes they had to be greatly curtailed ; almost 
 invariably much of them arrived in Edinburgh so 
 late as to be of no, or little, use. It may be thought 
 that this was due to the reports having to be 
 telegraphed. At first that might have been the case 
 to some extent ; but later, very little more time was 
 required to transmit the reports to Edinburgh than 
 was required to send them from the House of 
 Commons to a newspaper office in London. Always 
 the conviction was becoming stronger that there 
 must be direct representation of the paper in the 
 Gallery ; and always were efforts with that object 
 being made. 
 
 The connection of provincial journalism with the 
 Gallery of the House of Commons was not a new 
 thing. If I am not mistaken, the Manchester 
 Guardian and the Manchester Examiner and Times 
 had reporters in the Gallery some forty years ago. 
 Why they ceased to have them I do not know ; but 
 in 1868 and onwards to 1880 the doors of the House 
 of Commons were shut against all reporters of pro-
 
 196 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 vincial newspapers, as such. The privileged men 
 who represented London papers could and did work 
 for provincial papers, as I have shown, but, so far as 
 the officials of the House were concerned, the news- 
 paper world was London. Outside of London there 
 was nothing — at least nothing worthy of admission 
 to the Gallery of the House of Commons. It 
 became my work to open their eyes a little wider. 
 
 From 1868-69 to 1880 the Scotsman, through me, 
 took up the part of the Importunate widow as to 
 admission to the Gallery. Shall I ever forget the 
 interviews I had, the talking I had to do, the dead 
 weight of uninformed obstruction with which I was 
 met ! Of course I gave prominent politicians a bad 
 time of it : I was for ever worrying them on the 
 subject. Then It was that a great truth dawned 
 upon me : the House of Commons — I do not mean 
 the building, but the members — Is the most hide- 
 bound Chinese-like institution In the world. What 
 has been is and must h& pei^ oiJinia scscula scECulo7'tim. 
 I should not be surprised to learn that it required 
 reams of paper and bottles of ink to get a door 
 opened if it had once been shut by order. In my 
 quest I was sent from this official to that with 
 unvarying courtesy, but with no gain to my cause. 
 When I had interested a prominent politician in the 
 question that occupied my mind, he invariably began 
 by promising that of course what was wanted ought 
 to be done, and he would see about it. He did " see 
 about It," and learned that nothing could be done 
 without the authority of the Speaker.
 
 XVII OBJECTIONS TO OPENING THE GALLERY 197 
 
 " Will you see the Speaker, then, and press the 
 matter upon him ? " would be my request. 
 
 " Yes " ; and the Speaker would be seen, and my 
 friend would be told that the Serjeant-at-Arms must 
 be consulted : the Serjeant-at-Arms would then be 
 consulted ; and there a dead wall was encountered. 
 " It was impossible to admit the Provincial Press to 
 the Reporters' Gallery," would be the reply of the 
 Serjeant. Who could contend against so definite a 
 declaration by so high an authority ? 
 
 It seemed to me that I could. To me the 
 absurdity of the non posswnus was clear enough ; but 
 it did not seem to be so clear to those who were 
 kindly trying to help me. 
 
 " There is not room, I am afraid," said one of 
 these friends. 
 
 " Then make room," was my irreverent reply. 
 
 But making room was just what the officials, and 
 members of the House echoing the officials, seemed 
 to regard as little short of sacrilege. It might have 
 been thought that architects had ceased to exist, and 
 masons and carpenters had become as extinct as the 
 Megatherium. As the house had been built, so it must 
 remain. The accommodation for reporters that was 
 sufficient fifty years ago must be sufficient now, and 
 fifty or a hundred and fifty years hence. London 
 might have doubled its population ; the country 
 might increase tenfold in its industries and its 
 requirements ; but the Gallery of the House of 
 Commons must never be enlarged. 
 
 The vain imagining came to me that if I could
 
 198 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 see the Serjeant-at-Arms I could show him the folly 
 of obstruction, and persuade him of the justice of our 
 request. Truly it was a vain imagining. The 
 Serjeant-at-Arms at the time was Lord Charles 
 Russell, who had for his Deputy Col. Forrester. I 
 pressed for an interview with Lord Charles, and got 
 one. Indeed, I got two or three in different years. 
 The result was always the same ; the objections 
 always the same. To tell of one interview is to tell 
 of them all. 
 
 Objection — " There is not room in the Gallery for 
 more reporters than have admission now." 
 
 Answer — "The Gallery can be enlarged." 
 
 Objection — " No ; it cannot : how would you 
 enlarge it ? " 
 
 Answer — " I am not an architect ; but I can see 
 that if the Gallery were extended on each side, taking 
 part from the Members' Gallery, several seats could 
 be obtained." 
 
 Objection — " The members would never allow 
 that." 
 
 Answer^ — " Can you not try them } " 
 
 Objection—" Not easily ; because it is impossible 
 to say what room would be required if your proposal 
 were carried out." 
 
 Answer—" Not much room would be required 
 inside the House." 
 
 Objection — " That is not certain. If the Scotsman 
 be admitted, all other provincial papers must also be 
 admitted." 
 
 Answer — " I am not sure of that. You draw a
 
 xvit OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS 199 
 
 line now between London and provincial papers. 
 You even draw a line between papers in London, 
 Why should not a line be drawn between papers in 
 the country ? " 
 
 Objection — "That could not be done. If the 
 Scotsman were admitted, all other provincial papers 
 must be admitted ; and that cannot be." 
 
 Answer — " It is not in the least probable that all or 
 even a considerable number of provincial newspapers 
 would desire a seat in the Gallery if it were open to 
 them. The expense of keeping a staff of reporters 
 is heavy, and, I suspect, very few of the newspapers 
 would be willing to incur it. Let the experiment be 
 tried." 
 
 Objection — " That is not possible. Even if there 
 were room in the Gallery for more reporters than 
 occupy it now, it would be inadvisable to open it to 
 the provincial newspapers. It would be flooded." 
 Answer — " Then open it to some of the papers." 
 Objection — " That would be invidious, and indeed 
 impossible. Who would make the selection } " 
 Answer — " I believe it would make itself." 
 Objection — " No ; I am afraid it is impossible." 
 Thus my interview would end. Though I always 
 went to those interviews with confident hope, I 
 always came away from them with — not despair — 
 but wonder at the non-necessity for reasoning power 
 in high officials. 
 
 Year after year went on with the pressure great 
 and the results nothing. Perhaps if more of the 
 provincial newspapers had taken an interest in the
 
 200 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 movement ; if more had been desirous of getting the 
 Gallery open ; if even one other provincial news- 
 paper had worked with us, the years of waiting and 
 hoping and fighting would have been fewer. But 
 there was not one. If in any quarter — I mean 
 newspaper quarter — sympathy with the movement 
 existed, it was most successfully concealed. Of 
 course the London newspapers wanted no intrusion 
 into what they had come to regard as their own 
 domain. The reporters in the Gallery did not 
 want it ; because, if provincial newspapers got in 
 staffs of their own, extra earnings for provincial work 
 were likely to be lessened, if not lost. Provincial 
 newspapers did not want it ; because to keep a staff 
 of reporters in London would be costly, and if the 
 Scotsnian got a staff in the Gallery, the example 
 must be followed in many cases. The Press 
 Association did not want it ; because provincial 
 newspapers took special reports from it. Indeed the 
 Press Association was the creation of the provincial 
 newspapers after the telegraphs were taken over by 
 the Government in 1869. "What is the use of 
 seeking admission.?" I was often asked — "you get 
 reports from the Press Association. It gives you a 
 good summary, and special reports if you want them." 
 My answer to this objection was that we wanted our 
 own reports, and I believed that in the public interest 
 it was desirable we should have them. Here let me 
 say that I never was satisfied with the summary 
 report furnished by the Press Association. It was 
 good — of its kind ; but it was not the kind I liked.
 
 XVII SCOTTISH DEBATES 201 
 
 It satisfied English newspapers ; it did not satisfy us, 
 who desired not merely that Scotland should have 
 her fair share of attention in Parliament, but that 
 Scotland should also be interested in Imperial affairs. 
 The Press Association report would give us a long — 
 or at least a longish — account of a debate on an Irish 
 Bill or on an English Bill ; it would give us a few 
 lines of a debate on a Scottish Bill, and no more. Far 
 be it from me to say that this did not represent the 
 respective value of these debates in Cockneydom ; 
 it did not represent their value in Scotland. I have 
 heard it said that a Scottish debate is a weariness to 
 the flesh to most English and all Irish members. 
 That is not wonderful : as a rule they prefer the 
 whipped cream rather than the solid pudding of 
 argument. Perhaps of late this has been changed. 
 I sometimes think that in Scottish debates nowa- 
 days much whipped cream has been introduced ; and 
 I am sure a large part of it is sour. 
 
 All this does not bring my story of How the 
 Gallery was opened to Provincial Newspapers much 
 forwarder, but it indicates reasons why it was desired 
 that the Gallery should be opened. The way that 
 consummation was reached was through the general 
 election of 1880. In that year a large Liberal 
 majority was returned to the House of Commons, 
 and Mr. Gladstone became Prime Minister. I had 
 seen a good deal of him during the election and 
 before it ; for he began his famous Mid- Lothian 
 campaigns in 1879, and we had frequently met. 
 Shortly after the new Parliament had assembled and
 
 I 202 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 j the new Ministry had taken their places, I went to 
 
 London bent mainly on the opening of the Gallery. 
 
 i I had a strong impression that if I could interest 
 
 Mr. Gladstone in the matter, the desired end would 
 
 ' soon be gained, and therefore I asked for an inter- 
 
 view. My request was taken to him in the House 
 of Commons. I was in the members' lobby outside. 
 I had thought that perhaps Mr. Gladstone would 
 make an appointment with me. Instead of doing so 
 he came out to the lobby and joined me there. 
 Probably no pair of talkers ever had such attentive 
 onlookers as we had. The eyes of everybody in the 
 lobby were upon us. It turned out that among the 
 press lobbyists, and most likely among others who 
 were present, there was great curiosity to learn what 
 this interview meant — what it could portend. I say 
 this because in several of the newspapers in the 
 country "our Parliamentary correspondent" wrote 
 paragraphs about the interview. It is a sad indication 
 of the weakness of human nature that even among 
 pressmen there can be jealousy which is only relieved 
 by an ill-natured paragraph or two. That was the 
 mode of relief sought in regard to my interview. I 
 have always thought these paragraphs were a waste 
 of indignation. Mr. Gladstone, we may be sure, never 
 saw them ; I was not much hurt by them ; the public 
 were likely to think more highly of me than I deserved, 
 because they observed me on fairly familiar terms 
 with the political hero of the hour. 
 
 What the interview led to was — success. At first 
 the conversation did not seem to promise well.
 
 XVII REPORTING UNDER THE HOUSE 203 
 
 When I had explained what was desired, it became 
 evident that Mr. Gladstone had not then heard it for 
 the first time. Our cry for the Gallery had reached 
 his ears, and the officials of the House had got their 
 objections before him. He doubted there was no 
 possibility of making room for the reporters who 
 would be introduced. Then came a characteristic 
 passage. Had I ever thought of the possibility of 
 placing reporters below the floor of the House of 
 Commons ? He had been told that everything said 
 in the House could be heard there, and he had often 
 desired to know whether that was the case. Would 
 I go below and see ? Possibly that might solve a 
 host of difficulties as to the reporting arrangements 
 of the House. I agreed to go ; but I also urged 
 that he should agree to the appointment of a Select 
 Committee to inquire into the whole question of 
 Parliamentary Reporting. He promised to do his 
 utmost ; and then having arranged for my admission 
 to the "place below," he returned to the House. 
 
 Into the rooms below the House of Commons I 
 went. They are not subterranean ; they are really 
 on the ground floor. There is, or there was, a 
 strong wind in them, not draughty, but breezy ; for 
 they are, I believe, the channels through which fresh 
 air mainly reaches the House above them. The 
 centre of the floor of that House is grated ; more 
 than the centre may be, for aught I know. Through 
 the grating the fresh air ascends, and the sound of 
 speakers' voices descends. I remained in the room 
 for some time, and found I could hear all that was
 
 204 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 said, at least as well as it could be heard in the 
 House itself. But I could not see a speaker ; I 
 could not see the Speaker. Unless I recognised a 
 voice I could not tell who was speaking. The experi- 
 ence was interesting ; but it did not get the Gallery 
 opened. In no case, without great structural 
 changes, could the floor below be used for reporting. 
 Another interview with Mr. Gladstone, and the 
 story of my experience below, led to an understanding 
 that, if possible, a Select Committee should be 
 appointed. It was appointed. It seems to have 
 been thought that members who were more or less 
 directly connected with newspapers ought to be on 
 that Committee ; and therefore Mr. W. H. Smith 
 was appointed chairman ; Mr. John Walter of the 
 Times was a member, and two other members were 
 Mr. Joseph Co wen of the Newcastle Chronicle, and 
 Mr. J. D. Hutchinson of the Halifax Courier. 
 Conceivably all these gentlemen might be prejudiced 
 against the opening of the Gallery to provincial 
 newspapers. Mr. Smith, as the representative of the 
 great London newsagents' house, might think that 1 
 
 London newspapers alone required consideration. 
 Mr. Walter had for the Times the first position as to 
 reporting debates, and might have been excused for 
 thinking that nothing better was required. Neither 
 Mr. Cowen nor Mr. Hutchinson had shown any 
 desire for the representation of their papers in the 
 Gallery ; and might come to the conclusion that what 
 they did not require would not be good for other 
 newspapers, while it might lead to greater expendi- 
 
 i
 
 XVII A SELECT COMMITTEE 205 
 
 ture all round. As it turned out, Mr. Smith, as 
 chairman of the Committee, was, what he was in 
 everything he took in hand, an absolutely fair and 
 broad-minded man. Mr. Walter had too much well- 
 founded confidence in the reporting supremacy of 
 the Times to feel the slightest jealousy of the 
 admission of provincial newspapers to the Gallery. 
 The other two gentlemen did not like the proposal, 
 and fought against it. 
 
 They were not its only opponents. It had not a 
 single outspoken supporter in the provincial press ; 
 it had outspoken objectors. The Press Association, 
 through its manager, opposed it. Reporters in the 
 Gallery opposed it. I was examined as a witness, 
 and told my tale and answered objections. Mr. 
 Cowen and Mr. Hutchinson took a good deal of 
 trouble with me. They voiced the objections. All 
 the old Lord Charles Russell and Col. Forrester 
 objections rose up again, with others that pressmen 
 had started. First, there was the structural difficulty. 
 That, I urged, was the business of the House ; a just 
 claim was made — a claim as much in the interests of 
 the House as of the public, and no difficulty about 
 finding seats ought to stand against it. There is no 
 doubt that this view prevailed with the Committee. 
 If it was neccessary that the Gallery should be 
 opened to provincial newspapers, no question of 
 structural difficulties ought to stand in the way. Was 
 it necessary } 
 
 The objectors urged that there was no necessity 
 for it. They said that already there were plenty of
 
 2o6 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 facilities for reporting for provincial newspapers 
 through the news agencies which, as representing 
 provincial newspapers, had seats in the Gallery. 
 The answer was in effect that what was sauce for 
 the goose was sauce for the gander. Would the 
 London papers give up their seats in the Gallery 
 and be satisfied with the Press Association report ? 
 Would the Tifiies do so ? If they would not ; if the 
 Press Association reports were not sufficient for or 
 satisfactory to them, why should newspapers out of 
 London be compelled to be satisfied with those 
 reports ? To this reply there was no real answer. 
 
 But the objection took another form. A report, 
 it was said, was a report. If it was verbatim it could 
 be supplied by anybody, and as it must be the same 
 in all cases and for everybody, why should not the 
 Scotsman be satisfied with reports supplied from the 
 same source as other newspapers ? In effect my 
 reply was that the last thing Parliament ought to 
 encourage was the supply of all reports from one 
 source. By doing so, members would put them- 
 selves at the mercy of a single reporter. He might 
 be dull, or mischievous, or dishonest. I have not 
 met with many dishonest reporters in my time — very 
 very few. But I have met some. I have known 
 reporters who had political opinions, not to say 
 convictions. Those opinions were always generous 
 and usually rather wild ; and they told against 
 individual statesmen. Suppose political differences 
 found their way into the one Parliamentary report, 
 what chance would the public have of correcting the
 
 XVII OBJECTIONS MET 207 
 
 error or of knowing that there was error ? Dr. 
 Johnson was a passably honest man, who had nearly 
 a monopoly of Parliamentary reporting ; and did not 
 he, in his confidential moments, declare that in his 
 reports he always took care to let the damned Whigs 
 have the worst of it ? Independent reports corrected 
 each other. The blunder of one reporter would be 
 corrected by the accuracy of another ; and there 
 would be no likelihood of misrepresentation or mis- 
 understanding. 
 
 One ingenious gentleman who had a seat in the 
 Gallery brought forward a plan for a uniform report. 
 It had nothing to commend it except its wasted in- 
 genuity. The proprietor of a news agency, a rival 
 of the Press Association, propounded a scheme for 
 producing an official report which should be at the 
 service of all newspapers. It had the incurable 
 defect of all identical reports that have not been 
 corrected by the speakers. If it was to wait for the 
 correction, it would be of no use to the newspapers ; 
 if it was not to wait, it might lead at times to serious 
 misapprehension. Besides, no self-respecting news- 
 paper would consent to put its reporting into the 
 hands of officialdom. If the identical report was to 
 be supplied by a trader in reports, it would be giving 
 a wholly unjustifiable monopoly into the hands of that 
 trader, and would leave both Parliament and the 
 newspapers at his mercy. If the report was to be 
 official, that would mean that the Government could 
 control it. Of course all Governments nowadays 
 are honest and pure and strictly scrupulous in all
 
 2o8 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xvii 
 
 their dealings. But a bad Government might come, 
 or a bad man in a good Government : and the 
 reports might be tampered with. 
 
 All the requirements could be met by providing 
 room for more reporters in the Gallery. Many 
 reports would make an official report for the news- 
 papers unnecessary, and would go far to provide the 
 material for an official report for Parliament. 
 
 The Committee reported in favour of an extension 
 of the Gallery, and the allocation of seats in it to 
 individual provincial newspapers, or to combinations 
 of newspapers. The work was accomplished. The 
 extension of the Gallery did not lead to a flooding of 
 the House of Commons with small provincial papers. 
 The Scotsman got the first seat. Other newspapers 
 singly or in combination got seats. The old belief 
 in the impossibility of the change was broken down. 
 The papers that could not afford or did not choose to 
 incur the expense of keeping a staff of reporters in 
 the Gallery, kept to the Press Association. But 
 from the beginning of 1881 the Scotsuian has had its 
 own staff in Parliament, and its own reports of 
 Parliamentary proceedings. As a rule those reports 
 have been longer than any others save those in the 
 Times ; and to their general accuracy, members of 
 the House of Commons have frequently borne 
 testimony.
 
 CHAPTER XVIII 
 
 London following Scotland— Special newspaper trains^ — -The Glasgow 
 special — The Perth special — The example followed in London 
 — New machines — The Time^ efforts to obtain quick printing 
 — Its early machines— Hoe's invention — The rotary web 
 machine — Adoption by the Scotsvian — Latest developments — 
 Mr. James Law — London correspondence — Descriptive sum- 
 maries — Book reviews as news. 
 
 By way of illustrating the growth of newspapers out 
 of London, I have told a good deal of the Story of 
 the Scotsman. There are many other things that 
 might be told — all bearing evidence of the fact that 
 British journalism is not exclusively or principally 
 London journalism ; that British journalistic enter- 
 prise has — at least in later years — been more vigorous 
 out of London than in it ; and that London news- 
 papers are, as I write, availing themselves of methods 
 which were devised for them in Scotland. One of 
 these methods is the "special wire." That was the 
 invention of the provinces : it was first adopted by 
 the Scotsman; it was not taken up till years after- 
 wards by the London papers. Let me point out 
 another instance of the light which has been shed upon 
 business arrangements of London Daily Newspapers 
 by the ingenuity and enterprise of the Scotsman. 
 Having got a mind comparatively at ease about 
 
 p
 
 T 
 
 2IO AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 telegraph work and newspaper agents and other 
 previous troubles, the Business Head of the Scots- 
 man turned his attention about the end of 1871 in 
 another direction. The distribution of the paper 
 in most parts of Scotland was as good and as 
 speedy as the railways, coaches, and steamboats 
 permitted ; but there were parts of the country 
 where there was room for improvement if the 
 means could be found, Glasgow and the West 
 of Scotland had papers of their own ; and those 
 papers had great populations at their doors, and 
 could be distributed hours before the Scotsman 
 could be got into the same field. The question that 
 presented itself was whether in this field there 
 was room for the paper, and if there was, how 
 could it be enabled to occupy that room. Not 
 Glasgow only had to be considered. From Glasgow, 
 early trains started for the South and West of Scot- 
 land, and of course those early trains took Glasgow 
 newspapers. They did not take the Scotsman be- 
 cause it had to travel across the country, and the 
 ordinary Edinburgh and Glasgow trains did not 
 arrive in the latter city until too late for the out- 
 going South and West trains. No newspaper can 
 afford to be hours behind its competitors in reaching 
 the places where readers are to be found. The Scots- 
 man was late in Glasgow and the district served by 
 Glasgow. Frequently there were requests that some- 
 thing should be done to enable would-be readers to 
 get the paper as early as they could get the Glasgow 
 papers.
 
 xviii SPECIAL TRAINS 211 
 
 How was the difficulty to be got over? How 
 was the Scotsman to be eot into Glasgow before 
 the early trains left that city and before the in- 
 habitants of Glasgow itself were making ready to 
 go to business? The "Special Wire" suggested 
 the idea of a " Special Train." Before long the 
 Business Head of the Scotsma^i was in communica- 
 tion with the Manager of the North British Rail- 
 way as to the possibility of running a special train 
 with parcels at such an hour as to enable the staff 
 of the paper in Glasgow — for there was an office 
 in that city — to get them off by early trains as well 
 as distribute them in the city itself. There were 
 few difficulties ; at least there were few of the kind 
 that had stood in the way of the change of the old 
 system of news-middlemen or in the way of tele- 
 graphic reform and extension. The matter was 
 soon arranged. For a fixed sum per year the 
 Scotsman was to have a special train from Edin- 
 burgh to Glasgow every week-day morning, leaving 
 about four o'clock and arriving an hour later. If 
 any other Edinburgh paper wished to send parcels 
 it was to pay part of the cost ; but in any case the 
 Scotsman was responsible for the whole. I believe 
 some of the then existing papers in Edinburgh did 
 occasionally use the train ; and I believe that a 
 paper which was started after the then existing 
 papers had died also used the train. It is to be 
 feared that none of them greatly required it. The 
 train began to run on ist March 1872 ; it is running 
 still.
 
 212 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 An examination of time-tables relating to the 
 North of Scotland — the time-tables of the Highland 
 Railway and the Great North of Scotland Railway 
 with their branches — revealed the fact that if the 
 Scotsmmi could be got to Perth a little earlier than 
 was possible by ordinary train it could be forwarded 
 to the North and distributed there hours sooner 
 than it was. Again the " special train " was pro- 
 posed, and on the i8th of August 1872 one began 
 to run for the Scotsman from Edinburgh to Perth, 
 where it caught the early trains to the North and 
 North-East. 
 
 No enterprise of the kind had ever been at- 
 tempted in London. The newspapers there had 
 all London at their doors ; but they did com- 
 paratively little out of London, There was a belief 
 firmly rooted in the London journalistic mind that 
 their newspapers were not only the finest in the 
 world, but the finest in Great Britain. I purposely 
 state the belief in that way, because it bears directly 
 on what I have to tell. Practically the London 
 newspapers did not compete commercially with the 
 papers of the world ; they did compete with the 
 papers in Great Britain out of London. It was 
 wonderful, then, that they had never sought to get 
 to the great towns near them so early in the day 
 as to meet the local newspapers on their own 
 ground. They had done nothing of the kind. 
 The old news-agency plan, the old reliance on 
 ordinary trains, had been good enough for them. 
 It happened that in 1873 Mr. John Macdonald of
 
 XVIII NEW PRINTING MACHINES 213 
 
 the Times came to Edinburgh on a visit. There 
 was a special reason, to be told presently, why he 
 should come to the Scotsman office. He was shown 
 everything, and he took away with him the idea of 
 the Special Train. Before long he made an arrange- 
 ment with the London and North-Western Railway 
 to start a train for Birmingham about five o'clock 
 in the morning. After the train had been running 
 two or three months, the other railway companies 
 going North and West started like trains ; and 
 now what is known as the " Newspaper Train " runs 
 regularly. The suggestion of it came from Edin- 
 burgh, which had been years in advance. 
 
 It has just been said that Mr. John Macdonald 
 of the Times had a special reason for visiting the 
 Scotsman. That reason was that new printing 
 machines built at the Times office had been 
 brought into use in the office of the Scotsman. 
 In the first chapter of this book I have given 
 some account of the progress of newspaper printing, 
 from the old wooden press to the rotary web 
 machine, throwing off its 23,000 or 24,000 copies 
 an hour, printed on both sides and folded. The 
 Times led the way in the adoption and development 
 of these rotary web machines. The proprietors of 
 that paper were striving after quicker printing for 
 many years. In 1851 they showed in the Great 
 Exhibition a printing machine which was new. 
 The inventor's name was Applegarth. I remember 
 the machine quite well. A tall cylinder, upon which 
 the type was placed, revolved vertically, and as it
 
 214 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 revolved it met in turn six or eight cylinders over 
 which passed the sheets to be printed. Each sheet 
 was " laid on " separately, and was printed only on 
 one side. The arrangement was very awkward, 
 because each sheet had to be put into the machine 
 fiat and then turned on its edge to suit the vertical 
 printing cylinders. It was not believed possible to 
 make the printing cylinder revolve horizontally, 
 because of the difficulty of keeping the type in its 
 place. Be it remembered that every letter, or 
 almost every letter, in a newspaper is picked up 
 separately by the compositor. Each type is so 
 finished that it stands in perfect adjustment with 
 its fellow, and each line is supposed to be accurately 
 " spaced out," so that all are exactly the same length. 
 As a matter of fact, one line will be slightly tighter 
 than another. This is of no importance, and makes 
 no appearance, so long as the " form " is a flat 
 surface ; but obviously if the type were placed on 
 a horizontal cylinder so that at times it was hanging 
 head downwards, the law of gravitation would tell, 
 and any loose letters would drop out. This was 
 the difficulty which, in the case of the Times machine, 
 had been got over by making the cylinder vertical. 
 
 Still there was danger of type dropping out, and, 
 as I have said, the arrangement was very awkward. 
 Colonel Hoe of New York got over the awkward- 
 ness and produced machines which for many years 
 helped forward the growing newspapers. It had 
 been suggested that type might be used slightly 
 wedge-shaped, so that when it was "locked up" it
 
 XVIII NEW PRINTING MACHINES 215 
 
 would be wedged together. This was scarcely pos- 
 sible, though the experiment was tried. Col. Hoe 
 took another way. Everybody knows the line that 
 runs between the columns of a newspaper. It is 
 produced by what is called a " column rule," usually, 
 if not invariably, made of brass. Col. Hoe made 
 these wedge-shaped, and fitted them into "turtles," 
 which were sections of the printing cylinder, page 
 size. The column rules were made thicker at the 
 top than at the bottom ; so that when the screws 
 were applied the type was wedged together at the 
 top where the largest circumference of the cylinder 
 was, as well as at the bottom where it was smaller. 
 In this way horizontal type cylinder machines with 
 horizontal printing cylinders became possible. They 
 were not perfect ; for in spite of all precautions type 
 would drop out and make bad work. But they 
 were soon made comparatively perfect by the dis- 
 covery of the papier niachd process of stereotyping, 
 which removed all risks of falling type. 
 
 Still something better and quicker was required, 
 and for some time previous to 1871 the proprietors 
 of the Times had been experimenting with a rotary 
 web machine which would print both sides of the 
 paper at one operation. It might be interesting 
 to know whence the first idea of such a machine 
 came, and from whom. The path of that inquiry is 
 too thorny for me. It is mine to tell what I 
 know and have seen, not to attempt to settle the 
 claims of rival inventors. This is certain — the 
 Times was the first paper wholly printed by such a
 
 2i6 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 machine. The invention had been worked out in 
 the Times office, and the machines in use were built 
 by the proprietors themselves, or rather, I presume, 
 by Mr. John Walter, who was the owner of the 
 printing plant of the paper. The machines worked 
 smoothly and quickly, and did excellent work with 
 the paper on which the Times was printed. Would 
 they do equally well with the comparatively thin 
 paper on which the Scotsman was printed ? The 
 question was asked, because it was clear that some 
 such machines must be introduced if the ever-grow- 
 ing requirements of the paper were to be met. Mr. 
 John Macdonald of the Tiuies believed they would. 
 The Business Head of the Scotsman believed they 
 would. But it was doubtful, or seemed to be ; and 
 there were practical men who asserted that a thinner 
 paper than that used by the Ti7nes could not be 
 printed, because it would not bear the strain of 
 being drawn into the printing cylinders from the 
 reel. Many enterprising business men have from 
 time to time refused to put their trust in "practical 
 men," where new machinery has been concerned, 
 and the Business Head of the Scotsman followed 
 their example. Machines were ordered from the 
 Times, and by the end of 1871 were in full work. 
 They had solved the supposedly difficult problem. 
 It was found that they printed on the thinner paper 
 as well as on the thicker. In short, the experiment 
 was completely successful ; and now there is not a 
 newspaper of any note in the kingdom that is not 
 printed on a rotary machine.
 
 xviii THE 'BUSINESS HEAD' 217 
 
 The latest introductions into the Scotsman office 
 are machines that will print each at the rate of 
 24,000 an hour, and will produce a four, six, eight, 
 ten, or twelve-page paper at that speed. How long 
 they will serve to meet the requirements of the 
 paper I will not profess to predict. If the future is 
 to be judged by the past it will not be many years 
 before they will be superseded. 
 
 While I have been writing of the developments 
 of the Scotsjuan I have spoken of the Business 
 Head of the establishment as the instigator of and 
 the instrument for carrying them out. I believe 
 that to him more than to any other man in the world 
 the newspaper press of Great Britain — at least that 
 part of it out of London — owes most of the progress 
 it has made. Closely observant, entering minutely 
 into details, he saw what could be done for removing 
 obstacles to progress and extending the usefulness 
 of the newspaper, and he saw the methods that 
 must be adopted. It is safe to say that he never 
 took a step without having carefully thought out all 
 consequences. He never took a step backwards. 
 If a certain change were made in the paper — its 
 size or its general arrangement — everybody knew 
 that it was to be continued. He never tried ex- 
 periments with the paper, making promises to-day 
 which were broken to-morrow, or introducing as 
 permanent a feature which disappeared in a month. 
 He always knew the ground upon which he was 
 treading, and he led no one into slippery ways. 
 There were many of the newspaper men out of
 
 2i8 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 London who thought him a "pestilent fellow," for 
 he was always either carrying out in the Scotsman, 
 or seeking to get the opportunity of carrying out, 
 schemes which involved expenditure. The objectors 
 only looked at the cost ; he looked at the result. 
 They complained that they should be dragged or 
 driven out of their easy-going ways. He paid no 
 attention to their outcries. He helped to make many 
 of them rich against their own inclinations. He was 
 the head and front, the brain and eye of the move- 
 ments that have, since i860, brought about a complete 
 revolution in the press of Great Britain. He never 
 obtruded his personality. Always energetic, he was 
 always modest. What he has been he is. All of 
 us find him the same James Law we knew more 
 than a quarter of a century ago ; the same kindly 
 adviser, the same generous proprietor, the same true 
 man to whom any of us would trust our lives and all 
 we may possess. 
 
 It has been a feature in the Scotsman office for 
 the last thirty years, and probably more, that no 
 sharp line has been drawn between the Editorial 
 and the Business Management of the paper. I do 
 not mean that the Business Manager directs the 
 policy to be adopted, or that the Editor helps to 
 keep the books. There is no interference of any 
 kind with the Editor, and no interference with the 
 Business Management ; but there is the closest 
 association and interchange of views between the 
 two departments. It may be thought that there is 
 nothing of much novelty in all this ; the people who
 
 xviii THE LONDON LETTER 219 
 
 think so know little about newspapers. But my 
 reason for mentioning the fact is that there are two 
 matters in which I believe the Scotsman led the way, 
 and in which Editor and Business Manager had 
 joint concern. 
 
 Some time ago a claim was made for a particular 
 newspaper in London that it had been the first to 
 introduce those political and other paragraphs which 
 in papers out of London are usually found in the 
 " London Letter." The claim was unfounded. In 
 an earlier chapter I have said that probably the 
 article written by Edmund Yates in the Morning 
 Star with the heading "The Flaneur" was the 
 model on which many London Letters have been 
 built. There can be little doubt that the suggestion 
 is well founded. But before Yates wrote there had 
 been political paragraphs in the Scotsman. No 
 doubt there was a great difference between the 
 paragraphs he wrote and those that appeared in 
 Edinburgh. The "smart" man of Cockneydom 
 will endorse that statement with intention. He 
 may be passed by. The difference between the 
 two was that Yates mainly dealt with gossip ; the 
 Scotsman soujjht to confine itself to facts.^ This 
 feature is maintained. The " London Letter," when 
 it took collected form, was described as " From 
 Private Correspondence." That was and is in the 
 
 ' When arrangements were being made for the transfer of the telegraphs 
 to the Government, Edmund Yates, as a Post Office official, had to visit Edin- 
 Vjurgh in connection with the transfer. He noticed the London Letter, and 
 was told how it was compiled. He declared that it opened a new field for 
 literary men like himself ; and subsequently he was a contributor to it.
 
 220 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 main a correct description. Friends of the Editor, 
 or of the paper, who had information gave it by 
 letter, and it was put into shape in the office. The 
 one point insisted upon was that the statements 
 made should relate to facts, and should not chronicle 
 mere gossip. That requirement is insisted upon 
 now. There may be, and often are, contributions 
 from a dozen different hands in one Letter. There 
 were London Letters in the far-distant past. They 
 were either descriptive or gossipy. The Scots7nan 
 letter ** From Private Correspondence " was a new 
 departure. It has been imitated — wisely imitated — 
 in many quarters since. 
 
 Another feature which has endured, and is likely 
 to endure, is the description of Parliamentary pro- 
 ceedings. It was long felt that though a report of a 
 speech told what had been said, it did not convey 
 the faintest idea how it had been said. You might 
 understand arguments, if there were any, but you 
 could form no idea of manner. There might be a 
 dispute in the House of Commons ; the words used 
 might be sharp enough ; but the report of them 
 conveyed little knowledge of the tone and feeling of 
 the House itself. This was a shortcoming that 
 required remedy. 
 
 When efforts were being made to bring about an 
 alteration there was in the Gallery of the House of 
 Commons a gentleman named Spellan. He was 
 the chief of the staff of the Daily Netvs. He was a 
 portly man, with jet-black hair — which he did not 
 dye — and white-gray whiskers. I remember he told
 
 xviii DESCRIPTIVE PARLIAMENTARY SUMMARY 221 
 
 me one day that he had been into a barber's shop 
 to have his hair cut. The operator asked him what 
 he wished. "To have my hair cut," he said. "I 
 suppose you mean to have your wig dressed, sir?" said 
 the operator, with a broad smile. He had been 
 misled by the black hair and the gray whiskers. 
 Spellan lost his temper, and used more or less 
 Biblical language. 
 
 Spellan knew everybody in the House of Com- 
 mons. He was an educated man, and had a ready pen. 
 When it was explained to him what we required, he 
 undertook to do it ; and until shortly before his death 
 he did it well. His summary of Parliament, brightly 
 descriptive, was the forerunner of many summaries 
 of a like kind. Even the London newspapers — or 
 some of them — began, after a proper and long time, 
 to think that there might be something in the 
 descriptive summary ; and they have adopted it. 
 
 In still another direction the Scotsman led the 
 way. For the last two or three years there has 
 been a good deal of mutual admiration among some 
 of the London daily newspapers because they have 
 made more or less prominent features of reviews of 
 books. Their praises have been in each other's 
 mouths and have filled them. Books are noticed 
 quickly — that is, some books are. "They were 
 rarely noticed quickly till recently. It is a new and 
 
 an excellent feature of the ." So runs the 
 
 laudation with many floral decorations. Now it is 
 quite true that until recently book-reviewing was 
 put into a back place in the London dailies. Some
 
 222 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 of them rarely had such a thing as a review of a 
 book. Even in the case of the Times, where 
 reviewing was a department in the hands of a skilled 
 man, the reviews only appeared when there was 
 nothing else to be printed. I have myself seen in 
 the Times office many many columns of reviews in 
 type waiting for a chance to appear. In short, book- 
 reviewing was treated as a matter of secondary 
 importance. 
 
 Still, every now and then, when a book by some 
 distinguished author or on some exceptionally inter- 
 esting subject appeared, it was promptly noticed. 
 This was an admission that the public might desire 
 to have early knowledge of a book. If of one book, 
 why not of others ? They could not all be of the 
 same merit or the same interest ; but all of them had 
 interest for somebody. Information as to their 
 appearance and their contents would be as much 
 news as information in regard to any other matter. 
 This was in effect the argument that was pressed in 
 the Scotsman office. It has already been told that 
 from the first the paper had paid attention to litera- 
 ture. Next to politics, literature had been, in the 
 beginning, its chief subject for treatment. But the 
 news feature of literature had not been practically 
 recognised. Attempts had been made to secure 
 early treatment of books. A proposal to have a 
 particular day when book notices should regularly 
 appear was made. The idea was that every book 
 that came to hand during the week should be care- 
 fully noticed on the arranged day. In that way the
 
 XVIII REVIEWS OF BOOKS 223 
 
 news character of the reviews would have recogni- 
 tion. Practically the plan would not work. It 
 often happened that on the arranged day there came 
 a flood of perishable news that washed the books 
 out of the paper. In 1886 the remedy was found. 
 In that year the Business Head of the paper 
 arranged that on every Monday morning the paper 
 should be half as large again as usual, that the 
 "Books of the Week" might be noticed as they 
 deserved. 
 
 From that time till now the arrangement has 
 continued. Every week a feature of Monday's paper 
 has been the Reviews of Books. One result has 
 been an enormous increase of the books sent for 
 notice. They are certainly not fewer than 5000 or 
 6000 a year. So numerous are they that it is often 
 impossible to get all the concise and carefully-written 
 notices of them into Monday's paper. Then they 
 overflow into the papers of other days. But they 
 are never allowed to get old. Before the next 
 Monday comes they have all been printed. This is 
 the story of book-reviewing in its news aspect which 
 some of the London papers are cackling over as if 
 they had laid the egg themselves.
 
 CHAPTER XIX 
 
 Editors of the Scotsvtan — Alexander Russel — Those who knew him 
 — My association with him — His birth and education • — 
 Apprenticed to be a printer — Shorthand writing — Russel in 
 Berwick, Cupar, and Kilmarnock — He joins the Scotsmati — 
 Accession to the Editorship — " Russel of the Scotsman " — 
 Anonymous journalism — The work he did — A writing Editor 
 — His politics — His sturdy Whiggism — Hatred of mere political 
 expedients — Ecclesiastical criticism — " The enemy of the people 
 of God" — Opposition to the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. 
 
 In one respect the Scotsiuan has a unique record. 
 It was founded in January 1817. As I write it is 
 June 1896. The paper has therefore been in exist- 
 ence for seventy- nine years and a half. In that 
 long period only three men have been really respon- 
 sible for its political direction. Mr. M'Laren began 
 with it in 181 7 and retired from it in 1848 — a period ^ 
 
 of thirty-one years. Mr. Alexander Russel joined it 
 in 1845, and died in 1876 — a period of thirty-one 
 years. I became associated with it in February 
 1866, and we are now at 1896. There were two 
 interruptions — they could not be accurately described 
 in other terms. One was when Mr. M'Laren stood 
 aside for a couple of years and Mr. M'Culloch took 
 his place ; the other was for four years after the death
 
 CHAP. XIX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 225 
 
 of Mr. Russel, when the Rev. Dr. Wallace was 
 associated with myself. But these interruptions 
 altered no matter of fact. The real direction of the 
 paper lodged with Mr. M'Laren in his time and 
 with myself in mine. I doubt whether any other 
 paper has or ever had such an editorial record. 
 
 Mr. M'Laren I did not know: he was dead before 
 I came to Edinburgh. Mr. Russel I knew as few 
 men could have known him. Of course Mr. John 
 Ritchie Findlay had longer knowledge of him, and 
 was as intimately associated with him as I was. 
 They were closely connected in the work of the 
 Scotsman from the beginning of Russel's career upon 
 the paper till its close. I have often wished that 
 Mr. Findlay had put in print the story of his associa- 
 tion with Russel. Unfortunately he has not done 
 so. Then I doubt whether any man knew Russel 
 better than Mr. Law. They were on most intimate 
 terms. Long years before his death Russel had 
 learned to lean upon Mr. Law as on a sure staff, just 
 as in earlier times he had leaned on Mr. Findlay. 
 I remember on one occasion before I came to 
 Edinburgh, Mr. Russel and myself had walked out 
 to Hyde Park. There we sat, and I heard from him 
 many things as to himself. But the chief feature of 
 his talk was his praise of Mr, Law. To that work 
 he went back again and again, and it was easy to 
 see, first, that he had a most affectionate disposition ; 
 and second, that he had come to regard Mr. Law 
 more as a son than as a friend, and that he had the 
 most profound respect for Mr. Law's judgment. 
 
 Q
 
 226 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 But when all has been said, I still think that I 
 knew as much of Russel as an Editor as any man. 
 He had many friends. They saw his social side, 
 and they knew him as Editor through the paper. I 
 also knew him on the social side ; and I knew him 
 as a worker. The innermost recesses of his 
 editorial mind had to be known to me. The way 
 in which he looked at public questions might be 
 generally known to many men ; but the practical 
 application of his views could not be wholly under- 
 stood by what appeared in print. You may meet a 
 man every day of every week at the dinner-table ; if 
 you do not meet him at his work, you do not accu- 
 rately know him. Among his social acquaintances 
 Russel passed for a jovial, rather boisterous being, 
 who laughed at difficulties and at the world generally. 
 In society he was all that : in his work he was a 
 nervous, anxious man, who gave all his mind and all 
 his attention for the time being to the subject on 
 which he was engaged, and who would often discuss 
 that subject conversationally for some time before he 
 wrote, as if he were most anxious to be sure of the 
 ground on which he stood. That was prudent ; but 
 it was not the side of his character that was seen by 
 those with whom he dined. 
 
 Alexander Russel was born in Edinburgh in 
 December 1814. His father died when he was 
 young ; and he had to pick up his school teaching 
 at various "seminaries" in Edinburgh. Most men 
 have found that elementary school teaching is only 
 useful to them in after-life as having put into their
 
 XIX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 227 
 
 hands the weapons with which education may be 
 conquered. When elementary teaching is done and 
 secondary teaching begins, an advance is made into 
 a field where distinctive knowledge is to be acquired. 
 Russel seems never to have gone far into that field. 
 He was not a classical scholar. He had read history, 
 and had thought out many of its lessons. He had 
 revelled in the more robust poetry of the Restoration. 
 In his room at the Scotsman office he had several 
 bound volumes of manuscript extracts from English 
 poetry— Shakespeare, Milton, Herrick, Byron, Dry- 
 den, Cowper, Wordsworth, and others. Once I asked 
 him why he had been at the trouble to write out 
 these extracts. " Because I could not buy the books 
 to keep," was his reply; "nowadays all the best 
 poetry and the best prose of past times, if not of 
 to-day, can be got for very little money. When I 
 wrote those extracts, books were dear, and if they 
 had been much cheaper I had no money to spend on 
 them. I borrowed them and wrote out what seemed 
 to me the best parts of them." It is not difficult to 
 understand how he acquired his education so far, or 
 what manner of student he was. 
 
 W^hile yet a lad he was apprenticed to be a 
 printer in the office of Mr. John Johnston, whose 
 wife edited Taifs Magazine. She it was who dis- 
 covered the pen-and-ink ambition of Russel. She 
 encouraged him to write, and some of his produc- 
 tions were printed in the magazine and in other 
 periodicals. This is what tradition says : I never 
 saw those early pieces, but I do not in the least
 
 228 AX EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 doubt that they were written and printed. Every- 
 body knows that a French private soldier carries a 
 Marshal's baton in his knapsack, or may do so. 
 Ever}' lad who goes into a printing office has an 
 Editor's chair awaiting him if he chooses to qualify 
 himself for it. Russel did so choose. He taught 
 himself shorthand. The fact reminds me of a passage 
 between him and myself not long after I had come 
 to Edinburgh. He was in the habit of making 
 shorthand notes and jottings on the margins of 
 newspapers or documents that he might be reading, 
 with the intention of writing about the matter noted. 
 One day I took up a newspaper thus scribbled over 
 with shorthand. Some of the characters were 
 familiar to me. I looked more closely and found 
 that with a little trouble I could read all the notes. 
 It is not likely that I should have taken the trouble, 
 but that the first few words I deciphered showed me 
 that ]Mr. Russel was wronor as to a fact on which 
 comment apparently was to be based. 
 
 I went to his room and asked if he had been 
 writingf on the matter annotated. He said he had. 
 
 " And you have said '" — so-and-so ; I forget the 
 exact point. 
 
 " How do you know that ? " he asked. 
 
 *' Because I have read your notes here." 
 
 "You've what!" he cried, with a great display 
 of comic horror. 
 
 " I've read your notes." 
 
 " Do you know jNIavor's system of shorthand ? " 
 
 " I do ; it is the system I write."
 
 XIX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 229 
 
 "Gracious goodness!" he exclaimed. "Then 
 there can be no more security in mv note-takine for 
 me." 
 
 Then I told him he was wrong as to his facts ; 
 and the paper was saved from a blunder because he 
 had taught himself Mayor's system of shorthand 
 when he was young, and I had done the same. 
 
 Learning shorthand is the first step forward of 
 the printer's apprentice who aspires to an editorial 
 chair. The next step is a reportership. In Russel's 
 younger days there were few reporters who did 
 nothing but report. The reporter was the Editor 
 as well : he was often the canvasser for advertise- 
 ments. If the terminology of the stage were to be 
 adopted, the reporter of the period might be de- 
 scribed as a "general utility man." I doubt whether 
 Russel called himself a reporter : more likely he took 
 the higher honour at once and called himself Editor. 
 He might fairly do so ; for he was all the Editor 
 known in the office of the paper upon which he 
 was first engaged. That paper was the Berwick 
 Advertiser. Russel was there for some considerable 
 time, and then joined the Fife Herald. I never 
 heard him say much about Berwick : he often talked 
 of Cupar and his experiences there. The rival paper 
 to the Herald had for Editor a clever, witty man and 
 good classical scholar — James Bruce, an Aberdonian, 
 author of Euiiiient Aleii of Aberd€e7i, and Eminent 
 Men of Fife, also of two volumes of Classical and 
 Historical Portraits, which Thackeray praised. 
 Russel was Liberal ; Bruce was Tory ; at least he
 
 230 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 was Editor of the Tory journal. They were the 
 best of comrades. They attacked each other as 
 Editors in their respective papers, and enjoyed each 
 other's company as friends. At a later date they 
 were to become colleagues ; for Bruce took an en- 
 gagement on the Scotsman as assistant to Russel. 
 
 In 1844, Russel went to Kilmarnock to help in 
 the foundation of a new Liberal journal there. But 
 he was not to remain long in Ayrshire. Mr. 
 M'Laren wanted an assistant on the Scotsiitan. 
 Mr. John Ritchie, the proprietor of the paper, 
 had noted Russel's writing at Cupar, and had seen 
 in it the promise of great journalistic strength. 
 A shrewd, wise, observing man was John Ritchie. 
 Under a plain business exterior he had much insight 
 into character and sound judgment. He offered 
 Russel the post of assistant to Mr. M'Laren, and 
 it was gladly accepted. At that time the Scotsman 
 was admired by all politicians, or at least by all 
 Liberal politicians. Those who did not like it yet 
 recognised its ability and influence. To a young 
 politician like Russel, who had had his political 
 opinions strengthened into convictions by the paper, 
 a share in its work was a prize worth striving for. 
 To Russel it came without striving, except in the 
 sense of honest work done in other fields in support 
 of principles which were expounded and upheld in 
 the Scotsman. Often, later, he told how to be the 
 Editor of the Scotsman had been the ambition of his 
 youth. 
 
 It was in March 1845 that Russel came to Edin-
 
 XIX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 231 
 
 burgh to settle. He was young and enthusiastic. 
 Mr. M'Laren was old and cautious. At every turn 
 the older man recognised the ability of the younger 
 man. It is a fair assumption — though it is only 
 an assumption — that Mr. M'Laren foresaw great 
 developments of the paper, and knew that both 
 because of aofe and because of a certain intellectual 
 slowness, which was not dulness, he would not be 
 able to meet them. Whether that be so or not, it is 
 certain he was weary of the work and wanted relief. 
 In the comparative youth of Russel, in his wide 
 political knowledge, in his agile intellect, Mr. 
 M'Laren could not but see forces in excess of his 
 own, and exactly the forces required to meet and 
 adequately deal with the growing newspaper needs 
 of the time. There seems to have been some slight 
 misgiving as to Russel's caution. It has sometimes 
 occurred to me that misgivings of this kind have 
 been a tradition of the office. Mr. M'Laren had 
 them as to himself in a peculiar way. He had them 
 as to Russel. The fact was, Russel said brightly and 
 boldly what the older man put solidly yet tentatively. 
 No man was really more cautious than Russel ; and 
 when this fact had been established, Mr. M'Laren in 
 January 1849 formally passed over the Editorship 
 to the hands in which it had in reality been for 
 nearly three years. 
 
 Russel had, then, achieved a position which he 
 rightly valued as the highest to which a journalist 
 of his time could aspire within the limits of 
 journalism. How he used that position, how he
 
 232 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 magnified it, all men know as a tradition, many men 
 know of their own experience. He came to be 
 known as " Russel of the Scotsvian^' and there have 
 been people who have spoken of him as having 
 broken through the impersonality of the press. He, 
 they say, was the Scotsman. He was not. If he 
 had been the Scotsman, the paper would have died 
 when he did. He was not the Scotsman while he 
 lived, and no one knew this better than himself. I 
 doubt whether at any time such a thought passed 
 through his mind. He was always working for the 
 growth and renown of the paper. Even when the 
 hand of death was pressing more and more heavily 
 on him before the last blow, he was desirous to 
 produce something that might give the paper 
 strength. Every letter he wrote from his country- 
 place spoke either of articles sent, or of disappoint- 
 ment that planned articles had not been accomplished. 
 He wanted to add to the building : he never thought 
 he was the buildino^. 
 
 It is not an uncommon cry of the shallow-pated 
 or the angry, that the views expressed in a news- 
 paper are only one man's opinions, and ought to 
 have no more weight in a newspaper than if he had 
 spoken them. These are the critics who condemn 
 what they call the anonymous press. There is one 
 good thing to the credit of the wit of Professor Tait 
 of the Edinburgh University — there may be more ; 
 if there are, I never heard them or heard of them. 
 He was delivering the address to the students at a 
 capping ceremonial, and he fell foul of the press —
 
 XIX 
 
 ALEXANDER RUSSEL 233 
 
 nobody could ever clearly make out for what reason. 
 "The anonymous press," he said, "was the 'pesti- 
 lence that walketh in darkness.'" It was clever, 
 and it embodied the old Tory view of the press. 
 Many of those who talk of an article in a newspaper 
 as conveying only one man's opinion would, so far, 
 agree with Professor Tait. The idea is foolishness. 
 An article in a newspaper may be written by one 
 man ; though sometimes it is written by more than 
 one. But behind it is the newspaper itself — an 
 entity which must be taken into account. It is 
 sometimes said that newspaper men write what they 
 do not believe. I have some reason to think there 
 may be newspaper men who do this thing ; but they 
 are not many, and no Editor would employ them if 
 he were wise. Unfortunately they are employed. 
 Why do they write against their beliefs ? Is it not 
 because the paper for which they write advocates 
 principles or opinions with which they do not agree ? 
 The illustration shows the foolishness of the " one 
 man's opinion " theory. A newspaper is something 
 apart from the newspaper writer ; and no Editor 
 with a grain of common-sense would dream of 
 making his paper the vehicle of his own opinions 
 without regard to its responsibility and its reputation 
 for consistency. 
 
 All this may seem to be a long and prosy 
 digression. It maybe both long and prosy: it is 
 not a digression. It is meant to show the spirit in 
 which Russel regarded his connection with the 
 Scotsman. He certainly never accepted the pro-
 
 234 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 position that such a newspaper is but a cloak for an 
 individual. He never made believe as to his 
 association with the paper one way or the other. 
 He was proud of that association, but he did not 
 misunderstand its nature. I do not think it need be 
 doubted that he regarded the description " Russel 
 of the Scotsman " as a title of great honour ; but he 
 would always have insisted on the retention of the 
 preposition in the description. 
 
 Many pens have written of Russel as an Editor 
 and newspaper writer. Few of them seem to me to 
 have known much about him in either capacity. 
 No doubt the paper bore witness to his skill as an 
 Editor. Everybody, or almost everybody, thought 
 it was an everyday proof of his skill as a writer. It 
 was nothing of the kind ; for the reason that the 
 ordinary reader could not disentangle what he wrote 
 from what was written by others. In the early 
 years of his Editorship, when the paper was 
 published twice a week, most of the articles that 
 appeared might be his, all of them certainly were 
 not. When the paper began to be published daily, 
 he wrote a great deal. It is said that in forty or 
 fifty consecutive publications of the paper an article 
 from his hand appeared. That is not a wonderful 
 performance as such things are judged nowadays. 
 I have not examined the articles Russel thus wrote ; 
 but I venture to say that the last would be as good 
 as the first, and that though the subjects differed 
 and the mode of treatment varied, they were from 
 first to last of fairly equal merit. But he could not
 
 XIX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 235 
 
 write every article in the paper. Yet outside critics 
 attributed all the articles to him ; at least they attri- 
 buted all the best — all that showed humour — to him. 
 In this way some myths have been substituted for 
 facts in regard to his work. 
 
 It ou^ht alwavs to be remembered, when Russel 
 is spoken of as an Editor, that the conception of 
 the duties of that office was different in Edinburgh 
 and in London. There was a like difference be- 
 tween English provincial papers and London papers. 
 The conception of the duties of an Editor in London 
 was, and is, that he ought not to write himself, but 
 correct and mould the writings of others. In Edin- 
 burgh the Editor was expected to write himself as 
 well as to deal with the writings of others. In my 
 opinion the Edinburgh view is the correct one, if 
 newspapers are to be really vigorous exponents of 
 principles, or vigorous critics. If an Editor does 
 not feel a keen interest in a question, he cannot treat 
 it or have it treated properly, unless he is fortunate 
 enouofh to find a writer who does take a keen 
 interest in it. Any skilled hand can produce an 
 article of some kind on any subject : only the man 
 who believes with all his heart in what he writes, 
 and takes a deep interest in it, can produce an article 
 that will move the public. Readers are quick to see 
 through mere phrase-making and sentence-spinning. 
 Thus ninety-nine out of every hundred newspaper 
 articles written to order never have or could have the 
 slightest weight. This is why I think an Editor 
 should write as well as mould what is written.
 
 236 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Assuredly Russel believed in the system. He 
 was deeply in earnest in his political convictions and 
 in his belief in the importance of the duties he had 
 to perform. It has already been said that in social 
 life he was known as a playful humourist, a jovial 
 being who made all jovial about him. Many people 
 found it difficult to believe that he could be the 
 serious worker that the Scotsman showed he was. 
 I do not believe that he could have been induced 
 by any consideration to budge a hair's breadth from 
 the resolute assertion of what he regarded as vital 
 principles. He was a Whig. The name became a 
 reproach in the mouths of Radicals : in the mouths 
 of their successors it is a reproach now. Yet Whig 
 principles, or the adoption of them, had freed Scot- 
 land and England from a host of political evils. 
 They had ensured the freedom that was enjoyed 
 and that has extended. They had regard for safe 
 constitutional progress. They were against utter 
 destruction and in favour of building up. Russel 
 held to them with all the determination of his 
 political nature. There was not an atom of what 
 was and is known as Old Toryism in him. He was 
 not for preserving anything in any institution merely 
 because it was old. He did not believe in keeping 
 a new generation in the tight garments of their 
 forbears. But he was not for trying experiments in 
 the hope that they might turn out successful. He 
 did not believe in political Utopias. He had no 
 faith in the teaching of Radical politicians that a 
 New Heaven and a New Earth would be created if
 
 XIX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 237 
 
 the Church were disestablished, manhood suf- 
 frage adopted, and the House of Lords abolished. 
 He was not for perpetually throwing the Constitution 
 into the melting-pot. 
 
 Neither did Russel believe in putting patches 
 on political sores. He did not expect total regener- 
 ation from the adoption of any measure ; and he 
 expected no good whatever from measures that, 
 without regard to principle or to collateral circum- 
 stances, sought to put a stop to some admitted evil. 
 His range of political view was wide. Every pro- 
 posal was tested by principle and by regard to its 
 probable if not certain effect on other subjects than 
 that to which it was expected to apply. He was in 
 favour of Disestablishment, on the sound basis of 
 Religious Equality : he could never have supported 
 the action of some of the advocates of Disestablish- 
 ment in these days. He did not believe that the end 
 justifies the means. He would rather see a reform 
 that he desired postponed indefinitely than snatch 
 it with dirty hands. Trickery of all kinds was 
 hateful to him. No matter whether it was in 
 ecclesiastical affairs or in the region of politics, he 
 held it up to scorn and derision. 
 
 Especially did he delight in trouncing ecclesi- 
 astical offenders. He dealt them blows which were 
 not less hurtful because they were given with a 
 laugh and a joke. The ecclesiastics winced and 
 cried out ; but the blow told, and though its effect 
 might not be to greatly chasten him who was 
 stricken, it weakened his influence with the public.
 
 238 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 It goes without saying that Russel was spoken of 
 as a sinful man. The Scotsman under his guidance 
 was declared to be the enemy of Christianity. He 
 used to tell a story on this point which illustrates 
 the teaching of some of those who were touched by 
 the whip of his criticism. 
 
 There had been, as there often has been in the 
 Highlands, a ministerial outburst against dancing. 
 Some unfortunate Free Church young men and 
 maidens had sinned against the light by dancing at 
 a wedding or some festivity. Their pious pastor 
 had denounced them, threatened them with excom- 
 munication, given them the promise of the Nether 
 depths, and had indulged in general condemnation 
 of the sin of dancing. The Scotsman had criticised 
 this minister with infinite humour, and had told him 
 some home truths. Shortly afterwards Russel was 
 taking a holiday and found himself travelling by 
 coach in Sutherlandshire. There was some stop- 
 page at a hotel door, round which were standing 
 several of the men of the place whose day's work 
 it commonly was to watch the coach arrive and 
 depart. Russel noticed two or three of these in- 
 dustrious men looking at him, and overheard their 
 words. 
 
 " See that man sitting on the coach } " 
 
 " Yes ; who is he ? " 
 
 " Don't you know him }'' 
 
 " No ; v/ho is he ?" 
 
 "That iss the Enemy of the People of God, It 
 iss Russel the Editor of the Scotsman.''
 
 XIX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 
 
 239 
 
 These pious people believed that the Scotsma7i 
 was the enemy of Christianity because that was the 
 teaching of their pastors, who resented criticism. 
 Nothing is more certain than that Russel never 
 attacked Christianity, or Judaism, or Mahomed- 
 anism, or any form of doctrinal belief. Those who 
 knew him best knew that in him there was a deep 
 vein of sincere religious feeling. He did not pray 
 with the Pharisee. He did not parade his religious 
 beliefs and exalt his own piety before the people. 
 But there was in him far more genuine piety than 
 in many of those who are more outspoken on the 
 subject, and whose goodness is plainly manifested 
 from the mouth outwards. Nothing would induce 
 him to write a word for the paper, or to allow a word 
 to be written, that could properly be regarded as 
 an attack upon any man's belief. Into the field 
 of theology he would not go, nor would he allow 
 the paper to enter therein. He wrote much on 
 what is known in Scotland as the Sabbath question. 
 He would have nothing to do with Sabbatarianism, 
 but he resolutely declined to enter on the Scriptural 
 argument. He treated it simply as a question of per- 
 sonal judgment and wise liberty. He never dreamed 
 of constituting himself the judge or the censor 
 of the religious opinions of others. He held that 
 no newspaper had any right to interfere in such 
 matters. He was for the widest toleration. It 
 mattered not to him what a man believed — that 
 was for himself to consider. But the walk and 
 conversation of men were subjects for legitimate
 
 240 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 criticism. Thus he was ever ready to criticise what 
 he regarded as the extravagant pretensions of the 
 ministers, whether in pulpit, Presbytery, Synod, or 
 Assembly. They did not like it ; few people do 
 like being whipped. The more arrogant and the 
 weaker ministerial vessels assumed that religion 
 was attacked in their persons. It was a false pre- 
 tence. Priestcraft as against civil and religious 
 liberty was barred ; and, as everybody knows, 
 priestcraft is sometimes found in the Presbytery. 
 Russel would have none of it. His hand was ever 
 against what he honestly believed to be cant, 
 bigotry, or intolerance. He was equally in favour 
 of full religious toleration. 
 
 This latter feature was exemplified in the course 
 he took in 1851, when Lord John Russell brought 
 forward the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. The Pope 
 had created Roman Catholic Bishoprics in England 
 and designated them by territorial names. The Ultra- 
 Protestant world was at once in a flame. Pulpits 
 rang with denunciation of the " foreign potentate " 
 who had dared to do this thing. A quotation from 
 King John did service on a thousand platforms 
 and in a hundred leading articles. It was a base 
 attempt to enslave free-born Protestant Britons. 
 The Government of the day was called upon by all 
 it held dear to fling back the insult and the degra- 
 dation ; and Lord John Russell brought in a Bill 
 to declare the assumption of a territorial title by 
 any Bishop of the Roman Catholic Church a penal 
 offence.
 
 XIX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 241 
 
 Russel wanted to know what all the fuss was 
 about. He would have none of it. He denounced 
 the agitation, and especially he denounced the 
 Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. Who, he asked, would be 
 a penny the worse for Roman Catholic prelates calling 
 themselves Archbishop of Westminster or Bishop of 
 Salford ? The establishment of the hierarchy in 
 England, he assumed, was regarded by the Pope as a 
 matter of government within the Roman Catholic 
 Church, It affected nobodv but Roman Catholics. 
 Nobody was obliged even to call Dr. Wiseman "Arch- 
 bishop of Westminster." To resent what had been 
 done was as absurd as to resent any minister being 
 called the Moderator of the General Assembly. 
 
 The war was carried into the enemy's camp. 
 Russel saw with clear vision that what is now called 
 the "Nonconformist Conscience" was rampant. It 
 affected, not Nonconformists alone, but Churchmen. 
 It was not demanding freedom for itself. If it had 
 been, Russel would have been on its side. It was 
 demanding fetters for others with whose creed it 
 did not agree. That was, is, and ever will be 
 intolerable to the man who sincerely loves civil and 
 religious liberty. It was intolerable to Russel, 
 and in every publication of the Scotsman, then 
 published twice a week, he inveighed against it — 
 bore it down by force of argument, helped by shafts 
 of ridicule. The paper suffered. Shoals of sub- 
 scribers withdrew. But Russel stood firm, and he 
 was backed by staunch, honest John Ritchie, then 
 the sole proprietor of the paper. 
 
 R
 
 242 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xix 
 
 How fully Russel was vindicated, everybody 
 knows. The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill was passed. 
 It was dead from the moment it received the 
 Royal assent. The Roman Catholics never took 
 the slightest notice of it. Nobody attempted to 
 enforce it against them : to have done so would 
 have been absurd. At last, in 1 871, it was repealed 
 as a tribute to common-sense and toleration. Who 
 would dream of proposing such a measure now ? 

 
 CHAPTER XX 
 
 Russel and party ties — His views on Home Rule — His readiness to 
 listen to argument — His contest with Mr. Duncan M'Laren 
 — His views on " Working-manism" — Mr. Duncan M'Laren and 
 the Whigs — "Independent Liberals" — Mr. M'Laren's action 
 against the Scotstnan — Presentation to Russel — His continuation 
 of the contest — Reported reconciliation — The Annuity Tax 
 agitation and Disestablishment — The Free Church — The Irish 
 Church — Russel's dislike of narrow Voluntaryism — His probable 
 course in recent times. 
 
 What has been written as to the Ecclesiastical 
 Titles Bill is not only proof of Russel's love of 
 toleration, and his fearlessness in the assertion of 
 what he believed to be the truth ; it is proof that he 
 was not, in the strict sense, — that is, in the thick-and- 
 thin sense, — a party man. He believed in party. 
 He saw that Parliamentary government, if it is to be 
 efficient, must be party government. He had not 
 the faintest belief in "groups." He was convinced 
 that every man must make some compromise of 
 private inclination or opinion at times. But he 
 knew where to draw the line. In the case of the 
 Ecclesiastical Titles Bill he had every party induce- 
 ment to support it. The Government was a Liberal 
 Government of strong Whig proclivities. In most
 
 244 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 things it had his energetic support. The alternative 
 to it was a Government virtually under the direction 
 of Mr. Disraeli ; and Russel did not believe in 
 Disraeli. Yet without hesitation he declared against 
 Lord John Russell's Bill, and fought it from first to 
 last. He was one of the comparatively few Liberals 
 who maintained their Liberalism. He would not 
 set party before principle. 
 
 On many occasions he let it be seen that he did 
 not like the policy of a Government which, on 
 the whole, he supported. With the utmost care, and 
 often with caustic humour, he would indicate that its 
 measures, or a particular measure, did not deserve 
 support. He asserted his right to criticise his 
 friends, and he showed that where he thought them 
 utterly wrong he could and would break away from 
 them. I know it has been said that if he had lived 
 till 1886 he would have gone with Mr. Gladstone 
 in proposing to give Home Rule to Ireland. I am 
 sure he would not ; and for two reasons. One is 
 that he distrusted Mr. Gladstone and most of his 
 Irish legislation. The other is that he never gave 
 the slightest support to Home Rule demands when 
 they were made in his time, but ridiculed and 
 condemned them. Again and again have we talked 
 over the subject, and always Russel denounced the 
 Irish National movement. 
 
 On this point I have a piece of evidence which 
 for many reasons may be interesting. In August 
 1874 Russel was staying at his country-house at 
 Nenthorn. Almost daily, when he was not fishing,
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 245 
 
 he wrote letters to the office, and often — very often 
 — sent in articles. About the i6th of August Home 
 Rule demonstrations had been made in Glasgow, and 
 Home Rule speeches of the usual kind had been 
 delivered. One orator had asserted that Ireland 
 under the Grattan Parliament had " prospered 
 during the succeeding period as no nation in the 
 world had ever prospered." Another had with 
 wonderful iteration sung the praises of Federalism. 
 Russel wrote to me on the 1 7th of August, when the 
 report of the demonstration had appeared in the 
 papers, and this is what he wrote — 
 
 I thought to-day of writing on the Home Rule meetings, 
 but felt it was scarcely worth while ; also, that you would very 
 probably be anticipating me. If done at all, it should be done 
 lightly and slightingly. Note that " Federalism " is not Home 
 Rule, but something more ; that Federalism is to do everything, 
 including all municipal things, such as " sewerage " ; that if the 
 " Independence " that began in '82 made Ireland " prosper during 
 the succeeding period as no nation in the world had ever 
 prospered," it was strange that Ireland should have rebelled 
 during the "succeeding period" ('98); and that in France, etc., 
 there certainly would have been no occasion to apply at this time 
 for the release of the Fenian prisoners, as they would all have 
 been shot or guillotined long ago, especially if Republicans had 
 the rule. 
 
 An article on the subject had been written when 
 that letter arrived ; and I remember that it met with 
 Russel's approval. 
 
 Let me add that there is scarcely a development 
 of Irish Home Rule in these later days that Russel 
 had not more or less directly considered and rejected 
 — that is, when we were talking over the subject.
 
 246 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 The person who can believe that Russel, with his 
 strong common-sense, his genuine patriotism, his 
 hatred of shams, and his love of well-ordered liberty, 
 could or would ever have supported either of Mr. 
 Gladstone's Bills, will believe anything. I think I 
 can hear the words of scorn that would have come 
 from him about the " Union of Hearts," and the 
 like. 
 
 Let It be remembered that my object is to 
 present Russel and his views as he and they were — 
 as I knew them. All who know anything of the 
 relations that must exist, or ought to exist, between 
 the Editor of a great newspaper and his assistant 
 will understand how closely Russel and myself 
 discussed public questions and public men. It was 
 not always my fortune to agree with him ; but never 
 did he show impatience of difference of opinion. 
 On the contrary, he was always ready to argue, and 
 to be convinced, if that was possible. He had a 
 boisterous good-humoured way of meeting criticisms 
 and differences. The voice would be loud, perhaps 
 the language would be strong ; but the eye would 
 twinkle, and there would be a slight picking at his 
 beard. Always, when he had an argument to 
 combat or a phrase to shape, there came a knot on 
 that beard, which was untied as the argument was 
 met or the phrase rolled out. 
 
 On one occasion a complete difference of opinion 
 arose between us as to the meaning of a passage in 
 a public document. We argued without either being 
 convinced he was wrong. In any case an article
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 247 
 
 had to be written on the document, and I proposed 
 to write one, which he might manipulate as he 
 chose, putting in nots instead of affirmatives if he 
 thought fit. He agreed ; the article was written ; 
 not a word in it was altered by him ; and while 
 professing to complain that I overruled him, Russel, 
 it was clear, was convinced. Indeed he was the last 
 man in the world to allow an article which he did 
 not approve to appear in the paper. 
 
 Not long ago a writer who undertook to produce 
 a sketch of Russel and his career said : " Perhaps 
 Russel was occasionally forced into positions more 
 Whiggish, as we now say, than he actually was 
 himself by his antagonism to Mr. Duncan M'Laren, 
 long M.P. for Edinburgh, and who represented a 
 type of political thought in Scotland which had 
 nothing of the broad and generous democratic spirit 
 of to-day, but was a sort of reedy, acid, and botn'geois 
 Radicalism which Russel could not stand." This 
 passage is quoted here for several reasons closely 
 personal to Russel. It seems to assume that he 
 would have been in sympathy with what is called 
 "the broad and generous democratic spirit of to- 
 day " — that is, I presume, with what is commonly 
 known as Advanced Radicalism. I venture to say 
 Russel would have had no more liking for it than 
 he had for the Radicalism of Mr. M'Laren. Before 
 he died, active antagonism to Mr. M'Laren had 
 passed away ; but continuous combating of what 
 Russel regarded as extreme opinions had not. 
 Only a few weeks before he died he wrote and pub-
 
 248 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 lished an article on what he spoke of as "Working- 
 manism." In it he criticised, censured, and ridiculed 
 the modern tendency to teach the working-man that 
 his is the voice of the Deity, that he is the one great 
 prop of the nation, and that for him there ought to 
 be exceptional legislation, relieving him of taxes and 
 endowing him with privileges. Though a Whig, 
 Russel was always in favour of the Ballot, and in 
 every direction he showed the earnestness and 
 honesty of his Liberal opinions. But he absolutely 
 refused to believe that a policy almost entirely 
 destructive could be of benefit to the nation. 
 
 After he was dead, one of those who wrote a 
 memoir of him said : "Like most political economists, 
 he did not deal with questions from a humanitarian 
 point of view, and defective sympathy made his 
 writings on trades' unions and other working-class 
 interests appear peculiarly hard and unfeeling." If 
 this be correct — and in a certain sense it is correct — 
 it goes far to refute the suggestion that Russel 
 would have been in sympathy with "the broad and 
 generous democratic spirit of to-day. " 1 1 was because 
 he thought the democratic spirit was " broad and 
 generous " at other people's expense that he would 
 have nothing to do with it. Freedom from restraints, 
 no oppressive privileges, progressive improvement — 
 these were the things he sought after and supported 
 with all his strength. There was no " defective 
 sympathy " with honest effort ; there was a resolute 
 determination not to say a thing was good when he 
 believed it to be bad. No man saw more clearly than
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 249 
 
 did Russel that you cannot raise the general level of 
 the comfort of the people by class legislation. He 
 was no more for giving privileges to working-men 
 than he was for giving privileges to wealthy idlers. 
 He spoke plainly. Of course many trade unionists 
 and all "Advanced Radicals " did not like it. He 
 did not write to please them : he wrote in the 
 interests of what he believed to be the truth. It 
 has never yet been held that to tell a man that a 
 certain poisonous draught will injure him is "hard 
 and unfeeling." 
 
 The more recent writer whom I have quoted 
 is really unjust to Mr. Duncan M'Laren. The 
 Radicalism that gentleman professed was not 
 specially "reedy," or "acid," or '^ boitrgeoisT It 
 was an attempt to combine some old Liberal prin- 
 ciples with action of a destructive tendency. The 
 " broad and generous democratic spirit " of to-day 
 differs from it in that the pretence of old Liberal 
 principles is thrown away, and the destructive tend- 
 ency is all that remains. 
 
 It is impossible to deal with Russel's career 
 without political reflections and comparisons. He 
 differed from Mr. M'Laren because he believed him 
 to be actuated by personal motives — personal dis- 
 likes on the one side, and a desire for personal 
 aggrandisement on the other. It need not be 
 doubted that Russel was unwilling to see the exist- 
 ing order of things disturbed. After the Reform 
 Bill of 1832 the representation of Edinburgh and of 
 Scotland generally had come into the hands of the
 
 250 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Whigs. I have never had any doubt they felt that 
 what they had fought for and won ought to be and 
 was theirs to enjoy. The patronage of office, whether 
 local or national, and office itself were to be for them. 
 They acted upon that view. My conviction is that 
 they were in the main wise and prudent adminis- 
 trators, who used their power for the public good. 
 
 But there were many people who did not think 
 that the earth was the Whigs', and the fulness 
 thereof. Taking a foremost part among these 
 dissentients was Mr. Duncan M'Laren. He pro- 
 claimed himself, or was proclaimed, the leader of a 
 new party in Edinburgh which was to call itself the 
 " Independent Liberal Party." It was to rally the 
 people against the Whigs. Russel was opposed to 
 it, and stood up for his friends. How he did stand 
 up for them ! Day by day, swashing blows were 
 administered to the " Independents." All his life he 
 hated the use of that word as a description of a 
 man's politics. He has said to me — "When a man 
 calls himself an independent politician it means that 
 he is independent of common-sense, and generally of 
 common honesty." 
 
 It was in this spirit that he fought the " Inde- 
 pendent Liberal Party," and Mr. M'Laren its head. 
 For years the fight went on, and not many days 
 passed without an article in the Scotsman belabouring 
 Mr. M'Laren with cudgels of humour and hard 
 argument. That gentleman was as pugnacious as 
 Russel. He had no wit, nor a grain of humour. 
 He might have been the Mr. Gradgrind of Dickens's
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 251 
 
 Story. He was indefatigably industrious. He 
 loved to pile up statistics. It was indeed a curious 
 feature of the long gladiatorial contest that both 
 combatants loved fiofures. Russel could illuminate 
 them with humour: Mr. M'Laren could not. All 
 the same, they flung them at each other without 
 hesitation and without stint. 
 
 A strong light will be cast upon Russel's char- 
 acter and methods by a little closer examination of 
 his quarrel with Mr, M'Laren. Before joining the 
 Scotsman, Russel had been invited by Mr. M'Laren 
 to write papers for the Anti-Corn Law League. I 
 believe that while he was at Cupar he had written 
 an essay on Free Trade which had gained a prize 
 given by the League, and had brought him to the 
 notice of Cobden. Probably this was why he was 
 approached by Mr. M'Laren. The request that he 
 would write for the League was coupled with a 
 further request that he would attack the Scotsman. 
 Let it be repeated that this was before Russel came 
 to Edinburgh. It is not difficult to understand the 
 reason why Mr. M'Laren wanted the Scotsman to 
 be attacked. It was cautious on the subject of Free 
 Trade ; rather, it was cautious as to the Anti-Corn 
 Law League. It had no doubt about Free Trade ; 
 it had doubt as to the methods of the League. Mr. 
 M'Laren was on perfectly friendly terms with his 
 namesake, the Editor of the paper. He had been 
 a frequent contributor. In after-life he used to 
 point with pride to a portrait of himself which he 
 had paid for with the money received by him for
 
 252 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 contributions to the Scotsman before there was any 
 quarrel. Being on these terms with the Editor, he 
 yet asked young Russel to attack the paper. 
 Russel refused, and it may be that here was the 
 groundwork of the subsequent strong antagonism 
 of the two men. 
 
 In 1852 a general election took place. A few 
 years before, in 1847, Macaulay,who had represented 
 the city, had been defeated by Mr. Charles Cowan 
 on a No-Popery cry. Macaulay would not refuse 
 to vote for the Maynooth Grant, and all that was 
 narrow and bigoted in Edinburgh was arrayed 
 against him. Mr. Cowan, a worthy man in himself, 
 was the chosen champion of the No-Popery party, 
 and he won the election. In 1852 Macaulay was 
 brought forward again. Mr. Cowan also presented 
 himself, and there were two Conservatives. Mr. 
 M'Laren was Lord Provost of the city at the time, 
 and he too came forward as a candidate. This 
 irritated the friends of Mr. Cowan. They knew 
 that the city had repented its rejection of Macaulay 
 and would now return him ; and they regarded Mr. 
 M'Laren's candidature as an attempt to oust their 
 man. Perhaps it was : the question is not worth 
 pursuing. What is certainly true is that some of 
 the Cowanites became very bitter. 
 
 One of these Cowanites was Sir William 
 Johnston, who had been Lord Provost of the city. 
 On 15th June 1852 he wrote a letter to Mr. 
 M'Laren, and took care that the letter was published. 
 In it he described a speech by Mr. M'Laren as a
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 253 
 
 "miserably shuffling address," and accused him of 
 making " false and slanderous " statements, and of 
 uttering " gross untruths." He had, he said, been 
 frequently told that Mr. M'Laren was " a dangerous 
 person to have anything to do with," but had not 
 expected to have practical experience of the fact. 
 Finally, he said, " I hope my fellow- citizens may 
 learn something from this little incident, and take 
 care that they, too, do not take into their bosom the 
 cold little snake that may turn round and bite them." 
 
 This phrase was caught up by the public, and 
 in election squibs Mr. M'Laren was derided and 
 denounced as "Snake the Draper," and the like. 
 The Scotsman did not thus deride him. It was for 
 Macaulay first, but of the other candidates it thought 
 Mr. M'Laren the best. Russel was not very warm 
 in his support, but he was distinctly more favourable 
 to Mr. M'Laren than to Mr. Cowan. The reason 
 was not far to seek. Mr. Cowan's sin of 1847 
 was not forgiven. It was not that Russel distrusted 
 Mr. M'Laren less, but that he disliked Mr. Cowan 
 more. That relative feeling changed in after- 
 years. Mr. Cowan was elected: Mr. M'Laren 
 was defeated. 
 
 In 1856 Macaulay resigned, and his friends in 
 Edinburgh brought forward Mr. Adam Black for 
 the vacant seat. The Independent Liberal party 
 was in arms. All the opponents of the Whig party 
 were in arms. They met, and conferred, and finally 
 chose Mr. Francis Brown Douglas, an advocate and 
 a Free Churchman, as their champion. All the
 
 254 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 differences of 1852 were forgotten. Mr. M'Laren 
 had then called Mr, Brown Douglas a "calumniator," 
 and had spoken of him as " dishonourable." They 
 fraternised in 1856; Mr. M'Laren was Mr. Brown 
 Douglas's chief supporter. Sir William Johnston 
 joined with Mr. M'Laren. The Conservatives — at 
 least their representatives — supported the " Inde- 
 pendent Liberal." The newspapers — Conservative 
 and Liberal — with the sole exception of the Scotsman, 
 were against Mr. Black. Russel had to fight them 
 all single-handed, and he did so with characteristic 
 vigour. 
 
 Naturally he made the most of the previous 
 disagreements among the new allies. He twitted 
 them with their former abuse of each other. 
 Alluding to Sir William Johnston's description of 
 Mr. M'Laren as a "cold little snake," he wrote 
 that at a meeting of Mr. Brown Douglas's nomin- 
 ators there was present " every creature known in 
 the political world — Mammalia, Aves, Pisces, and 
 Reptilia " ; and, he added, " as for the ViperidcB, what 
 could be a more delightful object of Christian 
 contemplation than Sir William Johnston and Mr. 
 Duncan M'Laren lovingly intertwining the folds of 
 their affections, no longer with anything ' cold ' 
 between them ?" In all the leading articles of the 
 period there was but one other allusion to the 
 "snake" description; but one article was brought 
 to a close with a sentence exposing a misstatement 
 by Mr. M'Laren as to the number of spirit dealers 
 who had signed the requisition to Mr. Black.
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 255 
 
 Russel said there was in that statement an error of 
 90 per cent, "which," he added, " is very remark- 
 able in the case of a gentleman who is, like lago, — 
 very like lago, — 'a great arithmetician.' " Finally 
 there were squibs in the paper in which allusion was 
 made to the "snake," the stronoest beine one 
 headed " The Unholy Alliance." 
 
 During the whole of the contest the " Inde- 
 pendent Liberal " papers were notably abusive of 
 Mr. Black and the Scotsman. They flung accu- 
 sations against both broadcast. Of course they 
 accused Russel of indulging in personalities. This 
 brought from him a statement which I quote, 
 because it seems to me to describe with strict 
 accuracy his principle of controversy, not only in 
 this particular case, but in all cases. On the eve of 
 the election he wrote — 
 
 When men are acting in common without having any 
 principle in common — when no man among them can utter an 
 opinion without upsetting the confederate seated on his right 
 hand and on his left — when every shot made of political material 
 aimed at an enemy certainly puts to flight a friend — it is 
 natural that they should seek to employ themselves in personal 
 topics, such as the ascription to opponents of private and sinister 
 motives. Now a preliminary word on this subject of personality. 
 Some dull-minded people sometimes speak of ourselves as indul- 
 ging in personalities ; but the truth is, that, many and hot as have 
 been the contests, in which we have taken our humble share, we 
 never uttered, nor permitted others to utter, a personality against 
 even the most odious opponent. A personality, as we understand 
 it, is the importing into a controversy on public questions, the 
 private affairs, the personal peculiarities, or the supposable sordid 
 motives of the persons engaged in the conflict. The freest and 
 sharpest comment on everything a man says or does in reference
 
 256 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 to public matters is not personality, though it may be either just 
 or unjust, in good taste or in bad taste ; but to attack a man in 
 his private feelings, failings, and concerns, merely because he 
 takes an adverse course in public matters, is " personality," and 
 an outrage of which we never were guilty, art or part. 
 
 Then he appHed this principle as illustrated in his 
 comments upon Mr. M'Laren : 
 
 For instance [he wrote], there is no man of whom, though 
 we would it had been otherwise, we have had to say harder things 
 than of Mr. Duncan M'Laren — at this moment, not insidiously, 
 but to his teeth, we charge him with deserting principles, and 
 traducing his friends, and deceiving enemies, and acting only 
 for his own purposes, and especially his own malignities ; but we 
 speak on no other data than his own public speakings, writings, 
 and actings. As to his having private or meaner personal 
 motives either in this or in any former transaction, there are 
 those amohg his present followers who know that not long ago 
 we refused to allow the slightest vent to accusations of that sort, 
 which went to the public through other channels now choking 
 with his praise ; and we are most willing to add, though denying 
 the relevancy of the subject, that Mr. M'Laren is far removed 
 from sordid motives, and that his private qualities contrast very 
 favourably with his public. 
 
 One more passage from the last article, written 
 after the poll had been declared, may be excused : 
 
 We hold and deliberately act upon the doctrine that, if a 
 blow is not foul, the harder it is put in the better. 
 
 Mr. Black was returned by a large majority. It 
 was a great victory for the Scotsiuan, and Russel 
 rejoiced, it may be, in a rather boisterous fashion. 
 Then it was that Mr. M'Laren brought an action 
 against the proprietor of the Scotsman, and 
 against Russel. He founded his case on the squib
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 257 
 
 "An Unholy Alliance" on passages in articles 
 relating to the "snake" name, and generally on a 
 charge that the paper had sought to bring him into 
 contempt. A jury, largely composed of " Indepen- 
 dent Liberals," gave Mr. M'Laren ^400 damages. 
 He gave the money as a capital sum to the Heriot 
 schools, the interest to be applied to the purchase of 
 Bibles for the scholars. It may be here recalled that 
 when, many years afterwards, the Heriot schools 
 were put under a new scheme of management, against 
 which Mr. M'Laren had strenuously fought, he 
 suggested that the ^400 ought to be placed again 
 at his disposal. His suggestion was not adopted. 
 
 After the verdict in the action just described, 
 many friends of the Scotsman subscribed to pay the 
 damages and costs. I believe this subscription was 
 opposed by Mr. Findlay and by Mr. Russel, both 
 of whom thought it would be derogatory to the 
 dignity of the paper to accept it. But Mr. John 
 Ritchie, the proprietor, did not take that view. He 
 urged that the action and resultant damages and 
 costs were due to the fight the Scotsman had made 
 for the Liberal party, and that therefore it was 
 proper for members of the party to pay the bill if 
 they thought fit to do so. 
 
 Two or three years later, Russel's friends and 
 admirers took a further step. In May 1859 a 
 meeting was held in Edinburgh, at which Sir 
 William Gibson Craig moved, and Mr. Moncreiff 
 (subsequently Lord Moncreiff) seconded, a resolution 
 declaring that Mr. Russel, "by his able, consistent, 
 
 s
 
 258 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 and powerful advocacy of enlightened political prin- 
 ciples, having largely contributed to the diffusion of 
 sound Liberal opinions in Scotland, a testimonial be 
 presented to him in recognition of these services to 
 the community, and as a mark of respect for his 
 honourable and independent conduct in public and 
 private life." The resolution was carried without 
 hesitation ; a subscription was begun, and before 
 many weeks were over almost every man of note on 
 the Liberal side of politics had subscribed. A sum 
 of ;,^ 1 7 70 was thus raised. It was spent in silver 
 plate, which was presented to Mr. Russel at a public 
 gathering in the Waterloo Rooms. 
 
 It is not to be supposed that the kindness of 
 his friends diverted Russel's attention from Mr. 
 M'Laren. Russel was a good hater ; I suspect Mr. 
 M'Laren ran him close in that respect. Anyway, 
 Russel lost no opportunity of attacking and ridicul- 
 ing his opponent. He made opportunities. Mr. 
 M'Laren was active in all municipal matters. He 
 had been Lord Provost, as we have seen, and had 
 once tried to be elected to represent Edinburgh in 
 the House of Commons. He was beaten at the 
 time, but subsequently he was successful. At every 
 step Russel opposed and harassed him. I have a 
 strong suspicion that Mr. M'Laren did not greatly 
 object to the attacks that were incessantly made. I 
 do not mean that he liked being ridiculed and 
 laughed at for itself; but I fancy he had no objection 
 to it as helping him forward in the career he sought 
 for himself. " The blood of the martyrs is the seed
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 259 
 
 of the Church," Russel was for ever making a 
 martyr of Mr. M'Laren. Once, some four or five 
 years before Russel died, he and I were talking 
 about the conflict that had long been going on 
 between them. 
 
 "You have made a mistake," I said ; " you have 
 pursued M'Laren and made a martyr of him." 
 
 "Confound you," was the reply; "what would 
 you have done ? " 
 
 " I would have given M'Laren credit when he 
 did anything good, and thus have given strength to 
 censures of what he did wrong." 
 
 " But, confound it, he never did anything good 
 in his life. There was nothing to praise." 
 
 The argument went on, upon these lines, until at 
 last Russel said, with a good deal of pathetic force, 
 " Cooper, you don't know what that man has done. 
 You do not know the way in which he has sought 
 to undermine those to whom he was opposed, and to 
 serve his own personal ends. If you knew all, you 
 would like him as little as I do." 
 
 It has been assumed that between the two there 
 was reconciliation. It is true they shook hands in 
 the lobby of the House of Commons. It is true 
 that at the election of 1874 the Scots^nan supported 
 the return of Mr. M'Laren. It is not true that 
 Russel's dislike of his ancient enemy had ceased. 
 I shall not readily forget the difficulty we had to 
 induce Russel to allow the paper to support Mr. 
 M'Laren. The old controversies had worn them- 
 selves out. New issues were springing up. Old
 
 26o AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 opponents in the Liberal army had drawn nearer to 
 each other. Still Russel was well-nigh obdurate, 
 and only yielded with a protest. As for the hand- 
 shaking in the lobby, a sentence from a letter written 
 by Russel in London, in April 1876, immediately 
 after the "reconciliation," may give an idea of his 
 feelings as to the episode : 
 
 Entre nous, the gracious Duncan came to me in the lobby 
 last night, made a pretty little speech, and insisted on shaking 
 hands. More when we meet. 
 
 The "more" was not praise of Mr. M'Laren. 
 
 One of the features of the long war between the 
 two was the ingenuity with which Russel, after the 
 libel action, contrived to repeat the cause of offence 
 without infringing the law. On one occasion Mr. 
 Disraeli had written a letter to Mr. M'Laren which 
 praised that gentleman. It was published by him, 
 and Russel criticised it. He began his article with 
 these words : " When the Hebrew prophet raised 
 the brazen serpent high." All the country laughed. 
 
 Another time there had been a demonstration of 
 statistics by Mr. M'Laren. Russel wrote on the 
 subject and said, though it was not legally permis- 
 sible to speak of Mr. M'Laren as a snake, there 
 could be no doubt he was a great "adder." At 
 another time some exposure was made of more or 
 less secret doings, in which Mr. M'Laren as a poli- 
 tician was concerned. " We all along thought there 
 was something in the grass," commented Russel. 
 
 So the contest — if it can be called a contest
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 261 
 
 — went on. The ^400 damages awarded to Mr. 
 M'Laren could scarcely compensate him for the 
 subsequent years of rough journalistic usage that he 
 received at the hands of Russel. As I have said, I 
 suspect he did not greatly regret that usage. It 
 got him into the House of Commons, and it kept 
 him there. Before he died I saw a good deal of 
 him. He was the brother-in-law of John Bright. 
 They had both in earlier years been associated in 
 great popular movements, beginning with the Anti- 
 Corn Law agitation. Russel was as strong a Free 
 Trader as Mr. M'Laren. They differed less because 
 of Mr. M'Laren's Radicalism than because of his 
 local action. The Annuity Tax, which he sought 
 to overthrow, never had Russel's support on its 
 merits. He had opposed it and worked for its 
 repeal. But he opposed the later movement on the 
 subject because he believed it was dishonestly 
 directed, and he did not think good could come of 
 anything that was dishonest. 
 
 It is no part of my desire to enter into any of the 
 controversies of the time ; but it is impossible to do 
 justice, or anything like justice, to Russel and his 
 position as Editor of the Scotsman without straying 
 some way in that direction. Thus the mention of 
 the Annuity Tax agitation suggests the question — 
 What position would Russel have taken up in regard 
 to the movement of late years for the Disestablish- 
 ment of the Church of Scotland.-^ He was not an 
 upholder of Church Establishments. For many 
 years he was a constant attender at the Broughton
 
 262 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Place United Presbyterian Church, of which the 
 Rev. Dr. John Brown was the minister. The 
 United Presbyterian Church is based on Voluntary- 
 ism, and I know that Russel did not believe in the 
 maintenance of an Established Church. But he 
 saw the Church in existence. He knew her history. 
 No man was better acquainted with ecclesiastical 
 politics in Scotland than he was. I am convinced 
 that while he would have been satisfied to see the 
 Church of Scotland disestablished by a great move- 
 ment based upon principle, he would never have 
 given support to an attack on the Church that he 
 believed to be due to narrow jealousy or shabby 
 personal ambitions. The whole course of his con- 
 duct throughout the Annuity Tax agitation justifies 
 this opinion. 
 
 It should be remembered that Russel had no love 
 for the Free Church. I do not believe that any 
 man more thoroughly admired and respected the 
 convictions of some of the leaders of the Disruption. 
 But he did not love the subsequent leaders. It is 
 not necessary here to even attempt to analyse or 
 explain his dislike of or objection to them. It is 
 enough to state the fact. He sharply criticised 
 them. He refused to accept what he regarded as 
 their priestly assumptions. He denied that they 
 had any monopoly of virtue or wisdom or true 
 religion. In his time the Free Church through its 
 Assembly had not declared for Disestablishment. 
 It has done so now, though Establishment is writ 
 large in its Standards. If any one can believe that
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 263 
 
 Russel would have supported a Disestablishment 
 crusade with the Free Church as leader, he can have 
 no difficulty in accepting the story of Baron Mun- 
 chausen's adventures as literally true. 
 
 Russel supported the Disestablishment of the 
 Irish Church, not merely on the ground of Religious 
 Equality, but on the ground that it was a Church 
 imposed upon Ireland, teaching doctrines which the 
 vast majority of the Irish people did not believe. 
 In his opinion, Ireland for its good was joined to 
 Great Britain ; but he did not think that therefore 
 British institutions must of necessity be thrust 
 upon the Irish people. He thought that the Irish 
 Church was less likely to be regarded as a sacred 
 and venerable institution than as the outward and 
 visible mark of conquest. It is not probable that 
 he wholly trusted Mr. Gladstone in the matter of 
 the Disestablishment of the Church ; but he knew 
 that the question was taken up by the Liberal 
 party in whole-hearted sincerity. He could not 
 have found much similarity between the movement 
 then as to the Irish Church and the movement 
 now against the Church of Scotland. 
 
 No man disliked more strongly than did Russel, 
 what he thought the narrow and intolerant views 
 of those who took a prominent part in Voluntary, 
 that is Disestablishment, movements. He seemed 
 to think that they regarded themselves not merely 
 as the salt of the earth, but as the only possible 
 salt. He thought that they not only assumed to 
 be virtuous themselves, but denied that others were
 
 264 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 or could be virtuous. They were — some of them — 
 in earnest ; but he regarded their very earnestness 
 as a danger. It was more to be respected than the 
 insincerity of others who were ranged on the same 
 side ; but it was a danger to toleration. Therefore 
 he wrote against it and used all his humour and 
 argumentative power in combating it. That he was 
 successful cannot be doubted. 
 
 It is incredible that Russel would have had 
 respect in these days for men and methods that he 
 opposed when he lived. For let it be remembered, 
 he was actuated mainly by principle. He might 
 dislike this man or that and distrust him ; but he 
 did not judge a great question on narrow personal 
 grounds — certainly not on any personal grounds by 
 themselves. But he had great regard for methods. 
 He did not believe that if you planted thorns you 
 would gather grapes. 
 
 It is an interesting fact that in Great Britain, until 
 a comparatively recent date, honours have not been 
 showered upon newspaper men. It is otherwise in 
 France and several other countries. There the 
 newspaper is often the path to high appointments, 
 and to honours of more or less value. Personally 
 I prefer the British way, just as I prefer the British 
 civil service to every other institution of the kind 
 in the world, and for some of the same reasons. 
 Neither newspaper conductor nor civil servant 
 ought to be dependent on the smiles or frowns 
 of a Minister; nor should either have any induce- 
 ment to court the smiles. No one has a higher
 
 XX ALEXANDER RUSSEL 265 
 
 respect for dignities that flow from the Crown than 
 I have ; but I am convinced that no newspaper man 
 in active work ought to accept one. Those who 
 think differently may do so with perfect honesty. 
 To me it seems that as such honours come through 
 the Minister of the day, they may be regarded 
 both by him and the world generally as rewards 
 for party services rendered. It is not in the 
 interests of honestly independent journalism that 
 such a view should find support in the acceptance 
 of dignities by men whose only apparent claim to 
 them is that they have owned or edited newspapers 
 that had supported the party through whose hands 
 the honours are bestowed. No doubt this is entirely 
 a matter of opinion : I simply state mine. 
 
 But there are honours which are avowedly recog- 
 nitions either of political services well rendered, or 
 of literary or journalistic eminence. These can 
 never be misinterpreted as bribes. One such 
 honour was conferred on Russel. In April 1875 
 he was elected a member of the Reform Club by 
 nomination and without ballot. The Committee of 
 the Club had then and have now the power of 
 electing two members each year on the ground 
 of distinguished service to the Liberal party. In 
 1869 Mr. Gladstone and Lord Granville were thus 
 elected, and in subsequent years the Marquis of 
 Hartington (now Duke of Devonshire), Earl Spencer, 
 Lord Lansdowne, Mr. Cardwell, the Duke of Bed- 
 ford, the Duke of Westminster, and Lord Odo 
 Russell had been chosen. No election was made
 
 266 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xx 
 
 in 1874; but in 1875, Russel was placed on the 
 roll of members of the Club. Mr. (afterwards Sir) 
 James Caird, who had moved the election, was the 
 first to congratulate Russel. No man could have 
 been more pleased than Russel himself. He spoke 
 to us of what had been done. He wrote to his 
 friends on the subject. Yet he had grave doubts 
 whether announcement of the honour done to him 
 should be made in the Scotsman. I had no doubt 
 that, if only as a matter of news, it must be made. 
 In a letter to Mr. Law he wrote that he had yielded 
 to my pressure, and that he had done so with much 
 misgiving.
 
 CHAPTER XXI 
 
 Russel's early experience in writing — Disparagement of quick writing 
 — Number of articles per day — Russel and literature — His 
 style — His careful guarding of statements — Mr. Gladstone and 
 his Cabinet — Russel's use of humour — Illustration, not mere 
 joking — Russel and imagination — The subjects he delighted 
 in — His inability to praise — His appropriation of credit of 
 articles — Quicker journalism — Spontaneity of Russel's humour 
 — Anecdotes — Russel known on the country-side — His use of 
 quotations — Memory's betrayal — A closing interview — Mr. J. 
 R. Findlay's reminiscences of Russel. 
 
 When Alexander Russel began to edit a newspaper 
 there was no pressure upon him as to time or 
 otherwise. His first efforts were in connection 
 with papers published once a week. When he 
 joined the Scotsman it was published twice a week. 
 He was not greatly troubled with quick posts or 
 many telegrams. Indeed, until long afterwards he 
 could write at comparative leisure on a subject 
 that he had considered for hours or even days. He 
 had no fear of further news before his eyes — news 
 that might require an alteration of what he was 
 writing. One result of this was that he got into 
 the habit of thinking that the leading article of 
 to-day might be — if it was not all the better for 
 being — on the subject of the day before yesterday.
 
 268 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 The change of publication to a daily issue did not 
 make much difference to him in this respect. He 
 wrote every day for some time ; but he had all the 
 day in which to write. 
 
 It has sometimes occurred to me to speculate 
 upon what Russel would have been if he had 
 entered newspaper life thirty years later than he 
 did. Would he have been, either as Editor or as 
 writer, as marked a personality as he was in his 
 time ? Would he have adapted himself to the more 
 pressing requirements of modern journalism ? As 
 to this second question I am inclined to think he 
 would not. Ten years before he died, the pressure 
 was increasing week by week ; and he did not like 
 it. He was not a quick writer in the ordinary 
 sense, and he did not care to be pushed. He did 
 not like the idea of writing late at nieht on the 
 event of the evening, and it was long before he 
 could be reconciled to it. He would complain in 
 later days that his " topic " had been taken from 
 him by a writer on the previous night. Perhaps 
 it was a debate in Parliament or an incident in the 
 House of Commons that he would have liked to 
 write about in leisurely fashion next day. Some 
 writer had taken up the topic the night of the 
 debate or incident, and Russel found an article on 
 it when he opened his paper in the morning. He 
 objected to this, I am pretty sure he did not think 
 it good journalism. I am certain he thought it 
 militated against good writing and sound thinking. 
 
 That was the natural feeling of a man who
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 269 
 
 had never, or very rarely, written under pressure. 
 Nothing is more common than for some slow- 
 witted people to disparage the day-to-day writing 
 in newspapers. They cannot write or think except 
 with an effort ; and they stamp as poor and in- 
 effectual anything that is produced quickly. Their 
 standard of merit of an article is the length of time 
 taken in the writing of it. They require many 
 hours to do what another man can do in one 
 hour ; how is it possible for his article to be as 
 good as theirs ? Not only is it possible, it is 
 almost certain that the quickly written article will 
 be the better. As a rule your slow writer is a 
 dull thinker, and you cannot get much that is 
 good from such a source. There may be wit in 
 him somewhere, to be developed perhaps with 
 artificial stimulants, or with much midnight oil ; but 
 there are certainly slowness and dulness. 
 
 No one will imagine that I am in the least 
 identifying Russel with these slow-witted people 
 who find in their slowness a cause of self-gratulation. 
 Assuredly he was not slow-witted. No more nimble 
 wit could have been found. My desire is to 
 vindicate him from the implied charge of the slow 
 men that he was one of their number. He was not. 
 I do not believe that if he had been in active news- 
 paper life now he would have stood out as he did in 
 his own time ; but he would never have been a slow 
 thinker, though he might have been a comparatively 
 slow writer. His objection to articles written 
 rapidly sprang from the habits of his early news-
 
 270 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 paper life. He objected to more than one article in 
 a single issue of the paper ; and he always moaned 
 — it might be partly in joke — when, with his consent, 
 more than one appeared. It was not any dislike of 
 the second article in itself, it was the feeling that 
 there ought not to be more than one article. No 
 doubt this feeling had its origin in the practice of 
 past times. One article was enough in the early 
 daily days, for two reasons. First, there was no 
 telegraphic crowding of news ; second, there was 
 only one writer available — the Editor himself Of 
 course there were contributors ; but I suspect they 
 were then what they are now, irregular folk, that is, 
 irregular in their offers of help. The Editor had to 
 rely upon himself in the main, and of course he 
 came to think that one leading article was enough. 
 One is always enough, if there be no more than one 
 subject to which it is desirable to call public attention. 
 If there be more than one subject, there should be 
 more than one article. Russel came to see this, 
 and made no objections when the number of articles 
 was increased. 
 
 Part of the reason given for Russel's comparatively 
 slow writing has been that he had a fine literary 
 taste, and that he insisted that his leading columns 
 should have a high literary character. I do not 
 believe the suggestion will bear examination. It is 
 true that Russel had a wide and deep acquaintance 
 with English literature. Of course he could not 
 like illiterate articles ; only a fool or an ignoramus 
 would. But I do not believe he cared much for
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 271 
 
 literary form. He cared for ideas, and he liked 
 what he used to speak of as "good phrasing." If 
 there were no ideas in an article he despised it, 
 though it might be written with elegance. Forceful 
 thought was what he wanted ; and he had no care 
 for dandified literature. 
 
 As a matter of fact Russel's own style was any- 
 thing but elegant. He wrote long sentences with 
 many parentheses. Once I said to him, " Why are 
 you so parenthetical in your writing ?" "What do 
 you mean ? " he asked. " I mean that you introduce 
 into most of your sentences a parenthetical passage 
 or two." "You mean to say that I write involved 
 sentences ? " " No, I do not, in the ordinary sense. 
 Your sentences are involved, but no one can mistake 
 their meaning. What I am pointing to is your 
 habit of parenthesis." " Well," he said, " it is true ; 
 you are right. I got into the habit during the Free 
 Trade times. If I made a statement then, the other 
 side took it up and distorted it, and I got into the 
 way of carefully guarding all I said." 
 
 No better explanation of his style could be given. 
 Those who take note of the utterances of careful 
 statesmen will find that they never fail to introduce 
 qualifying words or passages into their statements. 
 It is the caution of the man accustomed to con- 
 troversy. I suppose no one ever illustrated it 
 more completely than Mr. Gladstone. It would be 
 difficult to take up any statement made by him, and 
 to say with absolute assurance what it meant. One 
 of his colleagues in the Cabinet of 1880-85 told me
 
 272 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 that on a certain occasion a difficulty arose at a 
 Council meeting. If I remember aright it was in 
 connection with Egyptian affairs. Mr. Gladstone 
 had made a statement in the House of Commons 
 which was interpreted in a particular way. The 
 Opposition raised questions, and the development of 
 affairs in Egypt convinced the Government that the 
 position previously taken up could not be maintained. 
 At the Cabinet Council, Mr. Gladstone proposed 
 that he should make to the House a statement 
 which he described. 
 
 "You cannot do that," said another member of 
 the Cabinet, with the manifest assent of the other 
 Ministers, "you said so and so (the opposite) the 
 other day." 
 
 " I don't think I said that," Mr. Gladstone 
 replied. 
 
 " Yes, you certainly did," was the general declara- 
 tion. 
 
 " I do not think I did ; let us send for the Timesr 
 The Times was sent for ; the report of what Mr. 
 Gladstone had said was referred to, and then it was 
 found that there were qualifying words which 
 deprived the statement of the definite meaning that 
 had been attached to it. 
 
 Russel's qualifications never went so far as this ; 
 they never enabled him to appear to be saying one 
 thing while he wished to be understood as saying 
 something else. He said what he meant, and his 
 qualifications had no other object than that of 
 making his meaning clearer and less liable to be
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 273 
 
 misunderstood. But I never knew a man editorially 
 connected with a newspaper who troubled himself 
 less with the form or more with the substance of 
 what was written. "There you go down into the 
 dirt, the whole dozen of you," was the opening 
 part of the opening sentence of a triumphant article 
 just after Mr, Brown Douglas's election, in which the 
 "Independent Liberals" had been beaten. It was 
 followed by a string of names — as " Mackenzieites, 
 M'Larenites," etc., who had gone "down into the 
 dirt." Everybody knew what it meant ; nobody 
 could praise it for literary taste. It was but one 
 instance of many. Let an article have ideas, with 
 even a suspicion of humour, and it satisfied Russel. 
 At one time we had a contributor, a minister in 
 Fife, who wrote articles that were almost gro- 
 tesquely humorous. It was impossible not to laugh 
 at them. Many people — foolish people — thought 
 they were written by Russel. He was not altogether 
 pleased at this ; but he could take no step to dis- 
 illusionise the mistaken ones. He saw and knew 
 the difference between the articles and his own. 
 One day when we were talking about them and their 
 writer, Russel said, " I saw Hill Burton to-day, and 
 
 he was speaking of D 's articles. He said he 
 
 knew they were not mine. They were very funny, 
 but they were funny for fun's sake. ' When you 
 are humorous,' he said, 'you are humorous for a 
 serious purpose ; you want to enforce a serious 
 lesson ; that writer cares nothing for the lesson, but 
 everything for the fun.' " 
 
 T
 
 274 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 It would be difficult to give a better description 
 of Russel's use of humour. Often have I felt irri- 
 tation when people have spoken of him as if he 
 were a buffoon who grinned through a horse-collar 
 to win the laughter of the gallery. He was nothing 
 of the kind. Sometimes people have said that 
 "Scotland roared at his sallies." It is a coarse 
 and inaccurate way of saying that Scotsmen, who 
 keenly appreciate humour, were amused and inter- 
 ested by his writing. There would be no inaccuracy 
 in saying that Russel's humour was at times rough : 
 it never was mere fooling. He did not always touch 
 his opponent with a rapier ; but he touched him in 
 such a way that if that opponent had common-sense 
 and temper it would improve him even though he 
 felt some irritation. 
 
 One writer on Russel discovered that he had no 
 imagination. Such a statement seems to me to 
 show that the man who made it suffered from 
 literary blindness. I am not sure that I know 
 exactly what he meant. I do not believe that 
 Russel could have written an epic poem, or pastoral 
 verses, or love-lorn sonnets ; I am sure he would 
 have had extreme difficulty in producing a novel. 
 But to say that he was devoid of imagination is 
 silly. No matter how hard were the facts with 
 which he might be dealing, he illumined them with 
 his imagination. Unless it is to be held that 
 there is no connection between imagination and 
 humour, the charge against him disproves itself 
 A sense of humour is not necessarily a part of
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 275 
 
 the imaginative faculty, but imagination is part of 
 humour. It has been said that no man more 
 strongly illustrated the imaginative faculty than did 
 Mr. Gladstone in his financial expositions. No 
 sneer was implied : the statement was sober truth. 
 Russel showed his imagination in the same way, and 
 with like subjects. He delighted in figures, not 
 as mere dry facts, but as indications of many things 
 not always visible to the ordinary eye. In no in- 
 stance was this better illustrated than in his contest 
 with Mr. Duncan M'Laren. That gentleman, as 
 I have before said, was fond of statistics. But a 
 column of figures was a column of figures to him, 
 "and it was nothing more." To Russel it was 
 much more, and he made it much more to those 
 who read his exposition of it. 
 
 When I was coming to Edinburgh a friend who 
 had served the Scotsman for many years, and who 
 knew Russel well, said to me — " Let me give you 
 a word of caution. Never offer to write on Board 
 of Trade Returns or National Finance, or statistics 
 of any kind. Russel regards all these things as his 
 own, and he would resent your coming in." This 
 advice troubled me a little ; for it seemed to indi- 
 cate that Russel was a jealous man. As a matter 
 of fact he was, in regard to the paper. He was 
 not fond of intrusions into his domain, or what he 
 regarded as his domain. He looked askance at 
 articles by his colleagues that seemed to touch his 
 subjects. He rarely bestowed commendation on 
 any worker. One day we were talking together as
 
 276 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 to the merits of work that had been done by one 
 of the staff, and I suggested that Russel should 
 say a few words of commendation to him. " Man," 
 was the reply, " I can't. I can't praise anybody ; 
 I never could." This was very nearly the truth, 
 but it was not exactly true. He could and did give 
 praise of his co-workers to third persons ; now and 
 then he said a word of praise in a shamefaced way 
 to a man himself. But it was plainly uncongenial 
 to him. My impression always was that the in- 
 ability to praise arose in the main from a constitu- 
 tional shyness as to certain things. It is sometimes 
 an impertinence to give praise : Russel, I fancy, 
 thought it almost always an impertinence. 
 
 Still there was a strong leaven of jealousy in 
 him. He did not care to hear praise of articles 
 that he had not written. When such praise was 
 bestowed in his hearing, he accepted it for himself. 
 The assumption of the praiser always was that 
 Russel had written the article under discussion. 
 Very likely he had not ; but he never allowed the 
 praise to go past himself. I have sat at the same 
 table with him many times and heard a particular 
 article praised as his. " Nobody but yourself could 
 have written that article, Russel," somebody would 
 say. Or, " We can all see your hand in that article." 
 Perhaps Russel would give me a look, but not a 
 word would he say by way of disclaimer, though 
 it might be and very commonly was the fact that 
 he had never seen the article till it appeared in the 
 paper. So far I think he had a certain justification.
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 277 
 
 An article in a newspaper ceases to be an individual 
 pronouncement. The Editor is responsible for it, 
 and he ought not to let the world know by whom 
 it is written. But this is scarcely the point of 
 the position taken up by Russel. He did not 
 discourage the perhaps natural and certainly vulgar 
 curiosity as to the writer of an article. He let it 
 be assumed that he was that writer. If he had 
 simply desired to baffle curiosity, he might have 
 done what he did ; but he took a like course when 
 he had no such excuse. It is no exaggeration to 
 say that in the later years of his life more than half 
 the articles in the Scotsman popularly attributed to 
 him were the productions of others. 
 
 The warning my London friend gave me when 
 I was coming to Edinburgh kept me away for a 
 short time from writing on statistical subjects ; but 
 soon I took them up, and before long they fell 
 mainly into my hands. The reason was obvious and 
 simple. If there was any importance in Board of 
 Trade Returns it was desirable to have that import- 
 ance indicated at the earliest moment. Nothing 
 was to be gained, so far as the paper was concerned, 
 by delay. No doubt it might be held that Russel, 
 a day later, would make the importance of the 
 Returns clearer than I could. But the answer to 
 such a proposition is that if I did not make the 
 matter quite clear to-day he could complete the 
 process to-morrow. As a matter of fact, Russel did 
 not find it necessary to go over the ground again ; 
 and thus Budgets, Statistical Returns, and the like
 
 278 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 were as regularly dealt with by me as they had 
 been by Russel. 
 
 This did not come about quite silently. He did 
 not pretend to like it. His objection was that he 
 should be deprived of the topic. He cried out 
 inside the office ; but he soon saw that if the paper 
 was to keep in the front rank it must deal more 
 rapidly with public events than it had done. He 
 was not so foolish as some people who seem to 
 think that quickness spells inaccuracy. Possibly 
 he may have thought at first that there was in quick 
 writing a danger of the paper being committed to 
 some course that would have to be retraced ; though 
 I do not believe he did. In any case, if he was 
 troubled with such a fear he speedily lost it. 
 
 Much has been said of Russel's humour. It was 
 a delight to every one who knew him, and to every 
 one who made acquaintance with it in what he 
 wrote. Sometimes it has occurred to me to think 
 that the best of Russel's humour was not shown 
 in his writings. It was more artificial there than 
 it was in his conversation. As he wrote with much 
 preparation, the humour was prepared. In talk it 
 was spontaneous. It bubbled out of him. An 
 excellent instance of this is afforded in a story which 
 has been told and mistold pretty often. 
 
 One day I went to his room for some purpose. 
 He sat at his desk facing the door. As I opened 
 it the light must have struck rather strongly upon 
 my hair, fast growing gray. He, who was bald, 
 put up his glasses and said, " Man, Cooper, how
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 279 
 
 white you're getting." Passing my fingers through 
 my hair, I replied, " At any rate, there's plenty of 
 it." "Oh," came the retort, "mine preferred death 
 to dishonour." There was no preparation in that 
 case. 
 
 Innumerable instances of a like kind could be 
 aiven. His conversation at the dinner-table was 
 ever bright with humorous gems, that never were 
 prepared. It has been told of some diners-out that 
 before leaving home they took a selection of stories 
 from their commonplace book and led up to them 
 during the evening. Russel had no commonplace 
 book of that kind. I do not believe a joke or a 
 story at a dinner-table was in his mind five minutes 
 before it was given out. On one occasion I saw 
 this spontaneity of humour and wit strikingly de- 
 monstrated. I was at a dinner party at which 
 Russel, W. B. Hodgson, Professor of Political 
 Economy at the Edinburgh University, Mr. (now 
 Sir) Arthur Mitchell, and one or two others were 
 present. Hodgson was a great story-teller, and, in 
 that respect, most amusing. He and Russel told 
 stories all the evening ; but there was the widest 
 difference between them. Hodgson's stories were 
 proofs of his possession of a good memory of books : 
 Russel's were purely spontaneous. They came from 
 him with a delightful freshness that brought com- 
 plete enjoyment to those of us who listened. 
 
 Sometimes Russel got the worst of an encounter 
 of wits — never, I should say, if the encounter were 
 with adults ; with youngsters anything may happen.
 
 28o AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 One Friday afternoon he was going to Tweedside 
 to fish, and had taken his seat in the train at the 
 Waverley Station when a news-boy came along. 
 ''Scotsman, sir," said he, offering a paper to Russel. 
 " Is it to-day's ?" was asked. "Yes." " That is no 
 use to me; I'll give you sixpence for to-morrow's 
 Scotsman^ " Here you are, sir," said the lad ; and 
 he pulled out a Weekly Scotsman, which, though 
 dated Saturday, was issued on Friday. Russel 
 had to pay the sixpence. 
 
 There is another story in connection with him 
 that may be excused if given here. His hand- 
 writing was detestable. Few but those who were 
 accustomed to it could make it out. A domestic 
 servant who had been in Russel's employment had 
 married a discharged soldier, who was, at a later 
 time, wanting work. His wife asked Russel if he 
 could not get something for her husband to do ; 
 and good-naturedly he pressed Mr. Law to give the 
 man work if any opportunity arose in the office. 
 At last a vacancy came for a reading -boy — the 
 unfortunate being who has to read " copy " to the 
 proof-reader. Mr. Law sent for Russel's man, who 
 came in due course. Could he read } was asked. 
 Yes, he could. Could he read writing as well as 
 printed matter } Yes ; he could read anything. 
 "Can you read that?" asked Mr. Law, putting 
 into his hand a page of Russel's manuscript. The 
 poor man looked at it, turned it upside down, 
 glanced at it in all ways, and then put it down on 
 the table with a bang. " The fellow that wrote
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 281 
 
 that," said he, "will never make his living by his 
 writing." 
 
 Little has been said of Russel's out-door life ; yet 
 not to know what it was would be to leave a great 
 part of him unknown. He loved angling, and of 
 course he loved hills and streams everywhere. Very 
 rarely was he in town for a whole week. (I am 
 speaking of later years ; but I believe it would also 
 be true to a large extent of the earlier days of his 
 connection with the. Scotsman.) "The meditative 
 man's recreation " had unceasing charms for him. 
 He knew all the Border country, and was known in 
 it, for he spent almost every hour of leisure on its 
 streams. Beyond doubt the excellence of his work 
 was to some extent due to his love of angling. He 
 could and did think over public questions and par- 
 ticular phrases while he was casting his flies. No 
 one came near him at such a time to be received 
 with a frown. Always a joke or a story was ready, 
 and there would be laughter and good-fellowship. 
 Not to this man alone or to that did he confine his 
 talk. He spoke to everybody, and spoke to each as 
 if he had known him all his life. "That is the way 
 to get information," he said to me one day in the 
 country when he had stopped for a " crack " with an 
 agricultural labourer; "you always get something 
 out of such men." 
 
 " I suppose you do not know them all ?" I asked. 
 
 " No," he replied, " I know very few of them ; 
 but they know me." And then he told how on one 
 occasion when he had been to "the Nest" on an
 
 282 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 angling trip, and was driving to Galashiels, he heard 
 a voice crying, " Russel ! Russel ! " He looked 
 about and he saw that the shout came from a plough- 
 man who was at work in a field past which he was 
 driving. The man pulled up his horses, left his plough- 
 stilts, ran down to the roadside hedge, and asked 
 over it, " How is the Irish Church Bill getting on?" 
 I wonder where else in all the wide world an Editor 
 of a great newspaper would have been accosted in 
 like manner, or asked such a question by a peasant. 
 There are some writers in newspapers whose 
 chief armoury seems to be a Dictionary of Quota- 
 tions. Russel wanted no help of the kind. He was 
 not much given to quotations by way of illustration ; 
 but when he did quote he drew upon a well-stored 
 memory. At one time Edinburgh had for a very 
 prominent Town Councillor, Mr. David Lewis. He 
 was an "Independent Liberal" — perhaps he was 
 more. Anyway, Russel liked neither his politics 
 nor his methods. At last Mr. Lewis accepted a 
 post as Treasurer to the Heriot Trust, and he 
 described his post as his "political coffin." He did 
 not refrain from public agitation, however, and 
 Russel called him to order with these lines : 
 
 " Lie still, if you're wise, 
 You'll be damned if you rise." 
 
 Where did he get those lines ? 
 
 On another occasion I had a curious exemplifica- 
 tion of his store of poetic knowledge, and of the 
 untrustworthiness of memory in the case of quota-
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 283 
 
 tion. He went to Egypt to the opening of the Suez 
 Canal, and wrote several descriptive letters. In 
 them were many quotations, which he asked me to 
 verify. They were all right in sense ; they were 
 full of verbal errors. 
 
 Once I had another curious instance of this un- 
 trustworthiness of memory as to quotations. When 
 the Revised New Testament appeared, it was sent 
 for review to an extremely able minister of the 
 Church of Scotland. He wrote the review, and in 
 the course of it compared many passages in the New 
 Version with the like passages in the Old Version. 
 When I read the proof I found an error in a quota- 
 tion from the Old Book. This made me look closer, 
 and I then found that out of forty or fifty such 
 quotations, not one was verbally correct. The 
 reviewer had quoted from memory. 
 
 No one can know better than myself how in- 
 sufficient these recollections of Russel are as illus- 
 trations of his character and his power. No man 
 could do justice to all the varied aspects of his 
 curiously compounded character. Some one has 
 said that the infinitely great and the infinitely little 
 are more or less mixed in every great man's mind. 
 It is true ; and it was true of Russel's mind. That 
 he was a great man, no one can doubt. Greatness 
 in men is not confined to warriors or statesmen. 
 He who directly and certainly infiuences vast bodies 
 of the people to the changing and improving of 
 many of their thoughts and acts is a great man.
 
 284 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Russel did this. He widened the Scottish view of 
 things political. He made intolerance hateful. He 
 lightened the yoke of the priestly Presbyterian 
 minister. He gave wholesome pleasure to thousands 
 of the people. Moreover, in his sturdy adhesion to 
 principle he set a mark against time-serving. He 
 kept to the traditions of the paper he edited. It 
 was founded in generous impatience of jobbery and 
 narrow Toryism. Till he came, it had fought against 
 those evils. He infused new vigour into the fight. 
 He brought a strong, young, powerful mind to the 
 task ; and never for a day did he forget what was 
 the work the paper had to do. I have been turning 
 over letters that he wrote in the last months and 
 weeks of his life. There is not one of them that 
 does not relate to the paper and its work. He 
 mourns that he cannot send in an article ; or he 
 tells that he has sent in one or two. When he 
 speaks of himself it is mainly in connection with his 
 desire to be able to do work for the paper. 
 
 Less than three months before he died, I went 
 down to his country-place at Nenthorn from Friday 
 to Monday. On the Friday there was a deluge of 
 rain, and walking in the grounds was not possible. 
 I wanted to smoke a cigar ; and together Russel 
 and I went into the conservatories. There we sat 
 for more than an hour, and there I heard from him 
 what I had never heard before — his appreciation of 
 the work done on the paper in his absence ; his 
 ideal of what the paper should be or should continue 
 to be ; and his distrust of certain politicians and
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 285 
 
 public men. Over all the talk there was the shadow 
 of the hand of death. He knew it as I knew it. 
 There were flickerings up of the old jovial spirit 
 now and then, but the flash was little more than 
 momentary. Grave kindliness of tone showed me 
 more clearly than I had previously seen it the 
 genuinely simple affectionate nature of the man : 
 while over all there spread the ineffable sadness of 
 certainty of early parting. I like to think of Russel 
 as I saw him then — vigorous as ever in thought ; 
 kindly-hearted, cordial ; with no boastful word, no 
 bitterness : a true man. 
 
 After the foregoing chapters on Mr. Russel had 
 been written, Mr. J. R. Findlay sent to me the 
 following pages of his impressions of his friend. 
 No one had better opportunities of forming such 
 impressions, and no one was better equipped for 
 appreciating the character of the man with whom he 
 worked for so many years : — 
 
 " It was in the spring of 1845 that Mr. Russel 
 came from Kilmarnock, where he had been for a 
 few months editor of a newly-established weekly 
 newspaper (which did not long survive his depart- 
 ure), to take the position of assistant editor of the 
 Scotsman, under Mr. Charles M'Laren ; and I was 
 placed under him as a sort of assistant and pupil of 
 both. Mr. M'Laren gradually withdrew from the 
 conduct of the paper, and finally and formally retired
 
 286 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 in 1849. When it was announced that he had done 
 so, it was also stated with perfect truth that Mr, 
 Russel had for a year or two before been actually 
 though not nominally editor. Mr. M'Laren had 
 been anxious to make this announcement for some 
 time previously, and it was delayed only by Mr. 
 Russel's reluctance to assume publicly and fully the 
 position he really held, as he feared that the paper 
 would suffer in repute from change of editor. That 
 he was so modest, and had such a decided distrust 
 of himself, may appear strange to those who, misled 
 by foolish representations, regard him as a type of 
 the self-asserting, aggressive, and boastful journalist. 
 The truth is that all his life he was really a diffident, 
 cautious, and in some respects an essentially timid 
 man, — to the last he had a trick of blushing, of which 
 he was heartily ashamed, — and the impression that 
 he was the opposite arose partly from the sometimes 
 undue force with which he — in common with all 
 such shy men, when really impelled to do so — 
 vindicated his powers and position. He formed his 
 opinions deliberately, he was careful and exact in 
 his statements, and guarded in their enunciation. 
 But having once made himself sure on all points, 
 he was free and fearless in assertion. Though keen 
 in controversy, he most conscientiously respected the 
 personal character, position, and views of the public 
 men against whom he contended. It was only 
 when he thought that the weak were being borne 
 down, or the erring mercilessly condemned, or that 
 religious intolerance seemed likely to triumph, that
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 287 
 
 he was roused to passionate phrase. He had a high 
 sense of the responsibihties of a pubHc writer ; and 
 I remember being much struck with his remarking, 
 at a period when, by journalistic pressure, he was 
 compelled to write on subjects that he had not had 
 time to study fully, how much it distressed him to 
 hear his own only half-thought-out opinions referred 
 to with what seemed to him too emphatic approval. 
 
 " He revelled in controversy. I once remarked 
 on the deplorable spectacle of a Christian country 
 being broken up into rival and warring sects, and 
 the extreme desirableness of union. ' Union,' he 
 cried ; '/ don't want union ; there would be no fun 
 in union.' He was delighted with the famous 
 ' Cardross case.' ' It will last for ever,' he exclaimed. 
 * I foresee no end of leading articles.' 
 
 " To Mr. M'Laren's former assistants, Mr, James 
 Hedderwick and Mr. Thomas Smibert, I, as a youth 
 of twenty, with a certain youthful turn for letters, had 
 been much attracted and attached ; and as Mr. 
 Russel had little regard for the merely artistic side 
 of literature, I was perhaps at first less in sympathy 
 with him ; but if so, in this instance Sir Anthony 
 Absolute's opinion proved as applicable to friend- 
 ship as to love — that ' it is best to begin with a little 
 aversion.' In fact he was a man with whom it was 
 impossible to be even casually associated — and I 
 was closely associated with him in his work and his 
 social relations for thirty years — without being 
 strongly attracted to him by his buoyant and 
 sympathetic temperament, his true kindliness of
 
 288 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 heart, his varied intellectual gifts, and his ready and 
 aboundine humour. His circle of friends In those 
 early days was not large — it was not so indeed at 
 any time, — but if a narrow, it was a curiously devoted 
 circle. The personal attachment and admiration of 
 those who from time to time were associated with 
 him in his work was the more notable that he was 
 by no means an easy, encouraging, or helpful master. 
 He always declared almost boastfully that he would 
 rather do a thing himself than tell any one else how 
 to do it. Hence, master in journalism as he was, 
 he left no pupils. If he praised an assistant's work, 
 it was, so to speak, with a grudge — a fashion of 
 speech arising partly out of sheer diffidence on his 
 own part, but not satisfactory to the recipient, until 
 he came to know and recognise the back-handed 
 method. If his praise was stinted, his blame was 
 sometimes bitter. Himself a strong man, and 
 feeling that it was well to have a giant s strength, 
 he sometimes forgot that it was tyrannous to use it 
 like a giant, and came down on the feeble offender 
 with quite unnecessary vehemence. This was rarely 
 the case, however, when he took pen in hand. In 
 writing, no one could be more careful to be just in 
 censure ; no one more generous in eulogy — the 
 more valued as being guarded, well founded, and 
 gracefully expressed. But eulogy, perhaps because 
 it was necessarily grave and measured, did not come 
 to him easily. ' You will have to say something 
 handsome of So-and-so,' I once remarked to him, 
 knowing he needed some such incitement. ' Yes,'
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 289 
 
 he replied ; * but I would much rather have to say 
 something disagreeable,' — meaning merely that in 
 the latter case he would have more freedom and 
 some fun. Neither in writing nor in speech was he 
 capable of formal censure ; he abhorred the didactic 
 and sermonising style. He only, so to speak, let 
 himself off in casual flashes of indignation ; he was 
 absolutely incapable of administering a formal re- 
 proof even to the most flagrant offender. With 
 boundless moral courage in public matters, he shrank 
 from any disagreeable personal duty — undoubtedly 
 a weakness, but one for which most people have 
 naturally a sneaking kindness, perhaps from a feeling 
 that they themselves may thus sometimes escape 
 their due. 
 
 " It has been said that easy writing makes hard 
 reading. Mr. Russel was not an easy writer in the 
 common sense — that is to say, he was not fluent, 
 though ready enough in the sense that he never 
 failed when called on. He was a hard and steady 
 worker, and he enjoyed his work. I have heard 
 him say that he could not preserve his self-respect 
 unless he did daily a fair day's work. This was, of 
 course, when he was in harness ; when out of it he 
 threw off anxiety and responsibility like a school- 
 boy. He did not care, however, for long holidays ; 
 only for a day or two, or a week or two now and 
 then, and back to work again. Compelled to 
 grapple with all sorts of subjects, he often felt that 
 for their due handling his resources as a student 
 were scanty enough, and he took pains to make the 
 
 u
 
 290 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 best of them. He used to twit his Hfelong friend, 
 John Hill Burton, by insisting that he (Burton), with 
 his boundless stores of erudition, did not make half 
 so good an appearance as a leader-writer as he him- 
 self with his comparatively small stock well applied. 
 He had a horror of hackneyed quotation, and of 
 everything like pedantry, and his methods of com- 
 position were certainly the reverse of pedantic. He 
 generally thought out his subject walking about the 
 room, and jotting down his thoughts in shorthand at 
 his writing-table. His cogitations were accompanied 
 by odd motions of his arms and hands, of which he 
 was scarcely conscious, but the absurd style of which 
 was once brought home to him in a fashion that 
 rather astonished him. He had shut himself up one 
 morning in a country-house to work, to which he 
 proceeded in his usual fashion, unaware that his 
 room was overlooked from a neighbouring window. 
 After dinner a lady who had observed him, being 
 an excellent mimic, asked their host if he would like 
 to know how a leading article was written ; and 
 getting up and walking about the room she pre- 
 sented to the bewildered editor and the delighted 
 guests a picture of his throes, shrugs, jerks, head- 
 scratchings, pen-bitings, and generally incongruous 
 movements. When his children were very young 
 he would often have one or more of them in the 
 room, romping with them in the course of his com- 
 position. Once I remarked to his sister that a 
 certain article was evidently written in excellent 
 spirits, ' Yes,' said she ; ' the last paragraph means
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 291 
 
 that he has had a roll on the carpet with Johnnie or 
 Janet.' He enjoyed writing, and quietly, never 
 boastfully, enjoyed his own good writing and its 
 occasionally rollicking humour as much as any of 
 his readers. But his humour, however exuberant, 
 was always illustrative ; his jokes were used only to 
 give light and colour to his argument. He never 
 indulged in the mere ' ground and lofty tumbling ' 
 style of some of his imitators. His fun was the 
 effervescence, not a substitute for substance. Even 
 socially he was not in the vulgar sense a humorist. 
 He was no maker of 77iots, no studied sayer of smart 
 things. They rose to his lips as occasion suggested 
 as lightly as bubbles in a pond when a pebble is 
 dropped into it. They were as evanescent, one chas- 
 ing the other into oblivion. He never retailed them, 
 and he never reported or repeated himself; he had 
 no need. He would tell good stories, but very 
 seldom his own or of himself ; and latterly he com- 
 plained that many stories were told of him which 
 had no foundation — a common grievance with 
 accredited humorists. ' What a brilliant evening 
 we had last night!' said Mr. Charles M'Laren to 
 me one day after a dinner at a friend's house. 
 ' Findlater and I have just been talking of it, and 
 we agreed that with Russel and Hodgson (the 
 late W. B. Hodgson, LL.D.) there, it could not well 
 have been otherwise. But we agreed also in a 
 marked distinction in their contributions to our 
 hilarity. Hodgson's were all drawn from memory 
 or from books, Russel's were entirely original and
 
 292 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 fresh, spontaneous as they were sparkHng.' It was 
 always so ; he did not joke with difficulty ; seldom 
 was he under any strain, except when, as he himself 
 sometimes confessed, he talked simply to keep the 
 talk going. He hated to see people who had met 
 together ostensibly to enjoy themselves remaining 
 stiff and reserved. To him the ' party in a parlour 
 all silent ' would thereby have at once proved them- 
 selves 'all damned.' And, while he enjoyed society 
 intensely, he appreciated also the accompaniments of 
 a good table. Leaving an entertainment where the 
 talk had been dull and didactic — this was in his 
 earlier days, before he ventured himself to lead and 
 enliven it — the viands cold, and the liquors scant 
 and thin, he exclaimed, with a sort of pathetic horror 
 in his voice, ' What a night I have had — neither 
 meat, drink, nor amusement ! ' 
 
 "In friendship his tastes were catholic, and his 
 attachments strong. Like Ferdinand in his love of 
 women, he loved men for ' their several virtues.' 
 For all within the intimate circle he would do much, 
 and forgive much. He could even forgive stupidity ; 
 harder for him perhaps than to forgive moral weak- 
 ness or error. The loss of friends touched him 
 deeply ; he wept such losses bitterly ; they opened a 
 vein of tenderness that underlay a nature otherwise 
 not easily moved. This strong natural affection was, 
 however, always active and acute in the case of his 
 own children, to whom he was passionately attached, 
 and to whom he showed his attachment as long as 
 they were quite young in almost childish displays of
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 
 
 293 
 
 affection. The death of his youngest son Charlie, 
 who at nine years of age was drowned in the Ettrick, 
 was an overwhelming blow, from which he very slowly 
 recovered ; if indeed he ever wholly recovered. He 
 also broke down terribly when a beautiful sister-in- 
 law, with whom he had been closely associated, died 
 abroad. In such bereavements his resource was in 
 hard work ; he bent himself to it with marvellous 
 resolution, and it brought its reward. 
 
 " His 7nots are still repeated by his friends ; and 
 it has often been suggested that they should be 
 chronicled. A goodly string might be collected ; 
 but their lustre would be somewhat dimmed by lapse 
 of time and association ; and it is better that they 
 should only live in tradition, till they die out even 
 there. And most of them were on the whole better 
 fitted for the hour of social pleasure than for the cold 
 expanse of print. It would, however, be most unjust 
 to his memory, to his taste and his judgment, were it 
 to be inferred from the opinion thus expressed that his 
 jests were too coarse and indelicate or too profane for 
 such exposure. Some of them were no doubt deli- 
 cately indelicate, and some of them in their application 
 of Scripture phrases trenched on what the ' unco guid ' 
 would set down as profanity. But these were all 
 really as little open to censure in this respect 
 as is the example of his happy use of his familiarity 
 with sacred writ which a legal friend is fond of 
 quoting. More than thirty years ago, the Court of 
 Session decided that Statutory Road Trustees were 
 liable in damages to persons injured by the wrong or
 
 294 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 negligence of themselves or their servants. This 
 decision was emphatically reversed by the House of 
 Lords. In 1866, however, the Lords gave a decision 
 in an English case directly contrary to their former 
 one ; and a few years thereafter, when the question 
 came up again in the Court of Session in another 
 Scottish case, the Court found themselves in a 
 dilemma ; and while the majority of the judges 
 thought the first objectionable decision of the Lords 
 was cancelled by their subsequent deliverance, a 
 minority held that they were bound to obey the 
 former decision until a Scotch case should be 
 appealed and reversed. The minority, said Mr. 
 Russel, rightly considered that the House of Lords, 
 having wrongly condemned Scotch lawyers, and 
 wrought havoc in Scotch law and practice, should 
 be made to confess their error and openly undo the 
 mischief. The case, he said, reminded one of St. 
 Paul's message from prison to the magistrates of 
 Philippi : ' They have beaten us openly uncon- 
 demned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison ; 
 and now do they thrust us out privily ? nay, verily ; 
 but let them come themselves, and fetch us out.' 
 This, though apt and amusing, is surely harmless 
 enough ; and in point of fact there was neither 
 irreverence nor coarseness in Russel's nature or 
 style ; not only did he not indulge in either himself, 
 but he resented and discouraged it in others. To 
 this habit and feeling his writings bear unequivocal 
 testimony. No ribald phrase or vile allusion is to 
 be found in any of them ; no mockery of religious
 
 XXI ALEXANDER RUSSEL 295 
 
 feeling or of sacred things. In this respect he is 
 pure as Scott. Like Burns, of whom he was 
 naturally a most ardent admirer and worshipper, he 
 hated and despised hypocrisy ; and his denunciations 
 of hypocrites were often ' nail't wi' Scripture.' He 
 used to quote a saying of a brother editor, James 
 Adam of the Aberdeen Herald, that ' there are two 
 books that bother the clergy — -Burns and the Bible,' 
 and he was fond of bothering the clergy with both. 
 Among the clergy he had many warm friends ; but 
 like most laymen, he liked them better in their per- 
 sonal than in their professional character and capacity. 
 He had a warm feeling for the simple but kindly 
 hospitalities of country manses ; and was happy in 
 enjoying them. One of his friends, alluding to 
 Russel's exuberant talent for society, his overflow- 
 ing fun and high animal spirits, remarked that he was 
 always at his best under some slight social restraint. 
 The atmosphere of the manse, the presence of a 
 man of reputation or rank, would supply this little 
 check, and his society was thus rendered the more 
 thoroughly agreeable to such of his associates who, 
 as being less gifted with wit and good spirits, were 
 less fit to cope with his sallies ; making them also 
 less apprehensive of becoming the butts of his sharp 
 though good-natured raillery. He had a great 
 respect for rank and wealth ; despising the latter 
 only when it was allied with vulgarity. He felt or 
 fancied that this alliance was common in the west of 
 Scotland, and a sort of easy prejudice which he 
 indulged against Glasgow and its magnates, he turned
 
 296 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xxi 
 
 to humorous account In many ways. Religious 
 intolerance roused him to passionate opposition and 
 denunciation ; narrow-mindedness in politics or 
 social life he equally reprobated. As a Scot he was 
 intensely patriotic ; but he did not hold that all 
 virtue began and ended in Scotland. It might 
 perhaps be more truly said, however, that he could 
 see little natural beauty in any country but his own. 
 In his eyes, foreign scenes and foreign travel had no 
 special attractions ; the hills and glens and streams, 
 especially the fishing-streams, of his native land were 
 enough for him. Socially, Edinburgh and its society 
 generally sufficed him. On his visits to London he 
 was petted and run after by many of the best people, 
 and for the time he rejoiced in the whirl and luxury 
 and display of the metropolis, but it had no hold on 
 him. As cities he could admire London and Paris, 
 but his feeling was always 'Peebles for pleasure.' 
 To sum up his character in a word, the ruling passion 
 of his life was to do good to his country and his 
 fellow-men by the untiring, unfearing, and conscien- 
 tious exercise of his gifts as a political writer. This 
 was his lifelong aim ; he never failed to keep it in 
 view ; and he worked for it to the end. This was 
 the soul of his life and career. All his other traits, 
 too often dwelt on, were, in comparison, mere 
 ' leather and prunella.' "
 
 CHAPTER XXII 
 
 The ecclesiastical yoke in Scotland — A holiday trip — A new ac- 
 quaintance — The Sound of Mull — Our new friend in a new 
 aspect — Arrival at Portree — Journey to the Quiraing — A funeral 
 procession — " His luggage " — A Gaelic song — Uig and its burial- 
 place — The walk to the Quiraing — Scene in the graveyard — 
 Searching for the family grave — A walk on Loch Duich side — 
 Glen Shiel — The milestones — The Cluny Inn — A dark look-out 
 — Ministerial denunciation of the sin of walking on the Sabbath 
 — Brighter prospects — Sabbatarianism and hypocrisy. 
 
 It cannot be doubted that the Scots7?zan, under 
 Alexander Russel's direction, did a great deal to 
 lighten the ecclesiastical yoke which had pressed 
 upon Scotland with much severity. The nature 
 of that yoke can scarcely be understood by any 
 one who did not experience it. My acquaintance 
 with it was not great ; for to some extent it had 
 been lessened when I went to Scotland. Yet it 
 was even then pretty heavy. Perhaps this fact 
 could not be better shown than in an episode in 
 a holiday excursion of mine about 1870. There 
 were many interesting features of that holiday 
 besides the ecclesiastical feature, and it may not 
 be amiss if the story be told from beginning to 
 end. 
 
 It was early in July that a friend and I started
 
 298 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 for what we intended to be in the main a walking 
 and fishing excursion to Skye and the Western 
 Highlands. From Edinburgh we went to Greenock, 
 and there caught either the Clydesdale or the Clans- 
 man — I forget which it was. These ships, which 
 were then under the management of Mr. David 
 Hutchinson and are now under Mr. MacBrayne, 
 trade to the Western Islands and Highlands, calling 
 at several places on their voyage out and home. 
 Their course from Greenock is round the Mull 
 of Cantyre, and sometimes the passage thereabouts 
 is stormy. A lovely warm summer evening found 
 us west of Cantyre, with a heavy ground -swell 
 coming in from the Atlantic. My friend and I, 
 with two fellow - voyagers — a clergyman and a 
 lawyer from Glasgow — were sitting upon a bench 
 on the bridge deck, holding on to the rails as the 
 ship rolled, and singing for our own amusement, 
 when suddenly there came before us on the deck 
 one of the handsomest young fellows I have ever 
 seen. He had the clear-cut features and the fine 
 complexion of the genuine Highlander. He was 
 well dressed in a blue pilot cloth suit. He was so 
 drunk that I doubt whether he could have stood 
 but for the roll of the ship. That roll seemed to 
 correct his stagger ; and thus he kept pretty well 
 erect while he listened to us. At last he began 
 to applaud, and I thought was going to sing him- 
 self, when one of the officers of the ship came up, 
 took him by the arm, and led him away. 
 
 Next morning, shortly after seven o'clock, we
 
 XXII IN THE SOUND OF MULL 299 
 
 were making our way out of Oban Bay to pass 
 throuph the Sound of Mull. It was a miserable 
 
 o 
 
 morning. All trace of the sun — except the general 
 diffusion of light — had disappeared. A raw cold 
 wind blew from the north-west, with abundance of 
 misty rain. Sometimes the misty rain became a 
 heavy downpour. The sea was leaden. The hills 
 were shrouded in their wet cloaks. On the northern 
 side of the Sound of Mull there are high precipitous 
 cliffs coming almost to the water's edge. On that 
 morning what looked like smoke was breaking 
 from the tops of those cliffs. I remember thinking 
 that it really was smoke, and that it might come 
 from an illicit still which some smuggler was 
 working in full confidence that the gauger would 
 not leave his warm shelter on such a morning. 
 But the number of clouds of smoke became too 
 large for this theory. There might be one or 
 two stills in such a quarter ; there could scarcely 
 be thirty or forty. Then the discovery was made 
 that what looked like smoke was not smoke : it 
 was fine spray, caught up by the wind from the 
 streams of water as they flowed to the edge of 
 the cliff. 
 
 Tired at last of watching these effects, I walked 
 along under the hurricane deck. There I saw our 
 young friend and applauder of the previous evening. 
 He and the clerk of the ship were engaged in loud 
 conversation. I thought they were cursing each 
 other. They were only arguing in Gaelic. Our 
 man stood with his face turned to the side of the
 
 300 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 ship. That face was grimy. If he had been a 
 stoker it could not have been blacker. His hands, 
 too, were blackened ; there was nothing about him 
 of the neatness of the previous evening. I passed 
 along, thinking no more of the young fellow, though 
 I asked some one how he came to be so black. " Oh," 
 was the reply, "he slept on the coals last night ! " 
 
 Nothing of interest marked the voyage past 
 Ardnamurchan, along the west coast, through the 
 Sound of Sleat, past Kyle Akin to Broadford and 
 then to Portree. We arrived at this last-named 
 place about nine o'clock in the evening, and at 
 the Royal Hotel found two holiday-makers, with 
 whom we foregathered. Before we went to bed 
 it was arranged that the four of us should drive 
 the next morning to Uig on our way to the 
 Quiraing, one of the sights of the island. This 
 was arranged with the landlord of the hotel. We 
 were to take sandwiches for our luncheon, with 
 wine of the country for refreshment, and to be 
 back in time for a tea dinner. 
 
 The next morning came. Rain poured down. 
 I have since learned that it rains on 360 days in 
 the year in Skye. We had not hit upon one of 
 the fine days. Nobody thought of being kept 
 back from the excursion by the rain. The horses 
 in the waggonette in which we were to travel shook 
 their heads as if they enjoyed it. The driver, a 
 young man, was gay — for a Highlander early in 
 the morning. As soon as breakfast was over, we 
 started.
 
 XXII ON THE ROAD FROM PORTREE 301 
 
 When you leave Portree to travel towards Uig 
 you go along a road which could not be bright if 
 the sun beamed down upon it, but which is surely 
 the most dismal in the world on an ordinary Skye 
 morning such as we had. It runs for a long way 
 through bog and moor. Pools of black water skirt 
 it. The hillocks in the moss are steeped with 
 moisture, and have a dank and wearied look as 
 if they were sentient and knew their condition was 
 hopeless. Melancholy — wet melancholy — broods 
 over the whole scene. 
 
 Before we had got far out of Portree I saw 
 before us on the road an ordinary farm -cart 
 travelling in the direction we were going. We 
 speedily overhauled it, and then saw that a couple 
 of planks had been put diagonally across the cart, 
 and that on these planks there rested a coffin. No 
 pall covered it : no attempt of any kind was made 
 to shelter it from the pitiless rain. An old man 
 led the horse that was drawing the cart, and by 
 his side walked a young man, whom I at once 
 recognised as the applauder of the first night of 
 our voyage, and the grimy - faced arguer of the 
 second day. 
 
 " Who is that ? " I asked our driver ; " and what 
 is that coffin doing there ? " 
 
 "Ah ! that is a very sad case. The poor boy in 
 the coffin went to Glasgow three months ago to get 
 work, and he was killed three or four days ago by 
 some machinery. The young fellow is his brother. 
 He has been to Glasgow to bring the body home."
 
 302 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 " I saw him having a row with the purser of the 
 ship," I said ; " what would that be about ? " 
 
 " Oh, it was very funny. The purser wanted 
 him to pay for the carriage of the coffin from 
 Glasgow, and he would not ; he said it was his 
 luggage." 
 
 No more questions were asked. We drove on 
 through the rain, leaving the cart and its sad load 
 behind. I was anxious to hear Gaelic singing, and 
 I asked the driver if he could sing. With most 
 becoming modesty he admitted that he could. 
 Would he do so ? That was another matter. 
 However, at last he consented, and began. Gaelic 
 interests me in a certain way, but I do not admire 
 it as the language of song. Perhaps that is because 
 I know so little of it. Assuredly I know what I 
 like to hear ; and my heart does not go out to 
 Gaelic singing. Never can I forget that moan 
 upon the road to Uig. The air seemed to be 
 about eight bars long repeated without end. It 
 went on for miles. We were fast sinking under 
 the combined pressure of wet, wind, and Gaelic 
 song, when happily one of the horses stumbled. 
 The driver stopped his drone, and swore — at least 
 I think he swore ; what he said sounded like swear- 
 ing. Anyway, the singing stopped, and we took 
 care that it did not begin again. 
 
 Our drive was to end at Uig, some fifteen miles 
 from Portree, and then we were to walk six or 
 seven miles to the Quiraing. Uig Bay is almost 
 perfectly horseshoe -shaped. The mouth is open
 
 XXII UIG AND THE QUIRAING 303 
 
 to the Atlantic, From the beach the land rises 
 steeply, and is — or was — so to speak, terraced. 
 That is to say, roads leading to crofters' houses 
 ran, at different heights, along the slope round 
 the bay. The main road formed the topmost of 
 these terraces. As you entered the village on this 
 road you came to an hotel. There we left our 
 conveyance ; and from there we began our walk. 
 
 About half-way along the road, at the full bend 
 of the bay, there was a graveyard. It was separated 
 from the road by a low wall. Like almost every 
 graveyard in the Highlands, it was in a most 
 forlorn and neglected state. Weeds grew high ; 
 not a grave seemed ever to have had the least 
 attention since it was made. I had never seen a 
 Highland burial-place before, and I was a good 
 deal shocked by its- condition. 
 
 We passed it, went on to the Ouiraing, and in 
 due course returned. W^hat a journey that was ! 
 The wind blew cold as in winter ; rain fell inces- 
 santly, now in driving mist-like showers, now in 
 heavy downpour. All the hills were wreathed with 
 mist that rose and fell and thickened and became 
 clearer in the gusty wind. One moment you could 
 see nothing but a great bank of vapour ; the next 
 it swirled aside, and black and frowning hills and 
 precipices were disclosed. We might have spared 
 ourselves the walk : next to nothing of the Ouiraing 
 could be seen when we got to it. In the wet we 
 munched our sandwiches. In the wet we shivered, 
 if we stood for a moment. In the wet we made
 
 304 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 our way back to Uig ; and in the wet we arrived 
 there. 
 
 As we came near the graveyard we could see 
 there were four or five men poking among the 
 nettles and other weeds in an apparently aimless 
 way. When we came nearer and looked over the 
 low wall we saw what I for one shall never forget. 
 There, on the grass, a short way into the burial- 
 ground, and not far from what I suppose might be 
 called the lych-gate, there lay a coffin. At the 
 head of it sat a woman, and other two women sat 
 one on each side of the head. Their heads were 
 covered with shawls, drawn under their chins. They 
 swayed backward and forward, and as they swayed 
 they crooned a sort of dirge. Nothing covered the 
 coffin. The rain fell pitilessly upon it and the 
 women. A drearier, sadder, more affecting sight it 
 would be difficult to conceive. 
 
 As we stood looking for a minute, a man came 
 up and was entering the graveyard, when I asked 
 him whose body it was that lay in the coffin on the 
 grass. It was, he said, the body of a poor lad who 
 had been killed in Glasgow. It was, in truth, the 
 body we had passed on our way to Uig. 
 
 "Who is that decent-looking old man in the 
 Inverness cape among the men in the graveyard.'* " 
 I asked. 
 
 " It is the father of the poor lad in the coffin," 
 was the reply. 
 
 " What are they doing there ?" 
 
 " They are looking for the family grave."
 
 XXII A GRAVEYARD SCENE 305 
 
 " Do you mean to say that no grave has been 
 dug for the body, then ? " 
 
 " No ; there is no grave yet. They are looking 
 for the family grave. It is so long since there was 
 a burial there, that they cannot find it. But they 
 have gone for a man who knows where it is, and 
 when he comes the grave will be dug." 
 
 By this time the gloom was thickening. There 
 was not a sign of summer warmth. A cold wind 
 drove pelting rain in from the sea, to the drenching 
 of every one who might be exposed to it. Those 
 were the atmospheric conditions in which we left 
 that melancholy scene. Once since I have seen a 
 body brought to be buried before the grave was 
 dug ; but then it was a bright sunny day. The long 
 train of "mourners" sat on the wall of the grave- 
 yard smoking their pipes while the grave was pre- 
 pared. I looked into that graveyard afterwards and 
 found from the headstones that almost every one 
 buried there had been an octogenarian. One 
 exception there was, a man who was said to have 
 been forty-five years of age when he died. Under 
 this information appeared the line, " He was a 
 promising youth " ! 
 
 But I have got far away from that Skye burial- 
 ground. I believe that since we were there it has 
 been swept away. A flood from the hills behind 
 washed all of it into the sea below. We left it in 
 wet. The wet continued till we got back to Portree 
 at half-past nine at night, soaked to the skin, shiver- 
 ing with cold, too hungry to eat without some pre- 
 
 X
 
 3o6 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 paration. There is a story of a plain man and his 
 wife who went to see Mrs, Siddons play. For a 
 long time they sat, their interest riveted upon the 
 stage, and tears rolling down their cheeks. At last 
 the man could bear it no longer. " Come away, 
 Sarah," said he, "do ye call this pleasure?" Could 
 we call our day's excursion to the Quiraing pleasure ? 
 More miserable bedraggled beings than we were at 
 the end of it could not have been found. Yet I 
 strongly suspect that day will be remembered by all 
 of us with more satisfaction than ninety-nine out of 
 every hundred days of our lives. 
 
 After visiting Glen Sligachan and Loch Coruisk 
 we left Skye and found ourselves at Balmacarra, on 
 the mainland. Our intention was to walk along 
 Loch Duich side, Glen Shiel, and the road beyond 
 to Loch Ness and Fort Augustus ; from whence we 
 meant to get across country to meet friends at Loch 
 Ericht side. 
 
 It was a Saturday morning when we started to 
 walk from Balmacarra to Shiel House. There was 
 not a cloud in the sky. The sun blazed down upon 
 us. At first there was a little shade here and there ; 
 but when we had crossed the ferry and got to Loch 
 Duich side, we had to brave the heat. The loch 
 glowed in the sun. Scarcely a ripple stirred on its 
 surface. It seemed of molten gold with distinct 
 purple shading from the hills. The crofters' houses 
 stood out from the heather and the patches of cultiva- 
 tion, with an effect of colour that was infinitely rest- 
 ful to the eye. Now and then the cry of grouse was
 
 XXII GLEN SHIEL 307 
 
 heard, but no other sound. Nobody but ourselves 
 was moving. The hills themselves seemed to sleep 
 in the warm and drowsy air. A little of walking on 
 such a day was enough. Some time, hours after we 
 had started, we reached Shiel House, about five or 
 six miles from Balmacarra. I do not believe that 
 even a pedometer would have marked more than 
 six miles for us. But it was enough. We sought 
 repose in the shady recesses of that inn, and only 
 moved out when the sun had gone to bed in glory 
 in the west. 
 
 Somebody has described a Scottish summer as 
 "three hot days and a thunderstorm." Like 
 Sydney Smith's jokes, it maligns Scotland. Yet it 
 must be confessed that many hot days do not often 
 come together with us. On that Saturday night 
 when we were at Shiel House Inn there came a 
 thunderstorm. I was dimly conscious of it at the 
 time, though, owing to the fatigue of the day, I slept 
 too soundly to be fully awakened. Next morning 
 the marks of it were seen. There had been torrents 
 along the road. The stream was swollen. From 
 the steep precipices about, small waterfalls poured 
 down. Everywhere the herbage looked greener 
 and fresher, and there was a wholesome cool tone in 
 the atmosphere. 
 
 Soon after breakfast, say about nine o'clock, 
 we started on what we expected would be a walk 
 of twenty-five or thirty miles. Our course lay up 
 Glen Shiel. I remember thinking how beautiful 
 that glen was. Without the wildness of Glencoe, it
 
 3o8 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 had a grand rugged beauty with which, to my think- 
 ing, Glencoe cannot compare. The Shiel brawls 
 down one side of it, and beyond rise up steep hills, 
 some with sheer precipitous fronts, some clad with 
 heather or indigenous birch. Along the road be- 
 tween these hills we went, knapsack on back, 
 cheerful as good spirits and restfulness could make 
 us. For about two miles the walk was delightful. 
 Then rain began to fall, and pelted heavily. Should 
 we go on, or should we return ? It would be 
 cowardly to return ; besides, we had no time to 
 spare. Therefore we kept on : so did the rain. It 
 fell without intermission — not a misty pretence of 
 rain, but a downpour of unmistakable water. We 
 plodded on, and as we were crossing a bridge at the 
 head of the glen, a dog-cart passed us on which rode 
 two men and the driver. I noticed no more than 
 this fact ; the rain damped all desire to make 
 acquaintances. 
 
 One curious feature presented itself as we went 
 along the road. The milestones came at regular inter- 
 vals ; that was not strange. It was a little more out 
 of the ordinary state of Highland milestones that they 
 had been newly painted, and their inscriptions were 
 quite legible. Most strange of all was the information 
 they gave. They were numbered from Shiel House. 
 Thus when we had walked a mile we came to a stone 
 inscribed "Shiel House, i mile." Obviously they 
 ought to have gone on in steady progression. But 
 they did not. One would say 2 miles to Shiel 
 House, the next 5 miles to Shiel House, the next 3
 
 XXII THROUGH RAIN TO CLUNY INN 309 
 
 miles to Shiel House, the next 8 miles to Shiel 
 House ; and so on. I am not pretending to give 
 the figures on particular stones ; it is only necessary 
 to illustrate the peculiarly misleading information 
 which some of them give. Subsequently I was told 
 by a native in the district that the man who had 
 been employed to paint the stones had got drunk 
 and had repeatedly lost count of his miles. Nobody 
 thought it necessary to alter the inscriptions. The 
 milestones were there ; that was enough. The road 
 led from one point to another ; let the traveller 
 count the number of them for himself. In any case 
 he would get the truth out of one or other of them. 
 
 On we went plashing through the rain. Soon we 
 were in a condition that made all further rain of no 
 account. We could not be wetter. Still we rather 
 hankered after shelter ; and at last, a little beyond 
 noon, we found ourselves not far from the place 
 where we assumed, on the authority of guide books, 
 the Cluny Inn must be. It was not in sight ; very 
 little was, except sheets of falling rain. But at the 
 moment there came to us out of the fields to our 
 right a lad, decently dressed, and seemingly regard- 
 less of the downpour. Mutual courtesies having 
 been exchanged, he said — 
 
 " You'll be for the inn ? " 
 
 " Yes ; is it far from here ? " 
 
 "No; it's just round the corner. There's a 
 preaching there to-day." 
 
 "Oh, indeed! Free Church ?" 
 
 "Yes."
 
 3IO AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 " How is it you are not there ? " 
 
 " Oh, I am a Roman Catholic." 
 
 " Ah ! Well, let us get to the inn." 
 
 In a few minutes we were there. The lad ran 
 ahead of us, and we were met at the porched door by 
 a stalwart handsome lass, who gave us a warm 
 welcome. She threw open the door on the right- 
 hand side of the lobby and asked us to walk in. 
 What a place it was ! The lobby was boulder- 
 paved. The smell of stale peat reek was as over- 
 powering as any odour I ever found in Cologne. 
 The room had all the smell, with additions of its 
 own of a damp and earthy kind. The fire-grate 
 was rusty. The paper that had decorated the walls 
 hung in festoons, mouldy with damp. There were 
 an old sofa, some chairs, and a table that looked and 
 smelt as if they had belonged to the first half-civilised 
 chief of a Highland clan. We looked, we sniffed, 
 we wondered. Was it better to be in such a room 
 than out in the fresh clean rain ? However, nature 
 is weak. The next inn was fourteen miles away — 
 perhaps more. The desire for refreshment had 
 sprung up. So we stayed. 
 
 The stalwart maid could not get us whisky — the 
 landlord was at the preaching, and had the keys. 
 She could show us to a bedroom where we could get 
 into dry clothes. She could light a fire in that room 
 where we stood. All these things she did. A 
 rough towel vigorously applied, and some dry 
 clothes (borrowed), made us fairly comfortable. 
 Then we remembered a flask that one of us carried.
 
 XXII SABBATARIAN DIFFICULTIES 311 
 
 It had not been exhausted. The maid got us 
 glasses, and we tried to aid the efforts of the now- 
 kindled fire to make us warm. 
 
 In this condition we sat, when there arose outside 
 the noise of many feet, and we knew the barn was 
 "skailing." "We shall get something to eat soon 
 now," said one of us. Steps were heard in the boulder- 
 paved lobby. The door opened ; a man put his head 
 in and looked at us. 
 
 "Are you the landlord ?" I asked. 
 
 "Yes." 
 
 "We would like to have some whisky." 
 
 " I don't care to sell whisky on the Sabbath." 
 
 " Dear me. Can you give us some dinner ?" 
 
 " No ; I have nothing to give you." 
 
 We stared at each other for a moment. Then 
 the door was pushed more widely open, and the 
 landlord ushered into the room two men, plainly 
 ministers. 
 
 "Walk in, Mr. Mackay, and sit down," said the 
 landlord. "Walk in, Mr. Macrae." 
 
 Mr. Mackay and Mr. Macrae walked in. One 
 was an old man with a very obvious scratch wig on 
 his head. The other was a younger man with a 
 face as of one who knew his own holiness and your 
 wickedness. I do not remember which was Mr. 
 Mackay and which Mr. Macrae. The elder man 
 sat down in one of the arm-chairs ; the younger man 
 straddled in front of the fire, to which he turned his 
 back. The landlord had left the room. Silence 
 prevailed for a time.
 
 312 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 " It's a very wet day," I said at last, with striking 
 originality. 
 
 " It's a varra wat day," said the younger man. 
 
 Then silence fell upon us again, to be broken in 
 the course of a few seconds by the voice of the 
 younger man. 
 
 " Didn't we pass you on the road from Shiel 
 House ? " 
 
 "If you were in a dog-cart, you did." 
 
 " Don't you know it's varra wrong to walk on the 
 Sabbath ? " 
 
 " Is it more wicked to walk than to ride ?" 
 
 " Oh, but we had a good purpose ! " 
 
 " And by what right do you assume that we had 
 not a good purpose ? " 
 
 Then, my temper being slightly stirred, I added : 
 " To me it seems much worse to take out on a 
 Sunday the four legs of a horse that cannot help 
 itself than it does to take out one's own legs." 
 
 If the roof had fallen, the younger man could not 
 have shown more astonishment and indignation. 
 "Come along, Mr. Mackay," said he (I am assuming 
 the old man's name was Mackay); "come along." 
 He stalked to the door, opened it, and out they 
 walked, shaking the dust off their feet upon the two 
 of us. 
 
 It happened that the door of the landlord's private 
 room was exactly opposite the door of the room in 
 which we sat. The landlord coming from his room 
 met the reverend gentlemen as they went out of 
 our room. We heard what passed.
 
 XXII SABBATARIANISM AND HYPOCRISY 313 
 
 " Won't you stay and have a bit of dinner, 
 
 Mr. ? " asked the landlord ; adding, " I have a 
 
 nice bit of steak." 
 
 "No," said the irate younger minister; "we 
 must be away." 
 
 A few minutes later, their dog-cart came up and 
 they drove off into the rain. No sooner were they 
 away than the landlord was in the room where we 
 sat. He rubbed his hands as if with a sense of 
 relief, and then he said, " What can I get for you, 
 gentlemen ? " We indicated that a little whisky 
 would not be amiss to begin with. 
 
 " But," said I, "cannot you give us something to 
 eat ? " 
 
 "Oh yes," was the reply ; "I have some beauti- 
 ful fresh herrings and a good steak. Will that do ? " 
 
 " Of course it w^ll," I said. " But why did you 
 tell us at first that we could not have whisky, and 
 that you had nothing to give us for dinner.'* " 
 
 "Oh," said he, with a smirk, "we have to be 
 careful of the clergy, you know, sir." 
 
 That was the whole explanation. In the pres- 
 ence of the Free Church minister, or within hearing 
 of him, the man, like all about him, had to put on 
 the pretence of Sabbatarianism of the most rigid 
 kind. When the ministers were away, common- 
 sense prevailed, and the desire for profit. The 
 ministers might make some people better than they 
 would have been ; but this case showed that the 
 chief or most prominent ecclesiastical manufacture 
 was hypocrisy.
 
 314 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xxii 
 
 We had a good dinner, and after it, the rain 
 having cleared up, our pious Sabbatarian landlord 
 initiated me into the mysteries of fishing with the 
 otter. Everybody who knows anything of the 
 subject knows that otter - fishing is one of the 
 worst forms of poaching.
 
 CHAPTER XXIII 
 
 English misconceptions of Scotland — A bigoted M.P. — John Hill 
 Burton — His idea of reviewing — Mutual Admiration Societies — 
 Burton, the Scotsmait., and Free Trade — Burton's pedantry — 
 His History of the Reign of Queen Anne — An inaccurate quo- 
 tation — Edward Ellice and Mr. Gladstone — Ellice's papers — 
 Burton's Bohemianism — Dr. John Brown, his kindliness — Pro- 
 fessor Blackie — His contributions — His mistakes — The Gaelic 
 way of spelling whisky — The Blackie Brotherhood — Its ending 
 — Some letters of advice— Differences healed. 
 
 When I went to Edinburgh in 1868 I knew no one 
 in the city outside the office of the Scotsman. All 
 Scotland was a new country to me. I had only 
 visited it once, three months before coming to it to 
 stay. Warnings were addressed to me in London 
 by friends there as to the coldness — atmospheric 
 and otherwise — I should experience in Scotland. 
 At that time — and there are indications that it is to 
 some extent the same now — the London and general 
 English idea of Scotland was that it was cold enough 
 in winter to rival the climate of the North Pole, 
 that the people were scarcely more than half civilised, 
 that the men wore kilts and the women short petti- 
 coats with no bonnets, and that no music was known 
 in the country save the skirl of the bagpipes. There
 
 3i6 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 were people in England, and in London especially, 
 who knew better than this, and there are more of 
 them now ; but the general uninformed opinion was 
 as I have stated it ; and among those who were un- 
 informed were many who ought to have been wiser. 
 The warnings addressed to me were not necessary. 
 The change was delightful. There was warm 
 welcome and a bracing climate, and friends soon 
 became many. 
 
 It has sometimes occurred to me to ask whether 
 any part of the British Islands has been so much 
 misunderstood in the other parts as Scotland. So 
 far as I know, neither the country nor the people 
 have been much affected by the misunderstanding. 
 Scotsmen have gone on their way with a full share 
 of confidence that they are the chosen people — the 
 "wisest, discreetest, virtuousest, best " of all men; 
 and that the "pock-pudding" Englishman is but a 
 poor creature. Mistakes are made on both sides ; 
 and I have no intention to burn my fingers by 
 getting between them. Perhaps it would be difficult 
 for any Scotsman to get up so keen a feeling against 
 England as an Englishman I once met had got up 
 against Scotland. He was a member of the House 
 of Commons, We met at Interlaken and at other 
 places in Switzerland, and we talked together — or 
 rather he talked to me. I heard his political views, 
 which were crude ; I heard his opinion of the House 
 of Commons, which was rude ; and I heard his 
 opinion of Scotland, which was, let us say, extreme. 
 He was confiding to me how he meant to dispose
 
 xxiii HOSTILITY TO SCOTLAND 317 
 
 of his fortune, which, I beheve, was considerable. 
 " In my will," he said, "it shall be provided that if 
 any of my children ever go to Scotland, even for a 
 visit, he or she or they shall be disinherited. Not 
 a farthing of my money shall they have." 
 
 "Goodness gracious!" said I ; "what has poor 
 Scotland done to offend you ?" 
 
 " Poor Scotland ! " he replied in a tone of ineffable 
 contempt — " poor Scotland is a blasphemous Calvin- 
 istic country, where no honest man can keep his 
 honesty, and no modest woman her modesty." 
 
 " Have you ever been in Scotland ? " I asked. 
 
 " Only once or twice, but I know it well ! " 
 
 "That is surprising. All I can hope for is that 
 I may escape the general contamination." 
 
 " I hope you may," was the serious answer, given 
 as if the speaker thought the hope not in the least 
 likely to be realised. 
 
 That man represented a division of London, 
 and had made some appearance in the House of 
 Commons. He lost his seat in 1892. Long before 
 I met him ample proof had been given to me 
 that views like his were next akin to sheer imbe- 
 cility. 
 
 Not long after I came to Edinburgh I made the 
 acquaintance of John Hill Burton, who was then 
 Historiographer-Royal for Scotland. He was one 
 of the most eccentric men I have ever met. He 
 seemed to have a supreme contempt for all ordinary 
 conventionalities. He dressed shabbily ; he had an 
 untidy appearance. He lived among books, and the
 
 3i8 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 dust upon them seemed to have become engrained 
 in his skin and his garments. He had an excellent 
 opinion of his own ability, and it was justified ; for 
 he had done most admirable historical work for 
 Scotland. His political friends — he had always 
 been a Whig— had obtained for him the post of 
 Chairman of the Prison Board, and in that position 
 he did great and good work in the establishment of 
 a system of judicial and criminal statistics. 
 
 Of all these things I heard from him. But 
 chiefly he loved to dilate on his past connection and 
 present association with the Scotsman. He had 
 been a contributor to its columns for many years ; 
 and until his death he wrote reviews of books for it. 
 He sfot more books to review than he ever reviewed. 
 He was, indeed, one of an old school of writers for 
 newspapers, who never troubled about anything that 
 did not specially interest them. If they were asked 
 to review a book they would take it, and, unless it 
 greatly interested them, no review of it was ever 
 forthcoming. Burton must have had scores — nay, 
 hundreds — of books put into his hands never to be 
 reviewed, but to be stored on his shelves. 
 
 All this was wrong. Though a book may not 
 have a special interest for a reviewer, it may have 
 much interest for a great public, and they ought to 
 be considered. But I suspect that Burton would 
 never have admitted their right to consideration. 
 He was the judge of what was best for them, and 
 they ought to be content to remain without knowing 
 what he had kept from them. The truth is, that
 
 XXIII JOHN HILL BURTON 319 
 
 there was a good deal of mutual admiration in those 
 days, and in the days before them. Let any one 
 turn to the books and records of the time and they 
 will find that this eminent man praised that eminent 
 man ; that every one who had any individuality, if 
 he showed it in an extravagant fashion, was a 
 genius ; and that, in short, the world had never seen 
 such a collection of truly great and good men as 
 then existed. 
 
 Do not let it be supposed that this mutual admir- 
 ation was confined to Edinburgh, or has not been 
 heard of in later days. Wherever two or three 
 geniuses were gathered together, whether in London 
 or Scotland, or in any small town in England, they 
 set up an altar in the midst of them, and they 
 worshipped each other and themselves. They do 
 it now. But there is this difference between the 
 mutual admiration of to-day and the mutual admira- 
 tion of the past : the latter comes down to us in 
 print or otherwise, and we imagine it must have 
 been well deserved ; the former we know to be 
 empty and a mere exhibition of unbounded conceit. 
 
 There is no doubt that John Hill Burton was an 
 able man. There is equally no doubt that he was 
 an eccentric man. He had great humour of a 
 caustic kind. I do not think he was sympathetic. 
 He prided himself upon the firmness with which he 
 held his opinions. It always seemed as if he were 
 afraid of showing kindly feeling. I do not mean 
 that he was, or even appeared to be, an unkindly 
 man. Such an impression would be altogether
 
 320 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 unjustifiable. What I mean is that he shut out 
 kindliness towards individuals in the exercise of his 
 function of critic. When he had his pen in his hand 
 every man and every matter must be discussed on 
 sound — or what he believed to be sound — principles, 
 and the man or the opinion he objected to had a 
 bad quarter of an hour. It always seemed to me 
 that there was a great similarity between the style 
 of many chapters of Burton's History of Scotland 
 and that famous 19th chapter of Kinglake's History 
 of the Crimean War. 
 
 One story Burton never tired of repeating to me. 
 It was that he had committed the Scotsman to Free 
 Trade. " Mr. Charles M'Laren had gone for a 
 holiday" — I am quoting Burton — "and had left the 
 paper in my charge. There had been cautious 
 treatment of the Corn Law question previously : I 
 went straight for Free Trade. Charles was very 
 anxious about it; but I knew I was right." Nothing 
 is more certain than that Burton had come to 
 believe all this. Yet it ought to be taken with 
 some allowance. Mr. M'Laren was not sure that 
 Free Trade could be adopted all at once. He 
 wished to look at the matter from all sides. He 
 saw that if the step were taken it could not be 
 recalled ; and he wanted to be sure that it was a 
 right step and one that would benefit the country. 
 Burton thought more rapidly, if he did not see more 
 clearly. Assuredly he had absolute confidence in 
 his own judgment, and once he had formed an 
 opinion he would proclaim it everywhere as if it
 
 XXIII JOHN HILL BURTON 321 
 
 were a divine revelation. Thus, if he had the tem- 
 porary authority over the Scotsman that he said he 
 had, — and without in the least desiring to attribute 
 conscious inaccuracy to him, I doubt the story, — and 
 if he was on the side of Free Trade, as I am sure 
 he was, he would not hesitate for a moment to 
 commit the paper to his views. In his later days 
 he was firmly convinced that he was the author of 
 the Free Trade policy of the Scotsman. It de- 
 lighted him to repeat the story. 
 
 There was a curious mixture of pedantry and 
 carelessness in Burton. I have heard him find fault 
 on most pedantic grounds with a passage in a lead- 
 ing article, and at the same interview he has handed 
 in an article with many careless passages. Somebody 
 had asked in the Scotsman what region of the earth 
 was there that was not filled with the works of 
 Scotsmen. Burton complained of this. It was, he 
 said, a mistaken rendering of Virgil's line, Qucs 
 regio m terris, etc., for that the word laboris 
 did not mean labours or works but griefs. I am 
 afraid I laughed at him. A day or two afterwards 
 he brought in a review of a volume of charters or 
 registers, and in it were most egregious blunders. 
 
 When Burton was bringing his last book, the 
 History of the Reign of Queen Anne, to a close, he 
 talked about it to me on many occasions. He had 
 no doubt that it was to be the greatest work of its 
 kind. Some time before he was ready for publica- 
 tion, a History of the Reign of Queen Anne by, I 
 I think, Mr. Wyon, made its appearance. The 
 
 Y
 
 322 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 period to which it referred always had great interest 
 for me, and I read the book with much pleasure. 
 It was admirably done, with an amount of care that 
 left little or nothing to be desired. I spoke to 
 Burton about the book, and asked him if he had 
 seen it. He had not, and he did not intend to look 
 at it, I told him its general scope and method of 
 treatment, not in reply to any question of his, but 
 because I thought, as he had a book on the same 
 subject nearly ready, it might interest him to know 
 how Mr. Wyon had done his work. The informa- 
 tion did not seem to interest him in the least. 
 
 A little later Burton asked me if I would look 
 over the proofs of his book. I was glad to have 
 the opportunity, and I told him so. The proofs 
 were brought, and I read them with positive dis- 
 may. There was much of the good writing and 
 cynical humour that had distinguished Burton's 
 previous works ; but, alas, there was slovenliness 
 in almost every page, and a general want of grip that 
 seemed to indicate failing powers. I had not the 
 courage to tell Burton what I thought, but contrived to 
 get out of the difficulty by suggesting some verbal 
 corrections here and there. I do not believe that 
 one of them was made, and I am certain the book 
 would not have been any better if they had been 
 made. 
 
 One of the corrections suggested was promptly 
 and sharply put aside by Burton. In one of the 
 chapters he had quoted Home's lines beginning 
 
 Firm and erect the Caledonian stood.
 
 xxiii EDWARD ELLICE ON MR. GLADSTONE 323 
 
 I pointed out that he had misquoted them. He 
 refused to make the corrections I sug^o-ested. 
 "What does it matter.?" he asked. "If it had 
 been a wrong quantity in Latin it would have been 
 a different thing." There was no arguing against 
 this position. The quotation, incorrect as it was, 
 remained unaltered. 
 
 Burton had been on terms of close acquaintance 
 with most of the Whigs of 1832 and later. He had 
 helped them, and they helped him to appointments 
 which he deserved, and the duties of which he dis- 
 charged with great ability. One of his Whig friends 
 was the elder Edward Ellice, the so-called " Bear 
 Ellice," who sat for Coventry for many years. 
 Burton told me that Mr. Ellice had often expressed 
 distrust of Mr. Gladstone, and on one well-remem- 
 bered occasion had said, " Never trust him ; he is 
 a monk at heart." Burton often repeated this story, 
 partly, I suspect, by way of warning to me, whom 
 he thought to be too favourably inclined to Mr. 
 Gladstone. 
 
 Shortly before his death Burton brought to me 
 some of Edward Ellice's papers. He had re- 
 ceived them from Mrs. Ellice of Invergarry, who, 
 he said, had asked him to edit them for publica- 
 tion. He wanted to know whether I thought the 
 particular papers he had brought, referring to 
 party management during the Reform Agitation of 
 1830-32, should be printed. My advice was that 
 they should not. Whether Burton would have 
 followed that advice it is impossible to say. He
 
 324 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 died shortly afterwards. The papers were, I be- 
 lieve, returned to Mrs. Ellice, and I have never 
 heard of their publication. 
 
 There was a kind of Bohemianism about Burton 
 that nothing could ever have eradicated. It was 
 amusing, though occasionally it took an embarrass- 
 ing form. He lived at an old house a little distance 
 from the City, on the slope of the Craiglockhart Hill. 
 It is now part of the magnificent new Asylum for 
 the Insane, which has been erected from designs 
 by Mr. Sydney Mitchell. The architect has worked 
 the old house into the great group of buildings with 
 infinite skill and the best effect. On one occasion 
 Russel, myself, and Mr. Robert Cox, uncle of the 
 present M.P. for South Edinburgh, were invited 
 to dine with Burton. We got there, we found our 
 way, or were piloted up stone spiral staircases, and 
 through dim passages, first to the drawing-room 
 and then to the dining-room. There were books 
 in all directions, and after some delay there was 
 dinner. The one feature of it that I remember was 
 that Burton had the wine for use in bottles under 
 the table. Did the wine 07i the table run short, 
 he fished up another bottle from under the table. 
 So we went to the end of the entertainment. It 
 was an entertainment in other than a material 
 aspect. The talk was good. Russel 's buoyancy 
 had a capital foil in Burton's cynicism. A merrier 
 evening was never spent. 
 
 The memory of that diimer brings another 
 incident and another figure to my mind. We, the
 
 XXIII DR. JOHN BROWN 325 
 
 visitors, had to drive out to Burton's house ; and 
 it had been arranged that I should pick up Russel 
 and Mr. Cox on my way. Mr. Cox Hved in Rutland 
 Street. I drove there, got to the house, rang the bell, 
 was admitted and directed to a room at the back. 
 When I entered it I found myself face to face, not with 
 Mr. Cox, but with Dr. John Brown, the author oi Rab 
 and His Friends. For a moment we both looked 
 blank, then laughter followed. He had expected a 
 patient, and never thought to see me. I had got to 
 the wrong house, Mr. Cox lived next door. We had 
 two minutes of pleasant chat and then parted. 
 
 Dr. John Brown was the gentlest, kindliest, most 
 amiable man I ever had the pleasure of knowing. 
 His character was reflected in his books. I never 
 heard him say a harsh thing to or of anybody. I 
 do not believe he was capable of speaking harshly. 
 He had a sharp wit and ready humour, but he never 
 used either to wound the feelings of any man or 
 woman. He was inquisitive — what thoughtful and 
 imaginative men are not ? — yet he never sought 
 to pry into matters of personal concern. He was 
 a searcher after information, not a mere gossip. 
 One evening he came into my room at the office 
 rather late. I expressed my surprise at seeing him 
 there so near the limit of elder's hours, when he 
 explained : — He had been on a visit to Russel at his 
 country-place, and had brought a message from my 
 Editor to me. He delivered the message, and then 
 he referred to an article in that morning's paper. 
 "You wrote that article," he said.
 
 326 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 " I cannot tell you," was my reply. 
 
 His eyes began to dance a little as he said, " Oh, 
 man, you need not make a secret of it ! Russel told 
 me you wrote it." 
 
 " Russel did not know ; he never saw it till he 
 saw it in the paper," 
 
 " And do you suppose he does not know your 
 articles when he sees them ? " 
 
 " I am not sure that he always does ; but no 
 doubt he is generally right in his surmises about my 
 authorship." 
 
 "Well, he is right this time; so no more need 
 be said on that subject." 
 
 Then he went on to ask me questions as to 
 where I had got some facts set forth in the article, 
 and finally he left me with kindly words of parting. 
 He never failed to praise what he thought was a 
 praiseworthy literary effort in the paper. I had 
 many letters from him in commendation of articles — 
 descriptive or of general interest — that had appeared. 
 Now and then would come a word of criticism, 
 always kindly, and always sound. No sneering, no 
 bitterness, could be found in anything he wrote or 
 said. He was in love with the world — not with 
 worldliness, but with everything animate and 
 inanimate in creation. Evil was a pain to him ; 
 good was his desire. He thought more of others 
 than of himself. His modesty was the feature of 
 his character that was known to all men. He was 
 not bashful, as are some men who yet do impudent 
 things ; but he was not desirous of parading before
 
 XXIII PROFESSOR BLACKIE 327 
 
 the public, or of singing his own praises, or of 
 showing other people how utterly insignificant they 
 were. He won the love of every one, he won 
 literary reputation of a high order ; and he deserved 
 both the love and the reputation. He was the 
 truest embodiment I have known of Colerido;e's 
 description of a really good man — 
 
 He prayeth best, who loveth best 
 All things both great and small. 
 
 No one has come in his place. We have good 
 writers, good thinkers, kindly men ; we have no Dr. 
 John Brown. 
 
 A widely different man was Professor Blackie. 
 No one could see him marching along the street, 
 plaid on shoulder, staff in hand, without seeing that 
 he had what the Kilbarchan weaver called " a 
 guid conceit o' himsel'." I am inclined to think 
 the world likes that kind of development. It is 
 disposed to take a man at his own estimate. If he 
 be modest and retiring, he may win the love of 
 friends, and the esteem of the appreciative ; but he 
 will not be a great man, or a comparatively great 
 man, in the eyes of the world. It wants self- 
 assertion. It got plenty of that commodity from 
 Professor Blackie. He believed in himself, and did 
 not trouble much about others. He praised dead 
 writers ; they could not be rivals. Sometimes he 
 praised living workers, with an ex cathedra manner, 
 and an air of patronage which no one could mistake. 
 I am sure he had kindly emotions ; he could not
 
 328 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Otherwise have had the esteem of so many good 
 men. But it was not for his kindHness that the 
 public Hked him, and he knew the fact. 
 
 For a long time after I made his acquaintance he 
 contributed to the columns of the Scotsman. Indeed 
 he did so almost to his death. He wrote well and 
 vivaciously, in a dogmatic tone, that was infinitely 
 amusing. Sometimes this tendency got him into 
 trouble. On one occasion he had written for us a 
 series of articles on Loch Tay, and the places of 
 interest on its shores. In one of these articles — 
 about Killin, I think — he paused in a rapid sentence 
 about whisky to say "(uisquebagh ; for that is the 
 proper Gaelic way of spelling the word)." The 
 article appeared, and on the afternoon of the same 
 day a letter came to hand for publication. The 
 writer said that Professor Blackie had made a 
 strange mistake; there was no such letter as "q" 
 in the Gaelic language ; the proper way to spell 
 whisky in Gaelic was " uisgebagh." The letter 
 was published. Blackie took no notice of it. Many 
 more letters of a similar kind came to hand, and, so 
 to speak, I pelted Blackie with them. At last he 
 could stand it no longer, and he wrote a short 
 indignant letter. Could the writers of the other 
 letters, he asked, suppose that he was so ignorant as 
 not to know there was no "q" in Gaelic, and that 
 whisky was spelt "uisgebagh " ? " Uisquebagh " was 
 a printer's error, for which he was not responsible. I 
 published the letter, simply putting this note to it : — 
 ** Professor Blackie revised the proof of his article."
 
 XXIII PROFESSOR BLACKIE 329 
 
 On the afternoon on which this appeared, he 
 came to my room manifestly in anger. 
 
 "Why did you put that note to my letter?" he 
 asked. 
 
 " It was the truth." 
 
 " There is no occasion to tell the truth in such a 
 matter." 
 
 " I am sorry to hear that doctrine from you, 
 Professor, though of course I knew you practised 
 what you now preach." 
 
 " What do you mean ? Do you mean that I tell 
 lies ? " 
 
 " No. The matter so far is one for a casuist 
 to settle. In your letter about whisky you said 
 ' uisquebagh ' was a printer's error. Presumably 
 you believed what you said. But it was not a 
 printer's error. You wrote 'uisquebagh.' There 
 it is "; and I produced his manuscript. " You revised 
 your proof, and you left ' qu ' standing where ' g ' 
 should have been." 
 
 " Oh," said he, " you make too much of it. 
 What does it matter ? " 
 
 And, swinging his plaid over his shoulder, he 
 tapped me in a friendly way on the head, and 
 marched out singing a scrap of Scots song. 
 
 Soon after I made Blackie's acquaintance, he 
 asked me to become a member of a club called the 
 " Blackie Brotherhood," It was a social club — with 
 twenty or thirty members, all more or less known 
 men in Scotland. The members dined together 
 once or twice a year ; that was the purpose of the
 
 330 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 club. Blackie took the chair at the dinner. He 
 was "the Chief." He proposed me for election : I 
 was elected ; and I went to dinners. Never was any 
 experience more delightful. Blackie was the most 
 autocratic and the best of chairmen. There was 
 a constant flow of wit, with now and then some 
 wisdom. I doubt whether a better company could 
 have been gathered in Scotland. Some came from 
 Glasgow, and some from other parts of the country. 
 All had a high position in their respective spheres, 
 as clergymen, doctors, and the like. Bear in mind 
 that this is true not merely of one particular dinner, 
 but of all. They were the most buoyant, the wittiest, 
 the most intellectual of social gatherings that I have 
 known. 
 
 Unhappily they came to an end, and I was the 
 cause — the very unwilling cause. This was the 
 manner of the end. Blackie had rushed into a 
 Highland agitation, and he had said many things 
 that, as it seemed to me, he ought not to have said. 
 He used language at times which was little short 
 in violence of the language used by Irish Land 
 Leaguers. He was sharply criticised in the 
 Scotsman, and on one occasion he was told that 
 what he had said was dangerously near to being an 
 incentive to crime. He was highly indignant, but 
 he made no complaint to me. Shortly afterwards, 
 when a dinner of the Blackie Brotherhood was 
 coming near, he sent word to the Rev. Dr. Cameron 
 Lees, who was then the Captain of the Club, that 
 I was not to receive intimation of the dinner ;
 
 xxin PROFESSOR BLACKIE 331 
 
 he would not permit me to be present. Dr. Lees 
 replied in effect that I was as much entitled to be 
 present as any other member of the Club, and that 
 he could be no party to my exclusion. I believe 
 he begged Blackie to reconsider his objection. 
 Blackie refused, and insisted upon my exclusion. 
 Thereupon Dr. Lees declined to act as Captain, and 
 sent the minute-books to Blackie ; the dinner never 
 took place, and the Blackie Brotherhood came to an 
 end. 
 
 It has sometimes occurred to me that Blackie's 
 practice in this case, as in others, did not exactly 
 square with his preaching. Perhaps I am wrong ; 
 and in any case it is right that my experience of 
 his preaching as distinct from his practice should 
 be told. 
 
 One Sunday in February 1882 I received from 
 Blackie a letter and two enclosures. The letter was 
 an introduction to me of Miss Stoddart, who was 
 taking a great interest in the anti-opium agitation, 
 and who, I suppose, wished to enlist the Scotsman 
 on the side of that agitation. This letter was not 
 wTitten by Blackie himself, but by an amanuensis. 
 One of the enclosures informed me that he 
 had been suffering from " three devils." The 
 "devil of ophthalmia" was one; the names of 
 the others I forget. They had confined him to 
 his room, and had compelled him to use the pen 
 of another for writing to me. The other en- 
 closure was a sonnet. It was introduced with these 
 words —
 
 332 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 I send you a sonnet, not for publication, from which you 
 will see how grandly I am able to return that sympathetic spirit 
 with which you review some of my best books ! 
 
 The sonnet was written on a sickbed, and if it looks sickly 
 it is only natural. 
 
 The sonnet did look sickly. It was an attack on 
 newspapers. They were "loathly lazar-houses," 
 wherein the sores and sins of the body-politic and 
 the individual were gathered together and exposed, 
 to the horror of sensitive souls. 
 
 When I had got through most of my work on 
 the paper that evening, I wrote a " sonnet" in reply 
 to Blackie's. My lines pointed to the cowardice of 
 those who shrank from looking facts in the face. 
 That is all I can remember of it. That night it was 
 posted to Blackie with a letter in which I said I 
 would rather not see Miss Stoddart ; for that I had 
 no sympathy with the anti-opium agitation, and was 
 not inclined to do anything that might cause my 
 fellow-subjects in India to be more heavily taxed 
 that the Chinese might be induced to grow 
 opium for themselves. Then I said the poet 
 of the establishment had been turned on to 
 produce a sonnet in reply to the one sent to 
 me. He had written one, which was enclosed. 
 It was, I thought, as true as Blackie's own, 
 and that was all the merit it could claim. There 
 was no difficulty in foreseeing what the result 
 would be. 
 
 Next day's post brought me the following letter 
 written by Blackie himself : —
 
 xxiii PROFESSOR BLACKIE 333 
 
 My dear Editor — Your sonnet is quite right ; and so is 
 mine. Most moral questions are a balance of contraries, which, 
 however, are not contradictions. The only question for practical 
 men is tvhat^ when, tvhere, how, and how much of each. See 
 Aristotle. 
 
 As to the opium question, I knew beforehand what your 
 opinions would be on that subject. Myself and not a few others 
 in Edinburgh — who are neither fools nor bigots — have long felt 
 that there is a certain range of social questions for which the 
 Scotsman has no organ. Admiring, as we cannot fail to do, the 
 general talent and practical wisdom of the paper, no amount of 
 wit and cleverness, no dexterous manipulation of Blue Books, 
 much less the iterated commonplaces of a one-eyed political 
 economy, falsely so-called, can compensate for the lack of 
 reverence and love, which, as Goethe teaches, lie at the root of all 
 true excellence, both intellectual and moral. What the Scotsman 
 lacks is, in our opinion, a lofty moral inspiration and a generous 
 moral chivalry. Add only these necessary things to your present 
 virtues, and you will reign without a rival over the hearts of all 
 true Scotsmen. — Sincerely yours, JoH. S. Blackie. 
 
 No copy of my reply to this letter was kept by 
 me. What I remember of it is, that while thanking 
 Blackie for his advice, I asked how it was to be 
 applied. Was the Scots77ian in the name of " rever- 
 ence and love " to leave undone things that ought 
 to be done, and to try to mislead the public by not 
 giving them the facts of the time ? I must have said 
 something as to my own motives and objects. Any- 
 way, the result was that Blackie sent me the follow- 
 ing letter : — 
 
 Mv DEAR Editor — It was very good in you to take my 
 preachment so seriously : somewhat too seriously perhaps. I 
 did not in the least mean to impeach the purity of your principles 
 or the honesty of your character as a journalist ; I spoke rather 
 of a hereditary tone in the Scotsman newspaper, which had
 
 
 334 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 attained full dimensions before you had anything to do with its 
 character, and which, so far as I know, you may not possibly 
 even now be able in all points to mould or to control. As little 
 did I mean — though no doubt given to preaching — to obtrude 
 my personal advice on you. I only thought it as well, in the 
 way of friendly confidence, that you should not be ignorant of a 
 certain feature in the conduct of your journal, which a consider- 
 able number of your constant readers could wish to be otherwise. 
 But of course if you do not see the fault, or imagine it perhaps 
 rather to be an excellence, you cannot mend it. It is quite 
 possible also that we may be wrong ; only we may claim to have 
 our views seriously considered, and not flung overboard as a dish 
 of feeble and frothy sentiment. 
 
 There are two forces in the present age potently at work, to 
 which in my opinion a wise leader of public thought should seek 
 to apply the rein rather than the spur ; I mean the notion that 
 all things are to be explained from the outside, from the merely 
 material and mechanical ; and again, the conceit that in the con- 
 stitution of society mere knowledge can achieve any valuable result, 
 without noble emotion, or what I call moral inspiration. The 
 mechanical is merely the engine: the steam that is to move the engine 
 comes from another source altogether, and can never be created 
 by any amount of mechanical appliances, or physical knowledge. 
 The cognitive faculty can direct, and tabulate, but it cannot 
 create. It is utterly destitute of plastic vitality ; in the words of 
 
 Burns — 
 
 The heart aye's the part aye 
 That makes us right or wrang. 
 
 As to political economy, of course I respect its laws as I respect 
 those of mechanics. I have read not a few treatises on the 
 subject, and have studied certain branches of it in minute detail ; 
 but I can allow it no dominant or legislative place in social 
 science. Without moral inspiration it is a body without a soul ; 
 tools, if you please, rather, without a workman, or with a bad 
 workman, or a mad one. 
 
 I suppose nothing more can profitably be said ; but if we 
 are wise men this accidental interchange of antagonistic thought 
 cannot remain without some advantage to both parties. — Yours 
 with sincerity, Joh. S. Blackie.
 
 XXIII PROFESSOR BLACKIE 335 
 
 It is no part of my intention to discuss this letter 
 here, further than to say that it is based on assump- 
 tions which might be questioned. It assumes that 
 a newspaper which deals with facts — " chiels that 
 winna ding" — has no moral force or inspiration 
 behind it ; which might be true, but is most likely 
 to be false. Further, it assumes that the "noble 
 emotion " or " moral inspiration " of the writer is 
 the only thing of its kind that is true, and that there- 
 fore it ought to be the guide of those who wish to 
 influence public thought. On this point one other 
 experience of mine with Blackie may throw some 
 light. 
 
 Now and then he delivered addresses to his 
 students or to some Society. He took pains with 
 these addresses and wrote them out in full. When 
 he had done so, he frequently brought them to me 
 with a request that the speech as written might be 
 embodied in our report of the gathering at which it 
 was to be delivered. These requests were complied 
 with for a long time. But it came to my ears that 
 the speeches we printed were not the speeches 
 Blackie delivered. Instead of giving them, he 
 wandered off into many side paths to win the 
 laughter of his audience. In this he invariably 
 succeeded, though, so far as I could gather, the 
 audience laughed at him, not with him. My feeling 
 was that the Scotsman ought not to print an address 
 as delivered by Blackie, when in fact he had delivered 
 one that was in all respects different. As it seemed 
 to me, we were deceiving the public and providing
 
 336 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 material that might mislead the future biographer of 
 Blackie. Thus it came about that I declined to 
 print the written speeches, and directed that his 
 orations should be reported as they were delivered. 
 Blackie was exceedingly indignant. " What did it 
 matter to the public ? " he asked. The written 
 speech was what he meant to say ; the spoken 
 might be regarded as nonsense — the public got the 
 best. In vain did I urge that the public did not 
 get the real speech, which was all that the news- 
 paper, as the historian of current events, was bound 
 to give. I hinted that it was not quite honest to 
 publish a literary or moral essay and describe it as a 
 delivered speech, when it never had been delivered. 
 Blackie's "moral inspiration" did not enable him to 
 appreciate the objection ; and I do not doubt that 
 he regarded the refusal to print more written but 
 undelivered speeches as a further proof of the 
 absence of that " noble emotion " to which he 
 attached so much importance. 
 
 In connection with the break-up of the "Blackie 
 Brotherhood," mention has been made of Blackie's 
 anger because he had been severely criticised in 
 the Scotsman. It is, perhaps, unnecessary to say 
 that no personal feeling dictated that criticism. So 
 far as I was concerned, it never occurred to me to 
 think that I had any individual grievance against 
 him. What may be described as public duty is one 
 thing ; private friendship is another. The Scotsman 
 has often criticised the public doings and sayings 
 of men who were my private friends, and I do
 
 xxiii RECONCILIATION 337 
 
 not believe that our friendship was lessened thereby, 
 except, for a time, in Blackie's case. Some of 
 our friends sought to heal the difference. It was 
 not a quarrel, because two aggrieved persons are 
 requisite to make a quarrel. Blackie was deeply 
 offended with me ; I was not in the least offended 
 with him. This was told to the friends who came 
 to me, and further it was said that Blackie might be 
 told this. But he wanted an apology in the paper for 
 what had been said of him there ; and as I thought 
 nothing had been said that was not fair and necessary 
 criticism an apology was out of the question. 
 
 At last I met him face to face on the Waverley 
 Bridge. He stopped me and he said — 
 
 " Do you think it right that two Christian gentle- 
 men should not be on speaking terms with each 
 other ? " 
 
 " No ; I do not." 
 
 " Then let us shake hands and have done with it." 
 "With all my heart," I replied. 
 We shook hands, and then he said — 
 " But you were very hard on me." 
 "You were very foolish. Professor. But if we 
 begin to argue the matter you may regret having 
 shaken hands with me. Let us be content to hold 
 our own opinions." 
 
 " That is wise," he said ; and though I am not 
 sure he ever quite forgave me, I know that he 
 embraced me in public — it was a way he had ; and 
 he sent letters and sonnets and other communica- 
 tions to the paper as in former time. 
 
 z
 
 CHAPTER XXIV 
 
 Misleading journalists — A case in point — " The biggest liars in Edin- 
 burgh " — Too much caution — The betrothal of the Princess 
 Louise — The anonymous letter writer — Some specimens — A 
 United Presbyterian minister and anonymous letters — Con- 
 viction and penitence — The "Christian minister" and the 
 wickedness of the newspaper — A lunatic visitor — An important 
 discovery — Lunatic letter-writers — Police advice and criticism 
 — The students and the Editor — An unpleasant lesson — An 
 angling recollection. 
 
 No calling is so open to error owing to misinforma- 
 tion as is that of the journalist, and in no other 
 hands can misinformation have such serious results. 
 No one tells a journalist the thing that is not unless 
 in the hope that the story may be published. If it 
 be published, the resultant injury may be widespread 
 and severe. For this reason it is greatly to be 
 desired that those who have the direction of news- 
 papers should be careful as to the acceptance of 
 statements that may be made to them. I am not 
 the judge of my brethren, but I can think what I 
 please, and sometimes the thought occurs to me 
 that a few of them are, like my old colleague 
 Washington Wilks, more desirous of picturesque- 
 ness than of accuracy. All of us are liable to be 
 deceived ; we need not encourage the deceivers.
 
 CHAP. XXIV FALSE INFORMATION 
 
 339 
 
 This is but a prelude to the story of an experience 
 of my own. Not long after I came to Edinburgh, 
 while the general election of 1868 was going on, 
 three men called at the Scotsman office and asked 
 to see the Editor on duty. At that time there was 
 not much care exercised as to callers ; they were 
 allowed to walk up into the editorial rooms without 
 check. These three men came up, and found me. 
 They were the friends and helpers of a candidate 
 for the representation of a county constituency not 
 far from Edinburgh. I did not know them, though 
 the name of one of them was familiar to me as 
 that of a man who was credited with having made 
 an important discovery in medicine. Their candidate 
 was on our side of politics, and of course we were 
 ready to help him. The three had a story of his 
 wonderful progress to tell. They told it, and assured 
 me not only that it was true, but that its publication 
 was of great importance to their candidate. It was 
 published. 
 
 Next day when I met Russel he asked where 
 
 the paragraph about election had come from. 
 
 He was told that I had written it from information 
 given tome. "Who gave you the information?" 
 he asked. I told him the names of my three in- 
 formants. "Man," said he, "they've done you. 
 They're the biggest liars in Edinburgh, which is 
 saying a good deal. Nobody would trust a word 
 they said. However, you could not know that; but 
 you will know it in future." The whole story was 
 false. A night or two later two of the three tried
 
 340 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 to play me a like trick. They did not succeed ; 
 but they heard something that if they took it to 
 heart might have been for their souls' welfare. 
 
 Many more or less similar experiences have 
 been mine. In one case a man brought to me 
 the announcement that he had been appointed to 
 a colonial governorship. It was to be made known 
 the next week ; but he had thought the Scotsman 
 ought to have the first news. Guilelessly I accepted 
 the story, asking for no proofs. There was not a 
 word of truth in it. In the ordinary sense, the man 
 was sane. 
 
 When you have been deceived, you become 
 cautious ; perhaps you become too cautious. This 
 again has been my case. News which was true 
 has been kept out of the paper for a day or two 
 because I could not be sure of its accuracy. One 
 day we received a letter bearing the Inveraray post- 
 mark. It was not in the handwriting of one who 
 was accustomed to the use of the pen. It was not 
 signed ; the words in it were not correctly spelt in 
 all cases. It stated that an engagement had been 
 made between the Princess Louise and the Marquis 
 of Lome, and that the marriage would take place 
 soon. I laughed ; the trick was too palpable ! 
 Fancy anybody thinking we could be taken in 
 by a story like that! Alas! all the self-conceit 
 was dashed two days afterwards by the announce- 
 ment of the engagement in the Morning Post. 
 The story was true. If it had been accepted, 
 the Scotsman would have been the first to let the
 
 XXIV ANONYMOUS LETTERS 341 
 
 world know of what had been arranged. The 
 moral is, not that journalists should jump at every 
 story that is brought to them, and publish it on 
 the chance that it may be true, but that every 
 story should be inquired into, and not one put 
 aside because of its apparent improbability. 
 
 Another of the delights of editorial life is the 
 anonymous letter. Sometimes I have wondered 
 whether this form of communication can be as 
 common in England as it is in Scotland. Rarely 
 a week passes without one or more reaching me. 
 They are of all kinds. Some have been from 
 writers who were concerned for the safety of my 
 soul ; some have been expostulations in regard to 
 particular reports of public matters ; most of them 
 have been from terribly aggrieved politicians whose 
 consciences were shocked to the point of anony- 
 mous letter writing, by the political attitude of the 
 paper. These last are most numerous when there 
 has been disappointment on the one side or the 
 other. They were very numerous in the latter 
 part of 1886, and they have been frequent in 1896. 
 
 For my own part, I do not object to anonymous 
 letters about myself sent to myself. It is a weak- 
 ness of mine to desire to see myself as others see 
 me, and glimpses of this kind are got from anony- 
 mous letters. Most men have more or less an 
 idea of their own good qualities ; what they want 
 is knowledge of their deficiencies and weaknesses 
 and wrongdoings. Your anonymous letter writer 
 points these out with perfect frankness. One such
 
 342 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 letter begins — "Sir, you are a liar!" It is im- 
 possible to go on in a career of inaccuracy when 
 you are liable to be reminded of it in so striking 
 a manner. Here is another opening to a letter — 
 "Sir, you are a FOOL!" That may be true, but 
 the announcement coming suddenly gives one a 
 shock. Another opening to a post-card letter I 
 received at my house a few days ago, signed "A 
 Liberal," runs — "What a raving idiot you are!" 
 Could anything be more calculated to lessen and 
 indeed destroy self-conceit ? 
 
 Of course all your anonymous correspondents 
 know far better than you do how a newspaper 
 ought to be conducted. They also know that as 
 on this point your views and theirs do not coincide, 
 you must be a "scoundrel," or a "liar," or a "fool." 
 If you give support to a particular statesman, you 
 are a toady : if you oppose him, you are actuated by 
 the most malignant motives. It may be submitted 
 that communications of this kind are a wholesome 
 discipline for most of us. We may take the lesson 
 to heart, though we may not admire the teacher. 
 
 It has been said that my receipt of anonymous 
 letters in 1886 was large. In that year the Scotsman 
 had opposed Mr. Gladstone as to Home Rule, and 
 at the general election the Gladstone Government 
 had been defeated. Some supporters of Home 
 Rule, with the proverbial zeal of converts, were 
 very bitter against the Scotsman and all connected 
 with it. Their bitterness found expression in 
 anonymous letters. Several of these were unclean
 
 XXIV A MINISTER CONVICTED 343 
 
 in the moral sense ; some were prophetic of the 
 destruction of the paper if it did not abandon its 
 opposition to Home Rule ; some were simply- 
 abusive. One writer sent letters almost every 
 other day. This is a feature of anonymous letter 
 writing ; there may be many different writers, but 
 there will be one who evidently thinks he has a 
 mission, and who will write day after day. In the 
 latter part of 1886 such a writer began to pay us 
 attention. For some time I thought no more of his 
 productions than I did of others ; they were abusive, 
 prophetic, occasionally filthy. At last, on receipt of 
 one of them, written on peculiar paper, I thought it 
 might not be amiss to try to discover who the writer 
 was. The post -mark on the envelope showed the 
 provincial town from which the letters came. I sent a 
 piece of the paper on which the letter itself was written 
 to a stationer in that town and asked him if he could 
 inform me where such paper was sold, and to whom. 
 The first shot told. The stationer to whom I wrote had 
 sold the paper himself to a United Presbyterian min- 
 ister in the town, who was his only customer for it. 
 
 My next question was, Did he know the rev. 
 gentleman's handwriting ? He did ; he sent me a 
 letter written by the minister to himself. It must be 
 remembered I had not told the stationer why the 
 information asked for was wanted. He had long 
 been our local correspondent, and he knew that he 
 would not be troubled without good cause. The 
 letter of the minister sent by him was put into 
 the hands of an expert in handwriting along with
 
 344 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 one of the anonymous letters. The expert said 
 without hesitation, what was indeed clear enough, 
 that the two letters had been written by the same 
 hand. In the anonymous letter there was some 
 attempt at disguise, but it was ineffective. 
 
 Thus the way was cleared for action. A letter 
 was written to the minister, in which he was told 
 that the Editor of the Scotsman had traced a series 
 of anonymous and nasty letters to him. The Editor 
 proposed to put the letters before the heads of the 
 United Presbyterian Church, but thought it right, 
 before doing so, to give the rev. gentleman himself 
 an opportunity of putting forward anything he might 
 desire to say. The answer was evasive. Practically 
 the authorship of the letters was admitted. Their 
 anonymous character was justified on the ground 
 that the Editor of the Scotsman was anonymous. 
 Strong political statements were made, and, generally 
 speaking, the tone of the reply was aggressive and 
 justificatory. 
 
 Another letter was addressed to his Reverence, 
 in which he was told that he seemed to have 
 mistaken the meaning of the first letter. The 
 Editor had made no personal complaint, and did not 
 mean to make any. All he desired was to know 
 whether in the opinion of the minister, and perhaps, 
 more particularly, whether in the opinion of the 
 heads of the United Presbyterian Church such 
 anonymous communications as he had received were 
 consistent productions of one who was engaged in 
 the Christian ministry.
 
 XXIV THE CONVICTED MINISTER 345 
 
 This brought a long, confused, and piteous 
 appeal. Indeed it brought two appeals; for the 
 rev. gentleman, having written one letter, thought it 
 necessary to write a second on the same day. I 
 could not but be sorry for the unhappy man. 
 Evidently his trouble was great. All the evil-doing, 
 he said, had come of mixing in political affairs. 
 Writing in the third person, he said, speaking of him- 
 self — "He has experienced the political sphere to 
 be inimical to the peculiar sphere of the Christian 
 minister. All these things have arisen from the 
 period of the Home Rule legislation." What 
 mischief that Home Rule legislation, or attempted 
 legislation, did ! Not only did it break up the Liberal 
 party, it led a Christian minister to write nasty 
 anonymous letters. 
 
 It was a peculiarity of the replies of the rev. 
 culprit that he sought to lay stress upon what he 
 spoke of as the " irreverent treatment given to the 
 Word of God " by the Scots77tan. He told how his 
 feelings as a " Christian minister " had been 
 harrowed by the profanity of the paper. He did not 
 seem to see that the pain of his goodness in feeling 
 the evil of the Scotsmans wickedness had not kept 
 him from doing a dishonourable and immoral act. 
 That was his look-out. He finished the letter from 
 which a sentence has been quoted with these words 
 — " He " (that is himself) "has to state, as the result 
 of his present experience, that he has formed the 
 resolution to sever himself wholly and perpetually 
 from all politics whatever, and to restrict himself
 
 346 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 entirely to the specific work of the Christian ministry. 
 And with these explanations and these expressions 
 — with the frankest, most heartfelt apology for every- 
 thing of which complaint has been made, he trusts 
 the Editor of the Scotsman will be satisfied ; andyi7r 
 ever abjuring politics, the present correspondence 
 may be allowed to bear fruit in his specific field of 
 the Christian ministry." 
 
 It may be thought that the grammar of this 
 passage is as faulty as the rev. gentleman's Christian 
 practice. But everybody can see what it means. 
 He was informed in reply that his apology was 
 accepted with pleasure, and that the matter 
 would not aofain be alluded to. A letter of thanks 
 closed the correspondence. In that letter there was 
 a reiteration of the assurance that never again would 
 the writer meddle with politics. Alas ! his convic- 
 tion of what is due to the Christian ministry has not 
 been strong enough to enable him to keep his word. 
 I have seen letters published in newspapers favouring 
 Home Rule which bear internal evidence that they 
 come from his desk, and on many occasions he has 
 figured at political meetings. His good resolutions 
 held, I believe, for a year ; perhaps for two. He is 
 now as sure of the duty of " the Christian minister " 
 to interfere and take active part in the political sphere, 
 as, under conviction of dishonourable conduct, he was 
 sure of the opposite when he wrote to me. 
 
 So far as I know, other ministers have not allowed 
 their political feelings to lead them into anonymous 
 letter writing ; but they have allowed those feelings
 
 XXIV EDITORS' VISITORS 347 
 
 to lead them into speech-making and appearances 
 at public meetings which, to quote the words of my 
 correspondent, are not within " the specific work of 
 the Christian ministry." It is for them to reconcile 
 the politician and the minister in their own persons, 
 if they can. The general opinion is, I am con- 
 vinced, that they may be good politicians or good 
 ministers, but they cannot be both. 
 
 The last passage shows how difficult it is for an 
 Old Newspaper Hand to get away from the Leading 
 Article. He must preach in his own way. Some- 
 times he does so with much interruption. That is 
 to say, the Leading Article is produced in the 
 intervals between callers. It is all very well for 
 your Social Philosopher to write thoughtful, and 
 sometimes unintelligible, treatises in a pleasant 
 study, without having to break off in the middle 
 of a sentence to answer a question or to receive a 
 visitor. The Editor of a newspaper who writes 
 Leading Articles has no such opportunity. He has 
 all sorts and conditions of men, and sometimes of 
 women, coming to him for advice, or to get printed 
 favours, or to ask questions. Now and then these 
 visitors are noteworthy, as in one case that occurred 
 in my experience some years ago. 
 
 Shortly after midnight, when I had just begun an 
 article, the porter came into my room, and said, 
 " Mr. M'Leod wants to see you, sir." 
 
 "Who is Mr. M'Leod.?" I asked with some 
 impatience. 
 
 " Don't know, sir."
 
 348 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 "What is he like?" 
 
 " He's an old man, lame." 
 
 "Oh, well, bring him up." 
 
 Up came Mr. M'Leod. He was a small, elderly 
 man, who could walk only with the help of two 
 sticks, on which he leaned heavily. He hirpled 
 into my room, and stood at the end of my writing- 
 table. He declined the chair I offered him, saying 
 that he preferred to stand. He seemed to be 
 somewhat embarrassed, and, anxious to get to busi- 
 ness, I asked, "What can I do for you.'*" 
 
 "I have come," he said, "to offer you a great 
 discovery," 
 
 I bowed, and he went on : 
 
 "It has already been made known to the 
 Speaker of the House of Commons. But I do 
 not think it can get sufficient publicity through 
 him. It is of great importance to mankind, and 
 I thought I would offer it to you. In the columns 
 of the Scotsman it would become known to all the 
 world." 
 
 Again I bowed, and, with a strong suspicion of 
 my visitor's good faith, I asked, " What is the nature 
 of the discovery '^. " 
 
 " Sir, I have discovered the means of preventing 
 any one from dying. If my discovery be made 
 known, nobody need die unless he chooses." 
 
 The murder was out ; but how was I to get the 
 poor fellow away ? " Do you really desire me to 
 publish your discovery ? " I asked, 
 
 " Yes, I do ; it is for the good of the world."
 
 XXIV LUNATIC LETTER-WRITERS 349 
 
 " I will do no such thing; take it away, there are 
 many people I want to die." 
 
 Not a word more did that poor fellow say to me. 
 The brutal declaration had stunned him. I shall 
 never forget the look of pained perplexity that came 
 over his small, vaguely thoughtful face. He turned 
 round and scrambled out of the room, and I was left 
 alone. Never again did a word about the discovery 
 reach me. It was a pity I did not take what he had 
 to offer, and get him away with less abruptness. 
 But allowances must be made. When you have an 
 article to write after midnight, and the paper has to 
 be at press before three o'clock in the morning, you 
 do not welcome visitors. The fewer of them the 
 better. 
 
 Rather worse in some ways than the harmless 
 lunatic caller is the active lunatic letter-writer. In 
 two or three cases, letters, plainly written by a lunatic, 
 have come to me day by day for months together. It 
 was not the same lunatic in each case. There was 
 no indication that the letters came from a lunatic 
 asylum ; the writers appeared to be out in the 
 world. One set of the letters contained a curious 
 mixture of words and figures. The writer might 
 have been planning cryptograms. Nothing could 
 be made of them by myself or any of my colleagues. 
 They came daily for months. Another set was 
 widely different. They were written in a beautifully 
 clear hand. Many of them had finely drawn geo- 
 metrical diagrams, by way of introduction to the 
 strangest problems. Some were literary essays, in
 
 350 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 which there were more than traces of sane thought. 
 Some were sonnets or other poems. One post 
 brought me from this writer twelve sonnets — one 
 for each month of the year, an essay on Pope, I 
 think, and a wonderful demonstration of some 
 hydraulic invention. Nothing could surpass the 
 neatness and care with which they had all been 
 prepared. The sonnets were better than many I 
 have seen printed. But running through all — 
 sonnets, essay, invention — there was the thread of 
 hopeless insanity. I have not heard from that 
 correspondent for several years. 
 
 Late hours of work are unavoidable where a 
 morning daily newspaper has to be got out. Some- 
 times this fact leads to misunderstanding as to the 
 character of the worker. He is seen going home in 
 the morning, and he is mistaken for a night reveller. 
 One morning, more than thirty years ago, I was 
 walking home in London. It was a fine morning, 
 bright and light. At a particular point on my way 
 a police sergeant was endeavouring to induce a 
 well-dressed young fellow, who was not sober, to go 
 home. Just as I passed, the sergeant, speaking to 
 the young man, but looking at me with the eye of 
 reproach, said, " Go home, sir. Take my advice, 
 and go home. It's time all respectable people were 
 at home." The sarcasm of that word " respectable " 
 crushed me, I went on with bowed head. 
 
 Another time, a kindly policeman entered into 
 talk with me as I neared my home one morning. 
 I had recently removed into the neighbourhood.
 
 XXIV STUDENT REPROACHES 351 
 
 My friend told me, "We couldn't make you out at 
 first, sir. We watched you pretty close, and couldn't 
 make you out. Now we know it's all right ; you're one 
 of them press fellows." Evidently there is not in the 
 police mind, or there was not in that police mind, the 
 reverence for the press which one hears expressed at 
 times, when the toast is proposed near the end of a 
 dinner, by one who has well eaten and well drunken. 
 
 Another street adventure of mine brought home 
 to me in a striking way the more or less unpleasant 
 conviction that years were leaving their mark upon 
 me. On a fine May morning I was walking home 
 along Clerk Street in Edinburgh. The air was 
 pleasantly warm and delightfully fresh after a hot 
 night in the editorial room. A set of students — 
 medical or divinity, I know not which — had been 
 enjoying themselves all night in the room of one or 
 more of their number. The window of that room 
 was wide open. Two or three of the students, pipe 
 in mouth, were leaning out of it. As I came into 
 view on the other side of the street, I was greeted 
 thus : — " For shame, old man ! " " Go home to your 
 wife, old man ! " " Oh, for shame, old man ! " " Go 
 home, go home, old man ! " Thus they pelted me as 
 long as I was within hearing of them. Could the 
 fact that he was looking old be more strikingly 
 brought before any man ? 
 
 That incident was but the beginning of a course 
 of warnings that I must no longer think of myself 
 as young or middle-aged. One autumn a little later, 
 I was spending an angling holiday at Tongue, in
 
 
 352 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xxiv 
 
 Sutherland. There were, among the other guests 
 at the hotel, two young fellows, neither of them far 
 from twenty years of age, one way or the other. A 
 stormy week came up. How well I remember that 
 week ! The wind blew a gale from the north-east : 
 rain fell heavily. It was all but impossible to get 
 out on the lochs, but my boat happened to be hauled 
 up at the Shepherd's Bay in Loch Loyal. That 
 bay was a little sheltered. The heavy waves that 
 coursed along the loch were barred by its northern 
 headland. Spite of rain and wind I went out every 
 day, and every day — simply fishing across the bay, 
 and pulling back for a fresh drift — I got a good 
 basket. One evening when, after changing my 
 soaked garments for dry ones, I was coming down 
 the stairs of the hotel, I heard the landlord talking 
 thus to one of the young fellows : " Look there, Mr. 
 
 C ," he was saying, while he pointed to a great 
 
 dish of fine trout that I had brought home; "look 
 there. That is a good basket brought in by an Old 
 Gentleman, while you young men dare not face the 
 weather. I/e does not fear a shower of rain or a 
 gust of wind, though he is old." It was painful to 
 me ; but it showed me myself as I was seen by others. 
 The landlord's lesson was taken to heart by the 
 young man. Next day, though the wind was as 
 high as ever, and the rain as plentiful, he was out 
 on the loch. But he had no such shelter and hot 
 corner as I had. He was drifted to the lower — or 
 upper — end of the loch, and had to go ashore with 
 no trout and soaked clothes.
 
 CHAPTER XXV 
 
 More angling recollections — Loch Leven trout — Fishing poor 
 compared with some Highland lochs — Tongue and its waters — 
 John Ross — Salmon v. Trout fishing — A reproof — The poacher 
 — Tossing and trouting — The piety of the ghillie — A ghillie's 
 praise — John Stewart — Loch Maree — Sir Molyneux Nepean — 
 Minnow v. Fly — A change — How to avoid midges — A curious 
 trouting experience — Angling evenings — South Uist — The 
 Howmore. 
 
 Very few lovers of angling are ignorant of the 
 merits of Loch Leven trout. Indeed, many people 
 who are not anglers — who never cast a fly in their 
 lives — know these fish. For have they not been 
 netted and sold in London and elsewhere ? To me 
 they always seem to have an earthy flavour which I 
 do not like. They are bottom feeders, and I am 
 not an admirer of the bottom of Loch Leven. Many 
 trout are taken out of Loch Leven that are not 
 Loch Leven trout. I am not skilled in natural 
 history, but, on the strength of evidence given in a 
 case at Stirling, I may venture to say that the true 
 Loch Leven trout is a land-locked sea-trout. The 
 evidence on which this assertion is founded was 
 artfully obtained. A certain person was charged 
 with taking fish of the salmon tribe out of the Teith 
 
 2 A
 
 3S4 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 (I think) when he ought not, or had no right, to 
 have done so. The defence was that the fish taken 
 were not of the salmon tribe. An expert — from the 
 British Museum, I beheve — was called by the 
 prosecution and declared they were sea-going fish. 
 For the defence two or three fish were put before 
 him, and he was asked to say what they were. He 
 pronounced two of them to be sea- trout. They 
 really were Loch Leven trout with the scales rubbed 
 off The explanation of the mistake was that Loch 
 Leven trout must be land-locked sea-trout. 
 
 There are many fish taken out of the loch that 
 are nothing more than the ordinary brown trout of 
 the streams. They come into the loch from the 
 waters that flow into it, and they thrive amazingly. 
 Manifestly the food obtainable by fish in the 
 loch is, for them, rich and plentiful. No matter 
 whether the trout be the true Loch Leven or the 
 common brown salmo fario, they are pink-fleshed. 
 The true Loch Levener is silvery ; the brown 
 intruder is creamy yellow. My experience is that 
 the latter grows the larger. 
 
 To my thinking, Loch Leven is not so satisfactory 
 as an angling resort as are several Highland lochs 
 with which I am acquainted. Angling always seems 
 to me a sort of business in the Kinross lake. You 
 are admitted by the gate, so to speak, into the 
 slaughter-house, where you can be your own butcher. 
 Most frequently you do not find many fish to kill. 
 They are there in great numbers, but they will not 
 come to your lure. If you are specially brutal, you
 
 XXV SUTHERLAND LOCHS 355 
 
 will discard the fly and put out the artificial minnow. 
 There are men who go to the loch who would, I 
 believe, use a net, if they dared to do so. It is the 
 fish they are after, and nothing else ; to them the 
 first and last thinor Jg to cret fish. Old Izaak would 
 never have regarded one of them as a "con- 
 templative man." They prize a trout caught on a 
 minnow as much as a trout caught with a fly ! They 
 are bored with little casting when the rise is not on. 
 All this I can understand, though I do not admire 
 it ; and if it be possible to get to another water 
 where the angler is more in evidence than the 
 butcher, to that water let me go. 
 
 Now there are several lochs known to me in the 
 far north where you fish freely, amid wild scenery, 
 and land to take your luncheon and to walk about ; 
 where the fish may be smaller than the average 
 Loch Levener, but are as red-fleshed and are 
 sweeter to eat. My taste leads me to prefer these 
 northern lochs as angling resorts. On an average 
 you will get there a better basket than you will get 
 at Loch Leven, and you will get it without resort to 
 trolling. I do not know what they may be now, 
 but I know that a few years ago Loch Loyal, Loch 
 Craggie, and Loch Slam, near Tongue, were capital 
 fishing lochs. Then, there was a wonderful star- 
 shaped lake called Loch Hallam, lying at the base 
 of the southmost peak of Ben Loyal. From 
 that water I have got many large baskets of good 
 fish. 
 
 When I first went to Tongue, my ghillie was old
 
 356 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 John Ross. Everybody who has been in that part 
 of the world knows him, or knew him, for I believe 
 he is dead now. He was a thorough sportsman. 
 One day I had been fishing in Loch Slam, out of 
 which the river Borgie flows. There are falls on 
 the Borgie, but salmon leap them and you often 
 get one in the lochs that empty themselves through 
 the river. A little time before my visit the lessee 
 of the shooting and of the fishing on the river had 
 thought to make Loch Slam a salmon pool, and to 
 that end had put a wire barrier across the burn that 
 connected Slam with Craggie. When I saw this 
 barrier, it was broken in places. I asked John how 
 it had got broken. " Oh," said he, with strong pulls 
 at the guys that fastened it to the bank, " it was 
 the storms of winter." His pulls and their effects 
 showed me what were the storms of winter. 
 
 On the particular day to which allusion has been 
 made, Loch Slam had been unproductive. It was a 
 blazing hot summer day, and the trout preferred the 
 cool depths to the surface. John proposed that we 
 should go down the Borgie and try for a salmon. 
 Was not the water preserved ? I asked. " Oh no ; 
 at least any gentleman who likes can fish it." This 
 was not true ; but John was a little given to pious 
 frauds, I did not know the truth, but was reluctant 
 to go ; he persuaded me, and away we went. After 
 a walk of about a couple of miles, John began to put 
 up the rod, and this being done, and a fly carefully 
 chosen, I was directed to cast. I tried, and could 
 not ; the reason being, not ignorance, but flies.
 
 XXV AN ARDENT SPORTSMAN 
 
 357 
 
 They were in clouds. It is literally true that I 
 could not see the water because of them. They fell 
 on me and made fishing impossible. John was not 
 to be discouraged by any such trifle. Neither was 
 he to be discouraged by the non-appearance of any 
 fish. Farther down the river we went casting- over 
 every pool. In vain. The heat grew hotter; the 
 flies grew more numerous. I struck at last ; not a 
 step farther would I go. If John liked to take the 
 rod while I rested, he might do so. He did like, 
 and soon he disappeared, returning about an hour 
 and a half later, with no fish, but a smile of welcome. 
 I was trying to drive away the files with tobacco 
 smoke. He was full of regret that I had not seen 
 the fish he raised in the Falls Pool. I did not believe 
 in that salmon then, and I do not believe in it now. 
 Humbly the suggestion was made by me that 
 we should return to our boat on Loch Slam. John 
 consented, and we trudged back. As we neared 
 the boat John moralised. "There is shentlemans," 
 he said, "that likes partridge-shooting better than 
 deer- stalking, and there is shentlemans as likes 
 trout-fishing better than salmon-fishing." "Well, 
 John," I asked of malice, knowing what the answer 
 would be, "which do you prefer ?" "I never goes 
 for a bird when I can get at a stag ; and all the 
 trout in the lochs is not worth a salmon. I would 
 rather stalk a deer for a week than shoot all the 
 partridges in the country." I believed him. He 
 had stalked many a deer, and had eaten much 
 surreptitious venison.
 
 358 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Not far from Tongue there is a loch called (I 
 think) Loch - an - Dearig. It is not a large sheet 
 of water. One side of it is precipitous. Beyond 
 that side is the moor on the slopes of Ben Loyal. 
 It is not exactly a deer forest ; but deer frequent it. 
 Once when John was expansive because of a good 
 day's sport and a touch of the flask, he told me of 
 a foray he and two or three others had made on the 
 moor to the east of Loch-an-Dearig. They were 
 after deer ; they found some, and drove them over 
 the precipice at the loch side. " There was eleven 
 of them," said John. " They was all dead." " How 
 did you get the bodies away ? " I asked. " Oh, 
 they was all gone in the morning." " I suppose 
 meat was plentiful about that time, John?" John 
 smacked his lips and looked volumes. 
 
 Of course John was pious. He was a Free 
 Churchman, with a holy horror of the Erastianism 
 of the Establishment. The Free Church was some 
 two miles away from the hotel, and most of the 
 villagers who went to church had to pass the hotel 
 door. I did not often see John on the Sunday 
 morning. But I know of his piety, not merely 
 because of his own assurances on the subject, but 
 because of practical demonstrations. One Monday 
 morning, when I got down to breakfast, and as 
 a preliminary walked outside, I found John sitting 
 there prompt for his day's work. " Where are we 
 goin' to-day, sir ? " he asked. 
 
 "Loch Loyal," said I. "We tossed for boats 
 last night, and I got Loch Loyal." 
 
 4\
 
 XXV PIOUS CHILLIES 359 
 
 "You what?" asked John in horrified tones. 
 
 "We tossed for boats." 
 
 "Last night?" 
 
 " Yes, last night." 
 
 "It was a sin, and we shall hev no luck ; we 
 needn't go." 
 
 "Surely it is not so bad as that," said I ; "we 
 will hope for the best." 
 
 To Loch Loyal we went. We got a full, even 
 overflowing basket. John was delighted. As we 
 got down at the hotel door that evening I said, 
 "You see, John, the tossing last night did no 
 harm." 
 
 " Ah, sir, it wass wrong. But do it again next 
 Sabbath night. Maybe we shall get another good 
 basket ! " 
 
 Another illustration of the piety of the ghillie 
 in those parts may be pardoned. John Munro, 
 as good a fellow as ever lived, told me the story. 
 
 He was ghillie to Mr. P , a gentleman given to 
 
 strong liquor and strong language. One day there 
 was a cloudless sky with very little wind, and Mr. 
 
 P 's temper was as inflamed as his nose. 
 
 " Damn the sky," he exploded. John expostulated 
 — " Sir, you've damned me, and you've damned the 
 boat ; you've damned the fish, and you've damned 
 the water and the wind, and I hev said nothing. 
 But when you damn the sky you damn what God 
 made, and I won't stand it, I shall row you ashore." 
 And he did. 
 
 One year, as John Ross's services were not
 
 36o AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 available, I had a ghillie whose name was Peter. 
 Probably he had a surname ; I never heard it. He 
 was a tailor by trade : I know, because he always 
 carried needle and thread for the repair of an injured 
 garment. He was a capital boatman — most in- 
 dustrious, and most eager for sport. A man more 
 reckless of his personal health and comfort I never 
 saw. He never hesitated to jump into the water 
 if that seemed to be the shortest way of getting 
 what was required. I expostulated with him, and 
 talked of the lasting torments of rheumatism. He 
 only laughed. I have heard that subsequently, 
 when acting as ghillie to IMr. William Black, he 
 injured himself and was lamed for life. His name 
 is mentioned here because in one respect he illus- 
 trated an attribute of the ghillie. He had more 
 industry than, so far as my experience goes, is 
 common with his class ; and he was in nowise 
 behind his fellows in a liking for whisky. 
 
 The coffee-room of the hotel at Tongue looked 
 out upon the main road, and it was the custom for 
 the ghillies to muster under the windows to await 
 their " shentlemen." One gloriously fine morning 
 I entered the coffee-room to find the windows open 
 and no other guest. As I stood for a moment, the 
 voices of the ghillies came in with the sound of 
 angry passion. Peter's voice rose above the others. 
 " You call your man a shentleman .^ Him! Look 
 at his flask! Look at my shentleman's flask! I 
 could get drunk every night if I liked." There 
 was no answer. The size of the flask was con-
 
 XXV JOHN STEWART 361 
 
 elusive ! Peter, in his honest zeal for the character 
 of his temporary employer, maligned me. My 
 flask did not hold quite a pint ; and I never had 
 a drunken boatman, save once, on Loch Tay, and 
 I had not given him a drop of alcoholic liquor. 
 
 My first visit to Tongue was due to an acquaint- 
 anceship with the hotel-keeper, made some four or 
 five years previously. He had been the landlord 
 of the Loch Maree Hotel. He was its first landlord, 
 and I chanced to go there in the first year of his 
 tenancy. No man could make visitors more happy 
 and comfortable than did John Stewart. He was 
 a big, stout man — as kindly, shrewd, well-informed 
 a man as you would meet in a week's travel. He 
 was not for ever bothering his visitors, but was 
 always ready to give them advice and assistance 
 in the matter of amusement. He had a large young 
 family. There was no school within ten miles of 
 the hotel ; and he went to Tongue to be near a 
 school. Thither, in holiday time, I followed him. 
 His family — rather his desire to see his boys (all 
 the children save one were boys) settled — made 
 him buy land in New Zealand and put them to 
 farming there. Poor fellow, he died soon after he 
 had got to his land. 
 
 The hotel at Loch Maree — or rather, to be more 
 accurate, the Loch Maree Hotel — is beautifully 
 situated half-way along the loch, on its south bank. 
 You step out of the hotel upon a short pier and into 
 your boat. Indigenous birch clothes the steep sides 
 of the loch. In front, half-way across, are islands.
 
 362 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 A long Stony point runs out on your right as you 
 embark, and among the rocky masses at its end 
 there are sandy bays or small lochs in which you 
 may dream away a sunny afternoon with glorious 
 surroundings. A little way off to your right, and 
 on the other side of the loch, rises Ben Slioch in 
 massive majesty. Hills are all around. Certainly 
 Loch Maree is the loveliest sheet of water I have 
 seen in Scotland. My first view of it can never 
 fade out of my memory. My son and I had 
 travelled from the south and had arrived at Auch- 
 nasheen, the nearest station on the Dingwall and 
 Skye line, late one summer evening, hours after 
 schedule time. We had twenty miles to drive to 
 the Loch Maree Hotel. Stewart had sent a 
 machine and pair to meet us, and it was waiting 
 at the station. For several miles the road winds 
 upwards in steady ascent. Then suddenly you 
 turn a sharp corner and all the length of Glen 
 Docherty and Loch Maree is before you. As we 
 turned that corner the sun was sinking in the west 
 straight before us. Its level beams brought out 
 every island in the loch like an emerald set in silver. 
 The silver became orold. The hills on both sides were 
 bathed in golden light. It darkened to purple, and 
 then little but dim twilight prevailed. Grandeur, 
 beauty, peace, were in that scene. We could not 
 speak. A solemn hush seemed to have fallen on the 
 earth and the waters. It was some minutes before the 
 horses, which had been stopped, were started again, 
 and once more the journey was pursued.
 
 XXV LOCH MAREE 363 
 
 Not only is Loch Maree beautiful, but there is 
 splendid sea-trout fishing in it after the end of July 
 and to the end of September. Thousands of 
 salmon run through the loch to spawning waters 
 beyond it ; yet a salmon is very rarely taken in the 
 loch itself. The assertion is made that no salmon 
 has ever been known to be taken in it. That is 
 a mistake. I have seen at least one clean salmon 
 and two salmon kelts captured in its waters. Sea- 
 trout are there in countless numbers. 
 
 The first time I went to the loch Sir Molyneux 
 Nepean, a Dorsetshire baronet and an old soldier, 
 was staying at the hotel. He was one of the 
 most amusing men I ever met. His stories were 
 innumerable, though they could not all be put into 
 print. He had been wounded in action, and could 
 not bear the fatigue of standing to cast a fly. 
 Therefore he trolled the day through with parr tail 
 for a bait. When a friend and myself were putting 
 up our rods before going afloat, and were preparing 
 casts of flies, he looked on with an eye of pity. 
 "Going to fly-fish, are you?" he said. "It's a 
 mistake. The fly here is a delusion and a snare. 
 The fish won't look at anything but bait." As a 
 matter of fact he was then right. Every day he 
 brought in twice as many fish as any of us caught 
 with the fly. 
 
 But there came a change. Some three or four 
 years later I expected to meet him as I had done 
 on as many consecutive holidays. I had gone by 
 sea to Gairloch, where a trap from the hotel met
 
 364 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT 
 
 CHAP. 
 
 me. When I landed, the driver gave me a note 
 from Sir Molyneux. It ran something Hke this : 
 
 Dear Cooper — The loch has gone to the devil. Not a fish 
 will look at the bait. I am off. You had better go too. Till 
 we next meet at Loch Tay, good-bye. 
 
 He was right : the fish would not look at bait 
 trolling. They would take the fly greedily, and we 
 made excellent baskets. 
 
 Sir Molyneux Nepean was the maker of a joke 
 which subsequently Mr. Barrie, to whom I had told 
 it, put into the mouth of Mr. Toole in Walker, 
 London. On a beautiful Sunday morning, when 
 there was not a breath of wind and midees were in 
 milliards. Sir Molyneux and I sat on stones near to 
 the hotel pier. To us there came a tall tourist, who 
 was flapping himself with hands and handkerchief 
 in the vain effort to drive off the midges. 
 
 "Midges seem to trouble you," said Sir Moly- 
 neux. 
 
 " They do ; I suffer horribly." 
 " Perhaps you wash your face in a morning ? " 
 " I should think I do," was the indignant re- 
 sponse. 
 
 " Ah ! I never do. The midges don't bite me." 
 The pained disgust shown on that tourist's counte- 
 nance I shall not soon forget. 
 
 I had a theory about fishing in Loch Maree. It 
 was that after a spate you should go down the loch 
 towards the sea, and each day fish higher. The 
 argument — possibly foolish — was that the sea-trout
 
 XXV A CURIOUS FISHING EXPERIENCE 365 
 
 came into the loch with the spate, and ascended it 
 by degrees. One day, in accordance with this 
 theory, I had gone down the loch to a beautiful 
 sandy bay on the south shore. It seemed to me to 
 be certain that trout must be lying there. The 
 breeze blew across the bay from the western end of 
 it. We rowed carefully over, and I began to fish 
 on the drift back. Never a fish rose. I was con- 
 fident the trout were there, and I told the boatmen 
 to pull back. I left my flies on the water over the 
 stern of the boat. Scarcely had we begun to move 
 when a trout rose to the trailing flies, and was hooked 
 and landed. When we moved again another took 
 the flies and was caupfht. Before we efot back 
 across the bay we had five splendid sea- trout. 
 Again I cast over it and not a fish rose. We 
 returned trailing the flies and got three or four trout. 
 A third time I cast over the water and not a fish 
 rose, and a third time trailing the flies we got trout. 
 By now I had reached the conclusion that my bad 
 casting was the cause of the trout not rising when 
 asked to do so in orthodox fashion. Close by, in 
 
 another lovely bay, a friend, Mr. G , was fishing. 
 
 He cast beautifully, and was a most expert angler. 
 I called to him and told him to come and try what 
 he could do. He came, and his experience was 
 exactly the same as mine. The trout would not 
 look at the fly cast ; they greedily took the fly 
 trailino-. 
 
 What pleasant evenings I have had at the Nest 
 on the Tweed ! What delightful days have been
 
 366 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 mine on Loch Tay, where frost and wind could not 
 cool the hope of getting salmon ! Many of them I 
 have got. Thanks to the Marquis of Breadalbane, 
 my fishing in Loch Tay has been in the reserved 
 waters, and it has been good. But always I have 
 been doubtful as to whether most pleasure comes 
 from the angling itself or from the stories of your 
 daily experiences told in the evening. Perhaps the 
 two are not altogether the same. Fishing calls for 
 industry, story-telling calls for invention. Your fish 
 are of the usual size when they come out of the 
 water ; they grow in weight as years roll on, when 
 the story of them is being told over the fire and with 
 a pipe. A dear friend of mine once caught a trout 
 that weighed a pound and a half. It grew to five 
 and six pounds ; and when I last heard of it the 
 weight was "over nine pounds; I ought to have 
 had it stuffed ! " 
 
 The best trout-fishing I ever enjoyed was got in 
 South Uist. Sir Reginald and Lady Gordon Cath- 
 cart own the island. They have a delightful house 
 on it called Grogary ; and those who have the 
 pleasure of staying there can have fishing galore. 
 Somebody has said of the island that all the land is 
 water, and all the water is land. The description is 
 a little confused, but it conveys a fair idea of the 
 place. There is but one river, so-called, in the 
 island, the Howmore. It is more like a wide ditch 
 than a river. It is oddly serpentine in its short 
 course, and there is scarcely any perceptible current 
 in it. But in the autumn it swarms with sea-trout
 
 XXV THE HOWMORE 367 
 
 and salmon. They seem almost to jostle one 
 another. If you chance on a good day, when there 
 is a fair breeze, with a dull sky, and perhaps a little 
 rain, you can hook out any number of fish from two 
 to ten pounds in weight. On such a day they rise 
 greedily to the fly ; on other days they will not look 
 at it. The Howmore Loch, which is but one of a 
 chain of lochs, empties itself into the river through 
 a culvert under the public road. Sir Reginald 
 Cathcart had a grating put at this culvert in the 
 earlier months of the sea-trout season, and the result 
 was to make the Howmore River a fully -stocked 
 pool. Trout of two or three pounds could get 
 through the grating ; the others had to remain till it 
 was taken off. 
 
 The Howmore was not my greatest pleasure. 
 There is a sheet of water within about half a mile of 
 Grogary where I loved to cast my line. The Gaelic 
 name of it I forget ; it came to be known by my 
 name. The trout were better in all respects than 
 Loch Leven trout. They ran larger ; they were 
 quite as shapely ; they were delicately red-fleshed ; 
 and certainly the best trout for the table I ever ate. 
 On one visit to Grogary I fished that loch on seven 
 days, for about four hours or five hours a day. I 
 got 139 trout weighing 141 lbs.
 
 CHAPTER XXVI 
 
 Mr. W. P. Adam — His work as Whip — His honesty of purpose — A 
 Liberal mistake in Midlothian — 1874 to 1880 — Mr. Gladstone's 
 resignation of leadership — Mr. Forster and the Marquis of 
 Hartington — An intei'view with Mr. Forster — His anxiety as to 
 the leadership — Impressions of Mr. Forster — Mr. Adam's work 
 — His difficulties — Liberal doubts and fears — London and Lord 
 Beaconsfield — Sudden announcement of Dissolution — An inci- 
 dent of the time — A conversation with Lord Granville — His 
 doubts as to the election — Sir William Harcourt and Liberal 
 prospects — Mr. Adam's estimates of result — The new Ministry 
 — Mr. Adam's place in the Liberal Government — His dis- 
 appointment. 
 
 In an earlier chapter, a conversation between myself 
 and Mr. W. P. Adam (afterwards Sir W. P. Adam) 
 has been related. I made his acquaintance soon 
 after I came to Edinburgh. He was at that time 
 the manager of the affairs of the Liberal party in 
 Scotland ; and he performed the duties of that office 
 with diligence, tact, and efficiency. It has been my 
 lot to have relations with many politicians, especially 
 during the last thirty years. It is safe to say that 
 by no one of them has there been shown more com- 
 plete disinterestedness and more earnestness of 
 purpose than were shown by Mr. Adam. He was 
 a kindly man, whom all who came to know him 
 learned to esteem.
 
 CH. XXVI A BAD ELECTIONEERING DEVICE 369 
 
 There is a general opinion, which I am not pre- 
 pared to say is wholly unsupported by facts, that 
 those who have to deal with the management of a 
 political party's affairs, and with its funds, are not 
 remarkable for scrupulous consciences. It is sup- 
 posed that they act on the principle that all is fair 
 in politics and electioneering. I am sure that was 
 not the view of Mr. Adam. He did not care to 
 adopt methods which he could not defend before 
 the whole world. On one occasion — the time need 
 not be more definitely stated — a proposal was made 
 on the Liberal side in Scotland to adopt a device 
 which had long been used by the Conservatives. 
 The Scotsinan had denounced that party for using 
 the device. Mr. Adam came to me and told me of 
 the proposal. I said it was wrong in itself; and 
 added that if this was not a sufficient reason to 
 induce those who made the proposal to abandon it, 
 the further consideration that it would be disastrous 
 in its results might affect them. Mr. Adam told me 
 that he entirely agreed with me, and that he should 
 oppose the adoption of the proposal. Subsequently 
 he said he had done so, but that he had been over- 
 ruled. It was some satisfaction to both of us that 
 those who overruled him suffered largely in their 
 pockets for their unwisdom ; and that the party itself 
 did not suffer was mainly due to important consti- 
 tutional changes which were shortly afterwards 
 made. 
 
 The general election of 1868 was in progress 
 when my acquaintance with Mr. Adam began. 
 
 2 B
 
 370 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 That election resulted in a large Liberal majority, 
 and, until 1874, Mr. Adam kept all the party- 
 machinery in Scotland in working order. Some 
 seats were lost to the Conservatives in 1874, and 
 over the whole of the United Kingdom they had a 
 large majority. The first effect of this election, so 
 far as the Liberal party was concerned, was that 
 Mr. Gladstone retired from the position of leader. 
 He pleaded age, and insisted that he had earned 
 retirement. Mr, Adam told me that he had no 
 doubt the real reason of the resignation was chagrin 
 at defeat ; and it is only fair to say that this was the 
 general opinion. The most prominent Liberal 
 statesmen pressed Mr, Gladstone to reconsider his 
 decision, but he was obdurate and refused to do so. 
 His retirement, he said, was final. Still an open 
 door was kept for his return ; it was determined 
 that before taking definite steps as to the leader- 
 ship the party should allow Mr, Gladstone a year to 
 consider whether he would persist in the course he 
 had taken. At the end of the year he still refused 
 to continue in the leadership, and the question then 
 arose. Who was to take up his work ? 
 
 Mr, Adam had all the time been working for the 
 party with steady loyalty and with good effect ; but 
 he had not been able to reconcile all differences and 
 remove all difficulties. My impression is that he 
 did not wish to act in any way that might appear to 
 pledge him to one person more clearly than to 
 another. He was for the party, not for any indivi- 
 dual. Of course he had his own opinions as to the
 
 XXVI MR. W. E. FORSTER 371 
 
 leadership, and I know what they were. He 
 thought that the Marquis of Hartington (now the 
 Duke of Devonshire) was the statesman most Hkely 
 to keep the party united and strong. But he never 
 allowed this view to interfere with the impartial 
 discharge of his duties as party Whip. There was a 
 desire in some quarters that Mr. William Edward 
 Forster should be chosen leader. At least one great 
 difficulty stood in the way of choosing him. The 
 Nonconformists had never forgiven him for the 
 Education Bill of 187 1. They were very sore on that 
 matter, though recently they have shown themselves 
 just as sore when an attempt was made to partially re- 
 model the system advocated and established by Mr. 
 Forster. Still he had many friends, and there were 
 good men and true who thought that the Liberal 
 party would be stronger with him as leader than 
 with the Marquis of Hartington. 
 
 Immediately before the meeting at which the 
 question was settled I was in London, and Mr. 
 Adam asked me to see Mr. Forster. That gentle- 
 man had desired an interview with me. We met at 
 the Athenaeum Club, of which Mr. Forster was a 
 member. I well remember the inhospitable way in 
 which that club then treated "strangers." They 
 were shown into a little room off the main hall — a 
 room that seemed to be more like a store -place 
 for waste -paper and lumber than a place where 
 members might receive their friends. I had never 
 met Mr. Forster before, but I was well acquainted 
 with his career. My opinion was that he would not
 
 372 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 unite the party so well as the Marquis of Hartington, 
 but I also thought that he might have the qualities 
 of leadership. My interview with him led me to 
 think otherwise. He was very anxious on the 
 subject. He was resentful because of the opposi- 
 tion to him. He thought he had earned the right 
 to possess the confidence of the party, and he did 
 not think the party would be benefited by having as 
 leader a statesman who might and probably would 
 be called to the House of Lords before long. I 
 pointed out to him that so far as he was concerned 
 this probability might not be a disadvantage ; if the 
 Marquis of Hartington went to the House of Lords, 
 the leadership of the House of Commons might fall 
 into his hands. " It is ill waiting for dead men's 
 shoes," was his reply. " That is true," I said, " but 
 the suggestion was your own ; only I put it as con- 
 stituting no objection to the Marquis of Hartington's 
 leadership at present." He admitted that this was 
 the case ; but he was not soothed when I told him 
 that in my opinion the Marquis of Hartington 
 would command the support of the party against 
 him. Everybody knows that he had to retire from 
 his candidature for the leadership ; and there can be 
 no doubt he did so because he saw his own chances 
 were hopeless. 
 
 My impression of Mr. Forster gathered at that 
 interview was that he was as honest a man as 
 breathed, but that he had not the qualities of a first- 
 class or even a second-class statesman. He did not 
 appear to me to have sufficient breadth of view, and
 
 XXVI THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP 373 
 
 I was convinced that if he became leader there 
 would be disorder in the House of Commons and in 
 the party, because of his sensitiveness and want of 
 tact. Long afterwards I had a conversation with 
 him in the House of Commons, and recalled our 
 interview at the Athenaeum Club. He then said 
 that time had convinced him it was well for himself 
 and for the Liberal party that he had not been 
 chosen leader ; but other matters had altered the 
 situation, and as to those other matters — Mr. 
 Gladstone's return and his policy — he was out- 
 spoken in an unfriendly fashion. 
 
 From 1874 to 1880 Mr. Adam worked in- 
 cessantly as chief Whip of the Liberal party, then 
 in Opposition. The conditions were for the most 
 part discouraging. The retirement of Mr. Glad- 
 stone and his fierce re-entry into active political life 
 in the course of the Bulgarian War had not made 
 the position of Whip one easy to fill. The nominal 
 leader of the party was the Marquis of Hartington. 
 He was responsible for the management of the 
 Opposition in the House of Commons. Yet Mr. 
 Gladstone, both in the House and out of it, virtually 
 assumed the position of leader. I am not discussing 
 the wisdom or unwisdom of his course, or the right 
 or wrong of it ; I am simply stating a fact. Mr. 
 Adam many times told me of the difficulties he had 
 to encounter. The Marquis of Hartington desired 
 to have the affairs of the party managed in such a 
 way that if he laid down the leadership it might be 
 felt that he had neither shirked responsibility on the
 
 374 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 one hand nor put impediments in the way of Mr. 
 Gladstone on the other. " No man can serve two 
 masters." That was Mr. Adam's difficuky. He 
 knew what the Marquis of Hartington desired ; he 
 did not always or often know what Mr. Gladstone 
 might demand. Still he worked steadily on, and 
 long before 1880 he saw the change that was 
 coming, or had come over the mind of the country. 
 He was one of very few in high quarters who did 
 see it. Among Parliamentarians there was a general 
 impression that the Beaconsfield Government had 
 not only retained the confidence of the country but 
 had strengthened it. 
 
 Most men of middle age will remember the 
 general tone of the newspapers in London at that 
 time. Those of them that professed to be Liberal 
 were either gloomily despondent or openly support- 
 ing the Ministry. Earlier in this book it has been 
 told how, in conversation with Mr. John Morley, 
 soon after 1880, I pointed to the difference in tone 
 between the newspapers out of London and the 
 newspapers in it. That difference was most marked. 
 London had taken to Lord Beaconsfield, and had 
 set itself to a great extent against Mr. Gladstone 
 and against his denunciations of the policy of the 
 Government. The newspapers out of London had 
 not done so. With one or two exceptions all the 
 Liberal papers were taking Mr. Gladstone's tone. 
 Still, so far as could be gathered, there was not 
 much belief that when the general election came, as 
 come it must, Lord Beaconsfield would be defeated. 
 
 f
 
 XXVI DISSOLUTION ANNOUNCED 375 
 
 Mr. Adam, fresh from London, used to say that he 
 came to me for comfort. Unswervingly I held to 
 the opinion that the Conservatives would be beaten, 
 and beaten badly. That was his opinion ; but it 
 was not shared by any of the leaders in London. 
 
 It may be remembered that the dissolution in 
 18S0 was announced without any preliminary warn- 
 ing. One evening, early in the session, Sir Stafford 
 Northcote, who was Chancellor of the Exchequer, 
 and was leading the House of Commons, intimated 
 without notice the intention of the Government to 
 dissolve Parliament as soon as the necessary business 
 could be wound up. It chanced that I was in London 
 that evening and in the members' lobby of the House 
 of Commons. Mr. Frederick Clifford, who was then 
 assistant editor of the Times, and an old acquaint- 
 ance of mine, was there also. We got talking over 
 the political situation. We did not agree as to the 
 strength or weakness of the Government, or as to 
 the Ministerial intentions. They had introduced 
 several Bills of importance ; but, as it was the last 
 possible session of the Parliament, I was pretty 
 certain the measures were only intended for show. 
 I said to Mr. Clifford that in my opinion the dissolu- 
 tion was near. He laughed at the suggestion. 
 " Look at the Bills they have introduced," he said. 
 " I have looked at them," was my reply ; "and I am 
 convinced they are for use in electioneering as proofs 
 of good intentions, but are not meant to be passed." 
 Clifford laughed at me, and would not accept my 
 view. He went across the lobby to speak to some
 
 376 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 one else ; and almost immediately afterwards there 
 was a rush out of the House. Mr. A. M. Sullivan 
 led the way, running across the lobby from the doors 
 of the House to the central lobby. He was making 
 for the telegraph office. Several other members, 
 mostly Irishmen so far as I remember, followed him. 
 In an instant thereafter the news ran through the 
 lobby like an electric shock, " Northcote has an- 
 nounced an immediate dissolution ! " It was in truth 
 a shock to many people. Clifford came to me and 
 said, "Well, you were right. What will be the 
 result of the election ? " My reply was that the 
 Conservatives would be beaten. He did not agree 
 with me. In that respect he was like almost every- 
 body else except Mr. Adam. 
 
 There was a general opinion that Mr. Gladstone 
 had destroyed the chances of success of the Liberal 
 party, if there ever had been any. Two nights after 
 the announcement of the dissolution, I dined with 
 Lord Granville in Carlton House Terrace. He was 
 very anxious on the subject of the election. Mr. 
 Adam had told him that I was more than hopeful. 
 
 " Don't you think Lord Beaconsfield has carried 
 the country with him ? " he asked. 
 
 " No, I do not," was my reply ; " I am confident 
 that Mr. Gladstone has won the country." 
 
 It must be remembered that the first Midlothian 
 Campaign had then been carried through. 
 
 "You can have little idea," I said, "of the effect 
 which the speeches in Midlothian have produced." 
 
 "Perhaps not," he replied. "Indeed I confess
 
 XXVI LORD GRANVILLE 377 
 
 I have thoueht that Mr. Gladstone had overdone 
 
 the work, and that the country was a little tired of 
 
 h)) 
 im. 
 
 " I do not think so ; indeed I am convinced that 
 such a view is mistaken." 
 
 "Well, I hope you may be right. Shall we win 
 seats in Scotland ? " 
 
 "Undoubtedly"; and I added how many I 
 thought would be won. It afterwards turned out 
 that I was under the mark. 
 
 "Suppose that there is a strong Liberal majority 
 after the election, and a Liberal Government," I 
 asked, " who is to be premier ? " 
 
 "Who knows?" was the cautious reply. 
 
 I pointed out that Mr. Gladstone's resignation of 
 leadership had never been withdrawn. " No," said 
 Lord Granville, "but the leadership has been re- 
 asserted." 
 
 The conversation was extremely interesting to 
 me, because it seemed to show that Lord Granville 
 did not expect the success of the party at the election, 
 and was in grave doubt as to what might happen if 
 it were successful. 
 
 Some two or three years afterwards, when Mr. 
 Gladstone was in office, I met Sir Charles Dilke at 
 a dinner party in Edinburgh. It was before his 
 fall, and when he was a member of the Govern- 
 ment. The conversation turned upon the election 
 of 1880, and the opinions among politicians as to 
 its probable result. I was surprised to hear Sir 
 Charles Dilke say that he and Sir William Harcourt
 
 378 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 were, he believed, the only men in London who had 
 confidence in Mr. Gladstone's success at the polls. 
 I had no means of knowing what Sir Charles Dilke 
 had expected, but as to Sir William Harcourt I had 
 the strongest reason to believe that he had expected 
 failure, not success. That reason was his own 
 declaration. 
 
 In the course of the week after Sir Stafford 
 Northcote had announced the dissolution, I was 
 on several occasions at the Central Liberal Office 
 in Parliament Street. Mr. Craig Sellar was then 
 taking an active part in the office under Mr. Adam. 
 One day I was there when Sir William Harcourt 
 came in. Of course we talked of election matters. 
 Mr. Adam was in high spirits. He believed that 
 the time of digging and watering was nearly over, and 
 the time for gathering fruit at hand. Sir William 
 was as gloomy as the virtuous but melancholy heavy 
 father of a transpontine melodrama. He would 
 not be comforted. Mr. Craig Sellar told him that 
 Mr. Adam and myself believed that the result of the 
 election would be a Liberal success. He bluntly 
 declared that no sensible man could or would believe 
 any such thing. Mr. Gladstone had damned what- 
 ever chance the party might have had, and that was 
 very little. Beaconsfield would be back with a 
 bigger majority than ever, and he deserved to be 
 back. And so on, and so on. The storm rumbled 
 along until Sir William took his departure. 
 
 It must be confessed that his pessimistic views 
 were shared by the workers in the Central Liberal
 
 XXVI AN ELECTION FORECAST 379 
 
 Office. Mr. Craig Sellar, who was a shrewd, able 
 man — one of the shrewdest and ablest I have 
 known — was constitutionally inclined to pessimism in 
 political affairs. Possibly he was always more hopeful 
 than he professed to be, and spoke doubtingly lest 
 he should mislead by appearing to be too sanguine. 
 To me, even at the general election of 1886, when 
 he sought to be returned again for Partick, he shook 
 his head over the Unionist prospects, and especially 
 over his own prospects. In 1880 he was encouraged 
 by Mr. Adam to believe better things ; but he was 
 afraid of the election. At the meeting at the Central 
 Liberal Office of which I have spoken, when Sir 
 William Harcourt was present, Mr. Sellar said, 
 " Nobody but you, Adam, and you, Cooper, believes 
 in victory. As you are so confident, what do you 
 expect the majority to be .'* " 
 
 It happened that I had been going over the lists 
 of candidates in all the constituencies, and had formed 
 an opinion as to the majority. Mr. Adam had been 
 going over the lists almost every day. He said in 
 answer to Mr. Sellar's suggestion that he was quite 
 willing to tell what were his expectations as to a 
 majority. He did not know what mine were, and 
 he, or somebody present, proposed that we should 
 each write the number of the majority we expected 
 without either seeing what the other wrote. We 
 did so ; and when the papers were compared it was 
 found that we were within two or three of each other. 
 I forget which was the higher ; but I know that we 
 were both high, and that, high as we were, the actual
 
 38o AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 majority at the election was still higher, though not 
 by many. At the time we were laughed at as too 
 sanguine. But Mr. Sellar subsequently told me that 
 the identity of expectation between Mr. Adam and 
 myself had made them all more hopeful. 
 
 Everybody knows that there was a large Liberal 
 majority at the election of 1880. It is further 
 matter of history that when Lord Beaconsfield 
 resigned he recommended the Queen to send for the 
 Marquis of Hartington or Earl Granville. In some 
 quarters he has been severely censured for this 
 advice. To me it seems that he could not have 
 given any other. It has been said that he ought to 
 have advised Her Majesty to send for Mr. Gladstone, 
 and that the advice actually given was due to jealousy 
 and bitterness of spirit. Nothing would make me 
 believe any such thing. Mr. Gladstone had formally 
 resigned leadership in 1874; he had renewed or 
 reasserted his resignation in 1875. He had never 
 formally withdrawn it. The Marquis of Hartington 
 had been chosen leader, and had discharged the 
 duties of that office till the dissolution. Lord Gran- 
 ville was the leader in the House of Lords. How 
 could Lord Beaconsfield, with any regard for tradi- 
 tional usage, have passed them by ? He did what 
 it was his duty to do. 
 
 In saying so much I seem to have strayed into 
 controversy, and assuredly that is no part of my 
 desire. But what has been written may remain 
 because it helps to an understanding of what fol- 
 lowed the Beaconsfield resignation. The Marquis of
 
 XXVI MR. GLADSTONE'S RETURN 381 
 
 Hartington and Lord Granville were sent for, and they 
 recommended the Queen to send for Mr. Gladstone. 
 There were and still are many people in the country 
 who thought and think now it was a grave misfortune 
 for the Liberal party that the advice was given. 
 The question is not worth discussion ; might-have- 
 beens are vain delusions. I asked Mr. Adam at the 
 time why Lord Hartington had not undertaken to 
 form a Government. Mr. Adam told me that such 
 a course was felt to be impossible. "Why?" I 
 asked. He gave me several reasons. One was 
 that Mr. Gladstone had in effect put himself before 
 the country as the Liberal leader. Another was 
 that, of course, Mr. Gladstone would not serve 
 under any other statesman, and neither Lord Har- 
 tington nor any other possible member of a Govern- 
 ment could regard with equanimity the prospect of 
 Mr. Gladstone sitting behind him, an independent 
 member in a condition of activity. The reasons 
 were sufficient. My own opinion had all along been 
 that Mr. Gladstone was, in the circumstances, the 
 only possible premier. 
 
 It is certain that Mr. Adam expected Cabinet 
 office in the new Ministry. He had worked for the 
 party as no other man had worked. He was early 
 and late in his strivings for it. He was a man of 
 great ability. He had that coolness of judgment 
 and that firmness of action which, I take it, go to 
 make good administrators. Assuredly I had ex- 
 pected that he would be in the Cabinet with a 
 Secretaryship. He was made President of the
 
 382 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xxvi 
 
 Board of Works without a seat in the Cabinet. 
 The disappointment was great. He was too loyal 
 a man to rise up in revolt, as less scrupulous men 
 would have done. He accepted the post. But his 
 spirit was broken. I speak of this with personal 
 knowledge. He kept a good face on the matter ; 
 but he took the Governorship of Madras that he 
 might get out of a position he detested. That his 
 death was hastened by his disappointment in regard 
 to the Liberal Ministry of 1880 I have always 
 believed. I know he thought he had been treated 
 with ingratitude. It is a small matter that in this 
 respect my opinion coincided with his.
 
 CHAPTER XXVII 
 
 Mr. Gladstone — His candidature for Midlothian — Lord Rosebery's 
 share in it — Doubts as to its wisdom — The 1879 Campaign — 
 Lord Airlie and Sir George Campbell — The 1880 Campaign 
 — Enthusiasm of the people — An interview with Mr. Gladstone 
 in London — His failure to read newspapers — An illustration — 
 The result of the election — The Disestablishment Question — 
 A private deputation — A suggestion for safety — A walk with 
 Mr. Gladstone — The cruise of the Tantallon Castle — News of 
 defeat of the Rosebery Government — Anxiety on board ship — 
 My last conversation with Mr. Gladstone. 
 
 It was not until 1879 that I made personal acquaint- 
 ance with Mr. Gladstone. That was the year of 
 his first Midlothian Campaign. There had been 
 much dubiety about his coming to Scotland. That 
 is to say, it had been doubted whether it was wise 
 to induce him, prominent as he had been and was, 
 to contest the seat for Midlothian. His seat at 
 Greenwich was unsafe. Indeed it was hardly likely 
 that in any circumstances he would contest that 
 constituency again. Another seat had therefore to 
 be found, and Midlothian was pitched upon ; while 
 Leeds also resolved to return him in absence if he 
 could not be present. It is not a mere surmise of 
 mine that Lord Rosebery was the guide in the 
 choice of Midlothian. At that time the late Duke
 
 384 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 of Buccleuch was the leader of the Scottish 
 Conservatives. He had ruled their camp for many- 
 years, and had so ruled it that he had well deserved 
 influence all over Scotland. Lord Rosebery might 
 very properly aspire to a similar position in the 
 Liberal camp. He was young, with brilliant abilities, 
 backed by honourable ambition. There was no 
 reason why he should not be the foremost figure in 
 the Liberal party in Scotland. Midlothian had 
 been, with one break, almost a preserve for the 
 Duke of Buccleuch. If it could be wrested from 
 him, not merely would a blow be struck at 
 Conservatism, but the influence of Lord Rosebery 
 would be increased, if he had a share in the 
 campaign. 
 
 It is not possible for me to say that these were 
 certainly the motives by which Lord Rosebery was 
 influenced in the course he took. He had a profound 
 admiration for Mr. Gladstone. The even then aged 
 statesman had exercised a great influence over the 
 young peer — an influence of character rather than 
 of direct pressure. Unquestionably Mr. Gladstone 
 was the greatest and first political figure of the time. 
 Different constituencies had discarded him for reasons 
 which no doubt they deemed sufficient ; but his 
 power in the country was not less. After retirement 
 in 1874 and 1875, he had come forward again and 
 had fought the Beaconsfield Government on its 
 Russo-Turkish policy. It was scarcely doubtful that 
 if Mr. Gladstone were returned to Parliament he 
 would take up the leadership of the Liberal party.
 
 XXVII MR. GLADSTONE AND MIDLOTHIAN 385 
 
 though the Marquis of Hartington had been holding 
 that position since 1874, and had discharged the 
 duties of the post with singular ability and rare 
 loyalty and fidelity. Here, then, were many reasons 
 why Lord Rosebery should endeavour to get Mr. 
 Gladstone to Midlothian. If he w^ere elected, the 
 Buccleuch influence would be lessened, and the 
 Rosebery influence increased. The probabilities of 
 election were great, considering Mr. Gladstone's 
 position. The electors would know that if they 
 gave him a majority they would have for their 
 representative the leader of the Liberal party, if not 
 the Premier of the United Kingdom. It was a 
 prize worth playing for ; and it was played for and 
 won. 
 
 There were doubters as to the wisdom of 
 choosing Midlothian for Mr. Gladstone. It could 
 not be called safe, and defeat was on all grounds 
 most undesirable. Edinburgh was open and would 
 be quite safe. These were the suggestions of the 
 doubters. I heard them urged again and again by 
 men who had not the courage of those who preferred 
 the bolder scheme. A seat for Edinburgh would 
 be a seat and little more. A seat for Midlothian 
 would be a shattering of Conservatism for the 
 time being, throughout Scotland. The boldness 
 was justified by the result. Mr. Gladstone was 
 returned, and all the Conservatives Scotland sent to 
 the House of Commons might, as some wit said, 
 have travelled there in a single compartment of a 
 first-class railway carriage. 
 
 2 c
 
 386 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 When Mr. Gladstone began his electioneering in 
 1879, I saw a good deal of him. He was the guest 
 of Lord Rosebery at Dalmeny, and there were 
 gatherings, social and for business purposes, almost 
 every day. Dalmeny became for the time being a 
 sort of Liberal Mecca, whither the faithful flocked 
 from all quarters to do honour to their prophet. No 
 one could fail to see that Mr. Gladstone enjoyed 
 himself. The homage paid to him would have 
 gratified any man. He made triumphal processions 
 through Edinburgh, Hundreds of thousands of 
 voices greeted him. Wayside cottages on country 
 roads were decorated in his honour, and old men 
 and women, young men and maidens in their 
 cleanest and best, stood at their doors and cheered 
 him as he drove past to places where he had 
 speeches to make. I doubt whether any statesman 
 ever had such popular honour done to him. It is a 
 breach of continuity of narrative to say that seven 
 years later there was a falling off in the demon- 
 strations when Mr. Gladstone was a candidate once 
 more. Even in 1885 he had not been so warmly 
 received as in 1879 and 1880. In 1886 the people 
 other than Irishmen were not demonstrative. In 
 1892, attempts to get up processions and displays 
 like those of 1879 were abject failures. 
 
 All this is history. There were some incidents 
 in the Campaigns of 1879 and 1880 which may not 
 be so generally known. At one of Mr. Gladstone's 
 meetings held in the Corn Exchange, Edinburgh, 
 the late Earl of Airlie made a short speech in
 
 XXVII MR. GLADSTONE AND LORD AIRLIE 387 
 
 proposing a vote of thanks to the candidate. 
 Between Lord Airlie and Sir George Campbell 
 there was a great personal likeness, and their voices, 
 which could not be called harmonious, were scarcely 
 distinoruishable one from the other. When Mr. 
 Gladstone got up to return thanks, he expressed his 
 gratitude to his " honourable friend Sir George 
 Campbell " for the kindness with w^hich the vote 
 had been proposed. The mistake was natural ; but 
 Lord Airlie was furiously indignant. The last man 
 he cared to be likened to was Sir George Campbell, 
 no doubt for the paradoxical reason that in voice 
 and manner they were so much alike. Mr. 
 Gladstone's attention was called to the mistake, and 
 he apologised to Lord Airlie. 
 
 The next afternoon, Mr. Gladstone spoke at 
 West Calder. A large dinner party had been 
 invited to Dalmeny, among the guests being Lord 
 Airlie. Mr. Gladstone was late in getting back 
 from West Calder. All the guests were awaiting 
 him in the library. At last he came, and foremost 
 among those who stepped forward to greet him 
 was Lord Airlie. " How do you do, Sir George }" 
 said Mr. Gladstone ; " I am very glad to see you." 
 Lord Airlie was speechless. 
 
 The second Midlothian Campaign took place 
 in 1880. Mr. Gladstone left London before the 
 work of the session was all wound up, and his 
 journey north was a prolonged triumph. He 
 spoke at every station where the train stopped. 
 Dense crowds were there to meet and hear him.
 
 388 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 In Edinburgh his reception was enthusiastic. It 
 was no manufactured welcome he received. Scots- 
 men, who are supposedly cold and undemonstrative 
 — (the biggest of mistakes, it may be said) — showed 
 how warmly they could greet the man who had won 
 their profound admiration and esteem. Not flags 
 and banners and decorations alone or chiefly proved 
 the sincerity of their welcome. That was shown in 
 their crowds, in their thunderous cheers, in the way 
 in which bareheaded they received him. There is 
 not a scrap of exaggeration in this statement. Mr. 
 Gladstone's reception in the Heart of Midlothian 
 was, I verily believe, the most wonderful ever 
 accorded to any man in the purely political sphere. 
 
 Before he left London I had seen and talked 
 with him. It has been asserted that he never reads 
 a newspaper unless his attention is directed to 
 something in one. There are reasons for believing 
 that the assertion is well founded. Perhaps it may 
 account for some of the mistakes Mr. Gladstone has 
 made. It is mentioned here because of an experience 
 of my own with him. In the same week in which 
 Sir Stafford Northcote had announced the dissolution 
 he had brought in his Budget. One of his proposals 
 was to make some alteration in the Death Duties. 
 Later in the week, at the request of Mr. Gladstone, 
 I went to see him in Harley Street. He began 
 to speak of what he should say in his speeches 
 in Midlothian. Among other subjects with which 
 he proposed to deal was, he said, the Death 
 Duties. I asked him if he had considered the
 
 XXVII MR. GLADSTONE AND NEWSPAPERS 389 
 
 probable effect of Sir Stafford Northcote's proposed 
 changes. 
 
 " He is not going to deal witli the duties?" said 
 Mr. Gladstone interrogatively. 
 
 " Oh yes, he is," I said. 
 
 " Are you sure ? " 
 
 " Perfectly sure ; the resolutions he is to propose 
 are on the notice paper." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone at once went to a seat on the 
 window upon which his Parliamentary papers were 
 lying, found the notices, brought them to the desk, 
 and turning them over found Sir Stafford Northcote's 
 resolutions. 
 
 " That is strange," he said ; " I did not know of 
 them." 
 
 Then, reading them, he made comments upon 
 them, of which all I can say now is that they were 
 not favourable to Sir Stafford's proposals. It was 
 plain, first that Mr. Gladstone had not heard the 
 Budget speech ; second, that he had not read it ; 
 and third, that he had not studied his Parliamentary 
 papers. Being out of office, he had not as many 
 secretaries at his service as usual. Your private 
 secretary is, as to many things, the eye and the ear 
 of the busy statesman. 
 
 In the Midlothian contest of 1880 nothing but 
 the beginning and the end made much impression 
 upon me. The beginning I have described. The 
 end was victory. Mr. Gladstone had a majority of 
 211. Some days before the poll, Lord Rosebery 
 had taken a private house in George Street, Edin-
 
 390 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 burgh, for Mr. Gladstone. It was not desirable that 
 he should be fatigued with too much driving to 
 and from Dalmeny. Edinburgh was more central. 
 Edinburgh was also the place where the votes 
 would be counted. Mr. Gladstone awaited the 
 announcement of the result in that private house. 
 I was not present when the news was brought to 
 him, but the bearer of it told me that it was received 
 with coolness, not to say coldness. Mr. Gladstone, 
 said my informant, was evidently chagrined that the 
 majority was not larger. 
 
 One of the questions that troubled Mr. Gladstone 
 in 1880 was that of the Disestablishment of the 
 Church of Scotland. A band of able men were 
 moving in favour of Disestablishment, and brought 
 pressure to bear upon Mr. Gladstone to induce him 
 to declare for it. The pressure was not success- 
 ful. In 1885 he had the same difficulty to face. 
 It was not so much public pressure that was put 
 upon him as private representations. He had 
 been requested to receive a deputation of Dis- 
 establishers, headed, I believe, by Principal Rainy, 
 the leader of the Free Church. He had consented 
 to receive the deputation. The proceedings were 
 to be private. On the evening before it was to 
 take place I was dining at Dalmeny, and Mr. 
 Gladstone spoke to me about the deputation. My 
 opinion was that it was a mistake to have the inter- 
 view in private, and I said so. He did not agree 
 with me, but asked my reasons. They were, that if 
 he was going to declare for Disestablishment, the
 
 XXVII MR. GLADSTONE AND DISESTABLISHERS 391 
 
 more clearly that was known to the public the 
 better. If he was not, whatever he might say- 
 would be repeated with the perfectly honest though 
 probably inaccurate colouring of the mind of him 
 who repeated it. He said he had no intention of 
 declarinor for Disestablishment. I thou""ht then 
 that this was the reason why he had consented to 
 receive the deputation in private. Possibly I was 
 mistaken. He saw the danger to which I had 
 pointed, and asked me what was the remedy short 
 of publicity. My reply was that it would be well 
 to have a shorthand writer present, who would take 
 a full note of the proceedings. The knowledge 
 that a transcript of these notes could be produced 
 would check possible misrepresentations. Mr. 
 Gladstone agreed with me, and said so. 
 
 At this moment Mrs. Gladstone came up, anxious 
 that Mr. Gladstone should not over-exert himself, 
 and should retire to his room. He went ; but five 
 minutes afterwards Mr. (now Sir) Edward Hamilton, 
 his secretary, came to me on the subject of the 
 conversation. He was all in favour of a shorthand 
 writer being present at the interview the next day, 
 and I undertook to send one. This was done ; and 
 I was subsequently informed that the deputation did 
 not like the intrusion, and showed its dislike. The 
 necessity for the precaution was fully proved two or 
 three days afterwards. Inaccurate statements as to 
 what had passed at the interview were put forward 
 in a tentative fashion. Denial of them, coupled with 
 a reminder that there was an authentic record of the
 
 392 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 proceedings, served to stop further developments in 
 the same direction. 
 
 Before the election of 1885 was over, I had a 
 long talk with Mr. Gladstone, in which some inter- 
 esting things were said — that is, things that were 
 interesting to me. It was just after the polling had 
 begun, A shooting- party had been arranged at 
 Dalmeny, and it chanced that on the day of the 
 "shoot" I drove over to introduce the representa- 
 tive of a Paris newspaper — a French gentleman of 
 great ability — to Lord Rosebery. We arrived 
 shortly before luncheon, which, for the sake of the 
 shooters, was to be eaten in the cottage of a forester 
 or keeper, within a mile of the house. Lord 
 Rosebery asked me to go to Mr. Gladstone, who 
 was at work in his room, and bring him to the 
 luncheon. I went, found Mr. Gladstone, and we 
 drove to the cottage. As we were leaving the house, 
 a telegram was handed to Mr. Gladstone, which, after 
 reading, he handed to me. It was from Mr. 
 Gourlay announcing that he had been returned 
 for Sunderland. About that time many such tele- 
 grams reached Dalmeny House. 
 
 After luncheon Mr. Gladstone asked me to 
 accompany him in a walk with Mrs. Gladstone. 
 We set off along the beautiful path by the sea that 
 leads to Cramond Ferry. In my experience I can 
 recall no more interesting conversation. The 
 Scotsman had been urging the delegation of 
 Parliamentary work to local- national bodies in 
 England, Scotland, and Ireland. Mr. Gladstone 
 
 
 i^
 
 XXVII A TALK WITH MR. GLADSTONE 393 
 
 asked me if I did not think we had gone rather far 
 in urging the creation of such bodies. One might 
 be possible in Scotland; but what of Ireland? He 
 showed that w^hat had been said in the paper had 
 been brouofht to his knowledg^e ; for he alluded to 
 particular arguments that had been used. My 
 answer was that within the limits that had been 
 suggested such bodies would be safe. He made no 
 comment on the reply. 
 
 Then the conversation turned upon other subjects, 
 among them journalists. He knew several, and spoke 
 of them with great care. I asked him if he knew 
 Mr. (now Sir) Edward Russell, the Editor of the 
 Liverpool Daily Post. He had met him ; but 
 knew him principally as a Shakespearian critic. He 
 spoke of Mr. Russell highly in this capacity, and 
 said of a particular essay by him that it was as good 
 as anything Dowden had done. Indeed in some 
 respects he liked it better. " But," said he, " I am 
 afraid he has a little lost himself in politics. He 
 has, I believe, thrown himself on the side of Mr. 
 Chamberlain and his programme." The allusion 
 was to what had been called the " Unauthorised 
 Programme," and is still known by that name. Mr. 
 Russell had supported Mr. Chamberlain ; but when the 
 Home Rule time came, he went with Mr. Gladstone. 
 
 The last time I had a conversation with Mr. 
 Gladstone was in June 1895, on board the Tantallon 
 Castle. Sir Donald Currie had invited a large party 
 for a trip on board that fine ship to the opening of 
 the Kiel Canal by the German Emperor. Mr. and
 
 394 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 Mrs. Gladstone were of the party, which included 
 Lord Welby, Lord Rendel, Sir Algernon West, 
 Mr. George Armitstead, Sir Joseph Pease, M.P., 
 Mr. Henry Gladstone, Sir John Leng, M.P., Sir 
 William Dunn, M.P., and Mr. T. C. Bolton, late 
 M.P. for Stirlingshire. These might be taken as 
 representing one side of politics. On the other 
 were Mr. Cuthbert Quilter, M.P., Mr. Ramsay, 
 then M.P. for Forfarshire, and several others whose 
 names I do not now recall. Sir Donald Currie was 
 the best of hosts. The entertainment was princely 
 in its character ; the cruise was one long pleasure. 
 
 On Saturday the 22nd June, the Tantallon Castle 
 was at Gothenburg. There two telegrams reached 
 Sir Donald Currie, telling him of the defeat of the 
 Rosebery Government on the previous night on the 
 Ammunition vote. To me, whose predilections were 
 for the Unionist cause, nothing could have been more 
 amusing than the consternation which this news 
 created on the side of the friends of the Government. 
 They were at no pains to disguise their vexation. 
 What did the defeat mean } they asked. It would 
 have meant little or nothing if the Government had 
 not desired to be relieved from office. My opinion 
 being asked, I said that in ordinary circumstances 
 the work of supply would have gone on ; but as the 
 Government had moved to report progress after the 
 defeat it seemed that they meant to give up. 
 
 All the rest of the day there was uneasiness 
 among the Ministerial section of our party. They 
 could not talk of anything but the defeat. Gothen-
 
 XXVII POLITICAL ANXIETIES 395 
 
 burg evening papers were bought, and desperate 
 efforts made to translate or to have translated their 
 telegrams from London. Alas ! those telegrams told 
 little or nothing more than had been told in the mes- 
 sages to Sir Donald Currie. That night we sailed for 
 home, and all through the lovely June Sunday at sea 
 there was nothing talked of among the politicians but 
 the defeat. We all attended church service ; but I 
 am afraid that many minds were wandering from the 
 prayers and psalms and hymns to the political situa- 
 tion. That certainly was not the case with Mr. Glad- 
 stone's mind. He was engrossed in the service. 
 Nothing could divert his attention from it. There 
 may have been one or two others of the congregation 
 who were similarly absorbed ; there could not have 
 been more. What course would the Government 
 take ? — that was the problem every politician present 
 was trying to solve. 
 
 Early on Monday morning we arrived in the 
 Thames, and still in doubt prepared for breakfast. 
 I had gone into the saloon in the expectation that 
 some news might have arrived. All through the 
 cruise I had been careful not to obtrude myself on 
 Mr. Gladstone's privacy. Truth to tell, I thought 
 his friends troubled him more than was necessary or 
 desirable, and that it was kindness not to increase 
 the intrusions upon him. On the Monday morning, 
 Mr. Henry Gladstone came to me and asked me if 
 I had any objection to see his father. Certainly I 
 could have none. Mr. Gladstone was sitting at 
 the lower end of one of the long tables. We
 
 396 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 went to him, and Mr. Henry Gladstone mentioned 
 my name. 
 
 "How do you do, Mr. Cooper?" said Mr, 
 Gladstone. " It is a long time since we last met." 
 It IS, Sir. 
 
 " I am afraid we have been much parted since 
 then.?" 
 
 " I am afraid we have." 
 
 " How long is it since we last met ? " 
 
 " Nearly ten years, I think. It was at Dalmeny 
 during the general election of 1885. We had then 
 a long walk together in the woods." 
 
 "Yes; I remember. Have you had any further 
 experience about Aberdeen hats ? " 
 
 This was an allusion to a story I had told Mr. 
 Gladstone in 1885 or earlier as to the largeness of 
 Aberdeen heads and consequently of Aberdeen hats. 
 He had used the story in at least one of his speeches 
 years before. Perhaps that was one reason why he 
 remembered it now. He went on to tell me other 
 facts he had gathered about hats, as — 
 
 " I hear that the commercial travellers send the 
 large hats they cannot sell elsewhere to Aberdeen." 
 
 " I did not know that." 
 
 " I also hear that the next largest hats to those 
 for Aberdeen are required for Wigtownshire." 
 
 " Indeed ; I did not know that. Of course you 
 know that in another respect there is a similarity 
 between the North-east and the South-west of 
 Scotland ? " 
 
 " Ah, yes. You refer to illegitimacy."
 
 xxvir A GREAT COMPLIMENT 397 
 
 "Yes." 
 
 "Well, perhaps there is a racial explanation of 
 both facts." 
 
 Then, turning the subject, Mr. Gladstone said — 
 
 " I am sorry I have not had an earlier opportunity 
 of talking with you while we have been on board 
 this ship. My imperfect vision, though it is helped 
 by the spectacles they have given me, prevents me 
 from recognising faces, except of those who are 
 always about me." 
 
 " Mr. Gladstone, I have not been willing to 
 intrude upon you." 
 
 " I wish you had. I am an old man, conscious 
 that I stand on the verge of the grave, and I should 
 have liked to tell you that though political affairs 
 have now little or no interest for me, I have been 
 impressed by the honesty of purpose with which 
 you have conducted your paper. I do not read 
 many newspapers, and have not done so for some 
 time ; but particular matters in newspapers are 
 brought under my notice, and what you have written 
 has often been brought before me. We have differed. 
 I could not agree with you. I think you have been 
 wrong ; but I have been impressed by your straight- 
 forwardness and earnestness in enforcing your views. 
 Perhaps if there had been as much straightforward- 
 ness in other quarters it would have been better." 
 
 " I cannot say, Mr. Gladstone, how deeply I feel 
 your commendation. Let me thank you for it with 
 all my heart. But I have no right to occupy your 
 attention longer."
 
 398 
 
 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT 
 
 CHAP. XXVII 
 
 "Well, I suppose we must go to breakfast; but 
 I am glad to have had this opportunity of renewing 
 our acquaintance and of assuring you of my respect." 
 ** Thank you. I need say no more." 
 Indeed, I could not have said more ; I was well- 
 nigh overwhelmed by what Mr. Gladstone had said. 
 The commendation he gave me was as unexpected 
 as it was generous. We shook hands and parted ; 
 and since that day I have not seen the aged states- 
 man again.
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII 
 
 The Home Rule Question — Necessity for some devolution — Oppo- 
 nents of local-national bodies, afterwards Home Rulers— ^-A 
 dinner incident — Edinburgh's return in 1885 — Sir George 
 Harrison — His death — Mr. Childers — The Pariiament of 
 1885-86 — Political information and how to use it — Information 
 from Mr. Childers — Sketch of draft Home Rule Bill published 
 in the Scotsinan — Consternation among Liberals — Mr. Glad- 
 stone's personal influence — The Scotsfnan's attitude — Painful 
 recollections — Accusations and invitations — A curious mission 
 — Mr. Childers as a correspondent — His inconsistencies — His 
 objections to the Home Rule Bill — His action in its favour — 
 Party fears — Other objecting statesmen. 
 
 A MAN who has been engaged more or less closely 
 for half a century in the discussion of political ques- 
 tions, and who during a great part of that time has 
 been in contact or communication with politicians, 
 may be excused for thinking the Home Rule epoch 
 one of peculiar interest. For within the half-century 
 there has been nothing like the breaking down of 
 political dams and the letting out of political waters 
 that has been seen since the general election of 
 1885. An old party was shattered, a new party 
 has risen on its ruins. Mr. Gladstone's Home Rule 
 Bill of 1886 broke up the Liberal Party and gave 
 birth to the Unionist Party. Men who had worked
 
 400 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 against each other all their lives were thrown to- 1 
 
 gether and have worked hand in hand for the main- 
 tenance of the Union. Such a break-up or change 
 has not been seen since Sir Robert Peel took up 
 Free Trade ; and his action then caused far less 
 rupture of old ties and far less change in political 
 parties than have been caused by Mr. Gladstone's 
 Home Rule movement. 
 
 All this is merely history. No one can doubt its 
 accuracy. But it is not the whole truth. Behind 
 the patent facts of the introduction of the Home 
 Rule Bill in 1886 there are the motives of those 
 quondam Liberal politicians who followed Mr. Glad- 
 stone, It is not for me to be the judge or to affect to 
 be the judge of those motives. But it is permissible 
 to state some facts which, if they do not throw a light 
 on motives, may help to an understanding of the 
 wonderful power exercised by Mr. Gladstone. 
 
 From the time of the appointment of a Secretary 
 for Scotland — an appointment which had been far 
 too long delayed — the impression that there must 
 be some devolution of the work of Parliament had 
 strengthened in my mind. The agitation that led 
 to the appointment of a Secretary for Scotland had 
 brought out many proofs that requisite legislation 
 for Scotland could not be obtained from the Imperial 
 Parliament. If a local-national body were created 
 that could frame measures and get them into shape, 
 the Imperial Parliament might sanction them. This 
 would relieve Parliament and give Scotland more 
 attention.
 
 xxviii A DINNER INCIDENT 401 
 
 Let it be remembered that I am not arguing, but 
 only stating my impressions before 1886. It seemed 
 to me that such a plan if applied to Ireland would 
 meet all requirements that were consistent with the 
 maintenance of the Union. Therefore the con- 
 sideration of the plan was urged upon politicians 
 and the public. It was not then actually formulated. 
 Not until 1887 did I put it into something like exact 
 shape. Subsequently Lord Rosebery publicly said 
 it " well might be a charter of Scottish Home Rule." 
 Previous to 1885 it had been sketched; and many 
 men who later threw in their lot with Mr. Gladstone 
 and his Home Rule Bill, addressed remonstrances 
 to me. 
 
 One evening, I think it was in April 1885, I was 
 dining with Mr. George Armitstead in Cleveland 
 Square. Mr. Chamberlain was one of the party, 
 Mr. Mundella was another. If I am not mistaken, 
 Mr. Bryce and Mr. H. H. Fowler were also there; 
 but of this I cannot be sure. After dinner, talk — all 
 political — turned on the Nationalist demands for 
 Ireland. Mr. Chamberlain and I insisted that there 
 ought to be a delegation or devolution of work to 
 a local -national body in Ireland. Mr. Mundella 
 would have none of it. A reform of municipal 
 institutions was desirable, he said ; to go further 
 would be most dangerous in Ireland. Twelve 
 months later he was with Mr. Gladstone supporting 
 an actual Parliament for Ireland. Mr. Chamberlain 
 was opposing such a Parliament ; and so was I. 
 Our plan — for we agreed, I believe, in all essentials 
 
 2 D
 
 402 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 — involved direct and absolute control by the 
 Imperial Parliament. Without that — Separation. 
 
 At the general election in November 1885 — the 
 first under the extension of the franchise in the 
 counties, and under the new Redistribution Bill — 
 Edinburgh, made into four divisions, had returned 
 four Liberal members — Mr. Goschen, Sir George 
 Harrison, Mr. John Wilson, and Mr. Buchanan. 
 Sir George Harrison, who had been Lord Provost 
 of the city, and who was one of the shrewdest and 
 most genial men I have ever known, was returned 
 for the Southern Division. Nobody at that election 
 had dreamed that such a measure as the Home Rule 
 Bill was in contemplation of Mr. Gladstone or of 
 any member of the Liberal party. There cannot 
 be a shadow of doubt that Sir George Harrison 
 never thought such a measure possible. If he had 
 lived, it is certain that Edinburgh would have voted 
 in block against the first Home Rule Bill. Mr. 
 Goschen, Mr. John Wilson, and Mr. Buchanan did 
 vote against it. Unfortunately Sir George Harrison 
 had died before Parliament met. The question 
 then arose who was to succeed him. He had 
 been opposed as being too moderate ; were the 
 moderate men or those who were, as they said, 
 more advanced, to choose his successor.'* Modera- 
 tion won the day. After much preliminary difficulty, 
 Mr. Childers, who had lost his seat at Pontefract, 
 came forward. He and I became pretty close 
 friends. He was returned after having defended 
 some measure of Home Rule for Ireland, which I
 
 XXVIII MR. CHILDERS AND HOME RULE 403 
 
 thought was on my lines, and which nobody thought 
 was on the lines of the Bill subsequently brought 
 in by Mr. Gladstone. 
 
 Everybody knows that Mr. Childers was included 
 in the Government that came in after the election 
 of 1885. Before Parliament met it had become 
 known that Mr. Gladstone meant to deal with 
 Home Rule. The position was peculiar. At the 
 election the Irish Nationalists, under the direction 
 of Mr. Parnell, had supported the Conservatives — 
 not from love, but avowedly for the purpose of 
 making any majority independent of Irish votes 
 impossible. The result of the election was a victory 
 for Mr. Parnell. There were 335 Conservatives 
 and Parnellites, and 335 Liberals following Mr. 
 Gladstone. Everything depended, or seemed to 
 depend, upon the way the Parnellites gave their 
 votes. When it became known that Mr. Gladstone 
 was preparing to deal with Home Rule, he got the 
 Parnellite votes, and Lord Salisbury's Government 
 went out of office, beaten in the House of Commons. 
 
 There was no reason to doubt that the Scotsman 
 would be kept well-informed of the doings and 
 intentions of the new Government. Apart from 
 other sources of information, Mr. Childers could, 
 I thought, be relied upon to take care that we 
 made no mistake by reason of erroneous news that 
 might be furnished to us. This statement indicates 
 a principle upon which I have always acted in 
 editing the Scotsman. Never have I published 
 or allowed to be published statements as to facts
 
 404 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 or intentions made known to me by statesmen, 
 or other men, without their consent. "Tell me 
 all you can or choose to tell. It will keep me 
 from going wrong as to facts ; it will not be pub- 
 lished without your consent." There is no ex- 
 aggeration in saying that hundreds of times I 
 have seen in other newspapers statements as to 
 Ministerial intentions or individual movements about 
 which I have known often weeks before. In the 
 case of Mr. Childers no difficulty arose. What he 
 wrote privately was kept private by me. What 
 was published on his information was published 
 with his authority. 
 
 No sooner was Mr. Gladstone seated in office 
 than he began his self-imposed task of drafting a 
 Home Rule Bill. Rumours innumerable flew about ; 
 they were all mere guesses so far as they related to 
 the provisions of the Bill. Not until the measure 
 was submitted to the Cabinet was anything definite 
 known, and the first authentic sketch of the purport 
 of the Bill was given in the Scots?7ian. Kites had 
 been flown : some, perhaps, with intent ; but the 
 public had no means of knowing what Mr. Glad- 
 stone had prepared. 
 
 From time to time Mr. Childers wrote to me, 
 giving his impressions of what the Bill would be. 
 He promised that as soon as it came before the 
 Cabinet, I should know what it was, and a cypher 
 was arranged in which he could telegraph informa- 
 tion to the public. 
 
 On 28th March the information came at the
 
 XXVIII SKETCH OF FIRST HOME RULE BILL 405 
 
 moment that the announcement was made of the 
 resignations of Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. (now Sir) 
 George Trevelyan. They had resigned because 
 they would not accept Mr. Gladstone's measure. 
 There had been a Cabinet Council meeting on the 
 previous Friday, when the Bill was produced. In 
 the London Letter of the Scotsman on Monday, 
 29th March, the following passages appeared : — 
 
 I believe you may accept as correct the following partial 
 description of the scheme as it was presented to the Cabinet on 
 Friday last : — 
 
 1. It proposes to create a Parliament for Ireland, with some 
 provision as to the rights of minorities. 
 
 2. It proposes that Ireland shall cease to send members to 
 the Imperial Parliament. 
 
 3. It gives to the Irish Parliament full control over Irish 
 financial and fiscal affairs. It will thus enable that Parliament 
 to settle the customs and excise duties for Ireland. By this 
 power the Parliament can establish a system of Protection in 
 Ireland, if it chooses, though I believe provision is made that 
 there shall be no differential duties. 
 
 4. It gives to the Irish Parliament the power of having a 
 separate currency for Ireland, if it chooses to do so. One result 
 of this would, of course, be that dollars and cents would become 
 the currency in Ireland. 
 
 There are many other provisions which will equally confer 
 upon the Irish Parliament Imperial powers. I need scarcely say 
 that there is extreme unwillingness to believe that Mr. Gladstone 
 really intends to produce such a scheme as this. Even those 
 who are his firmest supporters outside the Cabinet are staggered 
 by the propositions as far as they know them. 
 
 It would be difficult to exaggerate the consterna- 
 tion which this announcement created among Liberals 
 in Scotland. Several men publicly declared that if 
 the description of the Bill was correct they could not
 
 4o6 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 support it. Scores of earnest politicians came to me 
 and made like declarations. Kindly contemporaries 
 of the Scotsman suggested, and indeed asserted, that 
 the statement as to the provisions of the Bill was 
 untrue. It was, they said, a concoction. All these 
 accusations and all the unbeliefs did not affect me. 
 I knew my authority. Every word that had been 
 printed — even the comments I have quoted — had 
 been sent to me by Mr. Childers, and I was certain 
 he would not ask me to publish what he knew to be 
 inaccurate. 
 
 The suspicion has often arisen in my mind that 
 the statement had been given to the Scotsman for 
 one of two reasons, and possibly for both. Either it 
 was desired to see how the country would accept 
 such a measure as that sketched ; or it was hoped 
 that an outcry against it would induce Mr. Gladstone 
 to modify his Bill so as to enable doubtful colleagues 
 to support it. There was the outcry. The Bill was 
 modified in some respects — as in regard to customs 
 and currency. Many of those who had denounced 
 the whole scheme, used the modifications as a salve 
 to their consciences, and supported Mr. Gladstone. 
 
 Never within my knowledge has the personal in- 
 fluence of a statesman been more completely and 
 astonishingly demonstrated than in regard to Mr. 
 Gladstone and his Home Rule Bill. When the 
 measure was introduced, the Scotsman opposed it. 
 Naturally I was anxious to know what view the 
 people took of it. To that end I got a couple of 
 men whom I could trust — working-men — to go into
 
 xxviii PAINFUL EXPERIENCES 407 
 
 the workshops in Edinburgh and hear what the 
 opinion of the workers was. They had no difficulty 
 in assuring me that 90 per cent of the working-men 
 were against the Bill. When the election of 1886 
 came, nearly 90 per cent of the working-men in 
 Edinburgh must have voted for Mr. Gladstone and 
 the Bill. 
 
 A more painful time than that between the 
 production of the Bill and the end of the general 
 election which followed its defeat I never experienced, 
 and hope I never shall experience. There were 
 many political friends with whom I had been more 
 or less closely associated for years who accepted the 
 Bill and supported Mr. Gladstone. I thought them 
 wrong ; but it never occurred to me to judge them 
 harshly. Some of them were not equally considerate 
 of me. 
 
 Lately I have been looking over some of the 
 letters I received at that time, and even now they 
 give me pain. I was told that the course taken by 
 the Scotsman in opposing Mr. Gladstone was much 
 commented upon, and not favourably. Why should 
 I thus leave old friends } What influence had been 
 used to make the Scotsman take up the Unionist 
 position .^ Nobody believed that its course was 
 purely disinterested. 
 
 It might have been sufficient to reply that those 
 who suspected backstairs or illegitimate influence 
 must be themselves in the habit of exercising it. The 
 accusation that was suggested was too contemptible 
 to be touched. But ii was possible to say that,
 
 4o8 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 denying the honesty of no man, my honesty ought 
 not to be denied. Never in its career had the 
 Scotsman been at the beck and call of statesmen or 
 politicians ; and, so far as my influence could go, it 
 never should be. 
 
 One prominent statesman, a supporter of Mr. 
 Gladstone, wrote me a letter in which he warned me 
 of the consequences of the course the Scotsman was 
 taking. It would lose its influence, and I should be 
 ostracised so far as the Liberal party was concerned. 
 My reply was that if the Scotsman was to lose in- 
 fluence by being honest, the sooner the influence 
 went the better. If I was to be ostracised for acting 
 conscientiously, ostracised I would be. 
 
 While the election of 1886 was in progress, and 
 Mr. Gladstone was in Edinburgh, I received a 
 call from an old friend who had attached himself 
 to the Home Rule cause. He was not, and never 
 had been, a Member of Parliament. He was not a 
 private secretary to anybody. But I knew he was 
 on most intimate terms of friendship with Lord 
 Rosebery, and I knew he was seeing and talking 
 with Mr, Gladstone every day. He came, he said, 
 to ask whether, if Mr. Gladstone consented to any 
 modifications of the Bill, the Scots7nans opposition 
 to it would be withdrawn. Would I say what 
 changes would induce such withdrawal ? My answer 
 was, that nothing but a change in the very principle 
 of the measure could reconcile me to it. In my 
 opinion, it meant Repeal of the Union. As long as 
 a separate Parliament for Ireland with full powders
 
 XXVIII A CURIOUS NEGOTIATION 409 
 
 was insisted upon, the Bill must be opposed. My 
 visitor argued ; but it was in vain. At the time 
 when the intended provisions of the Bill had been 
 published, he had written to me insisting that such a 
 measure must be opposed. For reasons of his own 
 — doubtless sufficient — he had changed his mind 
 and had thrown himself on the side of the Bill. I 
 reminded him of the fact, and received for reply that 
 the interests of the party must have his first con- 
 sideration. I told him the party was being destroyed. 
 He did not agree with me, and went away professing 
 sorrow and disappointment at the answer I had 
 given him, which, he said, would be heard with 
 great regret by those with whom he was in com- 
 munication. 
 
 Nothing is further from my mind than to suggest 
 that my friend and visitor had been delegated to try 
 and make terms with me. All I know is, that he 
 came as I have described, proposed what I have 
 told, and asserted that my views would have weight 
 at what he spoke of as headquarters. It would serve 
 no good purpose if I were to suggest by whom he 
 was sent. He did not come of his own motion ; he 
 said he did not. It was a foolish errand, though it 
 had a side that was not uncomplimentary to me. 
 
 At the general election of 1886, Mr. Childers 
 was again a candidate for the Southern Division of 
 Edinburgh. From the inception of the Home Rule 
 Bill he had been a frequent correspondent of mine. 
 The whole question had been threshed out between 
 us. The funny feature of the correspondence, or
 
 4IO AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 rather the two funny features, were — first, that he 
 always professed to agree with me, and yet remained 
 in the Government ; and second, that he wrote as if 
 his counsels were most influential in the Cabinet, 
 and yet the Bill was not modified after the first 
 amendments in it. The proposals as to customs 
 and currency which were originally in the draft of 
 the Bill were withdrawn : Mr. Childers very plainly 
 suo-Q^ested that this was done at his instance. From 
 information that has reached me since, I am inclined 
 to believe that his was not the master-hand in pro- 
 curing amendments and omissions. He acquiesced 
 in the amendments ; he did not originate them — at 
 least at Cabinet Council meetings. In saying this 
 I am but repeating what has been told to me by 
 Ministers who were the colleaQfues of Mr. Childers 
 in the Cabinet when the Bill was discussed ; that is 
 to say, after Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Trevelyan 
 had resigned. 
 
 Presumably all of us have our special vanities. 
 When some kind power gives me the gift of seeing 
 myself as others see me, I have little doubt the view 
 will reveal faults and follies of which I have not 
 thought myself guilty. In like circumstances Mr. 
 Childers would have had a curious experience. He 
 persistently spoke of his influence in the Cabinet as 
 if it were supreme. He never was second in any- 
 thing. Mr. Gladstone relied upon him for advice ; 
 the other members of the Cabinet came to him to 
 help them out of any difficulties into which they 
 might have got. All this was hinted in mysterious
 
 xxviii MR. CHILDERS 411 
 
 fashion, in the gentlest of accents, with a certain 
 deferential air, yet with unmistakable firmness. At 
 first it impressed me ; when it did not produce any- 
 thing, I am afraid scepticism came. 
 
 Several times during the general election of 1886 
 Mr. Childers came to me. I was on the Unionist 
 side ; he was on the side of Mr. Gladstone. At 
 that time it was doubtful how the elections in Edin- 
 burgh would go. Soon it appeared that the majority 
 of the electors would yield to Mr. Gladstone's in- 
 fluence. Mr. Childers was not sure they would do 
 so — at least he was not sure in the early days of the 
 contest. All the time, in talks with me, he was ex- 
 pressing his regret that Mr. Gladstone had brought 
 forward the Home Rule Bill, or that he had made it 
 what it was. Again and again my visitor assured 
 me that he was much more nearly in agreement 
 with me than he was with the Home Rule Bill. All 
 the same, he defended the Bill in public, and kept 
 to Mr. Gladstone's side. Once I pointed out the 
 apparent inconsistency of his talk and of his action. 
 He replied that while he thought the Bill bad and 
 Mr. Gladstone wrong, he was afraid of great evils 
 springing from secession. No seceding party had, 
 he said, ever been able to maintain its existence in 
 British politics. He instanced the Peelites — some 
 of whom went one way, and some another : they 
 formed no lasting party. It is not desirable that I 
 should here repeat the arguments which I used 
 against his position. The impression produced upon 
 me was that Mr. Childers saw the right, and still
 
 412 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap, xxviii 
 
 the wrong pursued, because he did not think Unionist 
 Liberals could form a party that might get into office. 
 In short, he looked at the whole question from what 
 may be described as the official point of view. 
 
 Mr. Childers was by no means singular among 
 the colleagues of Mr. Gladstone at that time in ex- 
 pressing dislike of Home Rule and dissatisfaction 
 with his policy. It is nothing now that some of 
 them had at the election of 1885 denounced schemes 
 of local-national devolution. The point is, that after 
 the Bill was introduced, and frequently in the years 
 since, I have heard from their own lips condemna- 
 tion of the whole policy of Home Rule, and especially 
 of Mr. Gladstone's share in it. They have not said 
 these things on public platforms.
 
 CHAPTER XXIX 
 
 Danger of doing kindly deeds — An instance — Sir William Harcourt 
 and Scottish Liberal members — Complaints against them — Mr. 
 Marjoribanks — Urging him to political endeavour — His success 
 — His place in the Government of 1892 — Lord Randolph 
 Churchill — My meetings with him — His criticisms and his con- 
 fession — Sir William Harcourt on consistency — Sir George 
 Campbell — A story of him — Lord Young and some sayings 
 of his. 
 
 A CYNICAL philosopher has told us to beware of 
 kindly actions. When they are done to individuals 
 they often, indeed almost always, lead to unpleasant 
 returns to oneself. It is no part of my desire to 
 endorse or justify the cynicism. Scarcely can it be 
 said to have originality. Is there not a superstition 
 in Cornwall, and elsewhere along our coasts, that if, 
 in case of shipwreck, you save the life of a drowning 
 man, that man will do you serious mischief before 
 you die ? There is the idea of the philosopher in an 
 exaggerated form. Still most of us would, I think, 
 not be deterred by fear of possible consequences 
 from doing a kindly action. It is true that such 
 actions are not always without after-experiences 
 more or less troublesome. Very often one helping 
 leads to the demand for another. In other cases
 
 414 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 you may find that you have given to some one the 
 opportunity of opposing you, or perhaps have stimu- 
 lated him to indulge in opposition. Still, the hope 
 may be indulged that no man will be deterred from 
 kindliness of intention and action by the considera- 
 tion that possibly he may find the result is not all 
 that he expected, or rather that possibly it may lead 
 to results that he neither expected nor desired. 
 
 This train of thought has arisen in my mind 
 because of several experiences in the political sphere. 
 Some years ago I was asked by the Liberal 
 managers in a certain constituency in Scotland to 
 find them a candidate. There was every reason to 
 believe that if the man chosen was a good man the 
 seat would be won, and would be held. I sought 
 for a good man, found him, recommended him to 
 the managers, and he was chosen as a candidate in 
 preference to several others who were willing to 
 come forward. He was elected, and, as I thought, 
 justified the choice. But when the Home Rule 
 time came, he took Mr. Gladstone's side ; and from 
 that day to this he has been one of the most acute 
 and active assailants of the Scotsmmi and its political 
 views. 
 
 Nobody will suppose that I complain of this. 
 The gentleman has as much right to his opinions as 
 I have to mine. His attacks upon the Scotsman are 
 compliments, not perhaps in form, but in substance. 
 But clearly if, when I recommended him, I had been 
 guided by the consideration that some time he might 
 be my critic and censor, I should have looked for
 
 XXIX SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT & SCOTTISH M.P.'S 415 
 
 some one less able, and perhaps more likely to act 
 independently. As it is, there is much comfort in 
 knowing that my present foe and former protdgd 
 will adorn whatever position he may occupy in the 
 political future. That he will occupy a high position, 
 I have no doubt. 
 
 Another case more or less like to the one just 
 described may be adduced by way of showing that a 
 kindly action may not always have the result that 
 you might desire. 
 
 One evening I met Sir William Harcourt at 
 dinner in a country-house in Scotland. He was 
 then Home Secretary in Mr. Gladstone's Govern- 
 ment. It must have been in the year 1882 or 1883. 
 After dinner, talk was a good deal engrossed by Sir 
 William. Suddenly he opened out upon the Scottish 
 Liberal members of the House of Commons. None 
 of them was present. The diatribe was Ministerial 
 and general. Sir William sweepingly asserted that 
 the Scottish Liberal members were utterly useless. 
 They were of no service to the Government. They 
 could do nothing to help it when it was attacked. 
 The Conservative members were, he declared, worth 
 far more than the Liberal members. They could 
 do something ; the Liberal members could not. 
 "Look," he said, "at Mr. Campbell" (the member 
 for Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities) ; " he can 
 get up and help the Opposition with a speech that 
 is sensible. There is not a man on our side from 
 Scotland who can do the like. If we had men like 
 him we should have something to boast about."
 
 4i6 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 All this, and much more, was listened to with 
 amusement. I ventured to suggest that the con- 
 demnation was too sweeping ; that there were able 
 and efficient men among the Liberal members, and 
 I mentioned two or three names. Sir William 
 would have none of them. He positively waxed 
 indignant, or at least he spoke in tones that were 
 indignant, when the suggestion was made that Scot- 
 land had chosen some capable representatives on 
 the Liberal side. To me it was all most amusing, 
 and I confess it would have delighted me to extract 
 more denunciations from Sir William ; but my host 
 gave me a warning look, and the subject passed 
 away for the time. 
 
 There could be no doubt that at the bottom of 
 Sir William's censure there was some truth. The 
 Scottish Liberal members did not distinguish them- 
 selves in debate. Many of them showed no sign of 
 a desire to do anything. I thought this was a pity, 
 so far as some of the younger men were concerned ; 
 for it seemed to me that if they were going for a 
 political career they should learn to wield political 
 weapons and practise with them. Filled with this 
 idea, I wrote to Mr. Edward Marjoribanks, now 
 Lord Tweedmouth. He was then member for 
 Berwickshire. I believed he could do political work 
 if he would, and I tried to stimulate him to effort. 
 Thus I told him what Sir William Harcourt's 
 opinion of Scottish Liberal members was. (Let me 
 say that in doing this I violated no confidence : Sir 
 William had declared that he wished the members
 
 XXIX LORD TWEEDMOUTH 417 
 
 could know his opinion.) I told Mr. Marjoribanks 
 that there was some truth in what Sir William said, 
 and added that it was a shame a young man like 
 him did not put himself forward in the House. He 
 pleaded modesty ; I urged ambition. He promised 
 to see if he could do anything. 
 
 It is not necessary to pursue his political history 
 much further. He began to speak in the House ; 
 he made progress. In course of a short time he 
 became a Whip ; then he burst into the full glory of 
 a Cabinet Minister. Since 1886 he and I have been 
 in different political camps. He has done his 
 utmost to oppose views the Scotsman has advocated, 
 and he has done so with much ability. To slightly 
 alter Pope, 
 
 What great results may rise from trivial things, 
 
 Sir William Harcourt's diatribe against Scottish 
 Liberal members in 1882-83 made Mr. Marjori- 
 banks a Cabinet Minister in 1894! 
 
 It may be remembered that Mr. Marjoribanks 
 was not made a Cabinet Minister when Mr. Glad- 
 stone formed his Government after the general 
 election of 1892. Mr. Marjoribanks had been 
 acting as Whip for the Home Rule party from 
 1886 to 1892. I can say with the certainty of 
 knowledge that he had worked hard in the House 
 of Commons and in the management of the party's 
 affairs in the country. Few men have ever shown 
 more astuteness and more dilio^ence than he had 
 shown in promoting the Home Rule cause in Scot- 
 land. While the election of 1892 was in i^rogress, I 
 
 2 E
 
 4i8 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 saw him and we exchanged some laughing remarks 
 over the prospect. "If you get a majority," I said, 
 "what office are you going to have — the Admiralty, 
 the Colonies, or what?" "I do not know," he 
 replied. " Perhaps you will take or keep the Whip- 
 ship ? " " No, that I certainly will not. I have had 
 six years' penal servitude in the office, and that is 
 enough for me." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone got a majority and formed a 
 Government, and Mr. Marjoribanks consented to 
 take the post of chief Whip! The next time we met 
 I laughingly reminded him of his declaration that he 
 never would consent to take the Whip-ship. He 
 admitted that he had not liked to take the post. 
 Plainly he was disappointed ; but he said, "Randolph 
 agrees that I have done the right thing in taking it." 
 The reference here was to Lord Randolph Churchill, 
 who was Mr. Marjoribanks' brother-in-law. 
 
 It chanced that I only met Lord Randolph 
 Churchill on two occasions. Several times I had been 
 asked to meet him in Scotland, but I had not been 
 able to accept the invitations. At last I met him one 
 evening at dinner at Lady Jeune's. We sat side by 
 side, and had a most interesting conversation on 
 matters political. I had not admired Lord Randolph 
 in the early part of his meteoric career. It has never 
 been my opinion that politics ought to be divorced 
 from morals. Opposition as a duty without regard to 
 questions does not seem to me to be moral. Lord 
 Randolph began his career by holding and proclaim- 
 ing a different belief. It was my duty to criticise him
 
 XXIX LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL 419 
 
 then, and the duty was performed sometimes in very- 
 plain language. On one occasion I remember the 
 Pall Mall Gazette, then under the editorship of Mr. 
 Frederick Greenwood, quoted a passage from an 
 article in the Scotsman on a speech made by Lord 
 Randolph Churchill. The passage was quoted to 
 be condemned as violent journalism. It called a 
 spade a spade. It spoke plainly of the attacks Lord 
 Randolph had made on political opponents. That 
 evening, at dinner at Lady Jeune's, Lord Randolph 
 recalled this incident to my recollection, and said he 
 had no fault to find with the criticism which had 
 been condemned : if he struck out, he expected to be 
 hit back. " Besides," he added, " in those days I 
 did go rather far." 
 
 Some time after this meeting Lord Randolph 
 wrote to me, saying that he should be passing 
 through Edinburgh on a certain day, and asking me 
 if I could see him. My reply was a request that he 
 would take luncheon with me at home on the day 
 he named. He agreed to do so, and in due course 
 came. We had again a most interesting conversa- 
 tion, that is to say, a conversation most interesting 
 to me. The best of it came after luncheon in the 
 smoking-room. He smoked cigarettes, carefully 
 packing the tube with cotton-wool. My taste in 
 tobacco is stronger. He spoke of his health, and it 
 was not difficult to see that he was a broken man. 
 
 I remember that he talked of public affairs as if 
 he had and could have little more to do with them. 
 Now and then he became animated as he spoke of
 
 420 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 prominent public men. He said that he and Mr. 
 Balfour had been good friends, and he added that it 
 was his own fault they had gone apart. He said a 
 good deal about Mr. Gladstone, and insisted that 
 his earliest formed opinions of that statesman had 
 been correct. No man but Mr. Gladstone would, 
 he thought, have ever ventured to take up Home 
 Rule as he had taken it up. There was room, he 
 thought, for an extension of Local Government in 
 Ireland ; but to propose to give it a parliament of 
 its own was to go back to the dark ages. Mr. 
 Parnell he admired in a certain fashion : his ability, 
 said Lord Randolph, was great. No more astute 
 leader had headed the Irish Nationalists at any 
 time ; but he could not be trusted. This, he 
 thought, was so plain that he could not believe 
 Mr. Gladstone did trust the Irish leader. If he did, 
 then never had any public man been so credulous. 
 This led him to speak of Mr. Gladstone's capacity 
 for what he called self-deceit. Mr. W. E. Forster, 
 he thought, was right when he said Mr. Gladstone 
 could persuade himself of the righteousness of any- 
 thing in which he wished to believe. " Fifty years 
 hence," said Lord Randolph, " Mr. Gladstone will 
 not have the place in public attention he now has : 
 he will be regarded as a freak of nature, and there 
 will be wonder how it was that he had so much 
 influence in his life, considering what he had done 
 and what he had failed to do." 
 
 Then the talk went on to the question of Naval 
 defence, and he told me many facts that had come
 
 XXIX LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL 421 
 
 to his knowledge about our own navy and the navy 
 of France. This led him to make a most remarkable 
 declaration — " If I had known when I was in office 
 what I know now, I would have cut off my hand 
 rather than have resigned when I did," It was 
 obvious that he was very much in earnest. The 
 avowal led him to say that impetuousness had been 
 his great fault. He jumped to conclusions too 
 readily, he said ; and he added that he was very 
 headstrong. Something I said on the subject of 
 consistency led him to insist that in politics what 
 appeared to be inconsistency might be perfectly con- 
 sistent. He quoted Lord Beaconsfield's defence of 
 himself in the Marylebone contest, when he was 
 trying to get into Parliament. Some one had 
 accused him of inconsistency, and he declared that 
 he prided himself on his consistency : he hated the 
 Whigs, and would do anything to baffle them ; that 
 was true consistency. I do not believe that Lord 
 Randolph was prepared to go as far as this ; but 
 assuredly he maintained that apparent inconsistency 
 might, in changed circumstances, be perfectly justifi- 
 able, and indeed might be necessary. 
 
 That was the last time I saw Lord Randolph 
 Churchill. Not long afterwards he started on that 
 journey in search of health which was to end in his 
 death. 
 
 The defence of apparent inconsistency in which 
 Lord Randolph indulged in the course of our con- 
 versation, reminds me of a story I heard in 1887 of 
 Sir William Harcourt. He was at luncheon in a
 
 422 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 house in town where poHtics might be talked. The 
 misdoings of the then Unionist Government were 
 the chief topic of his conversation. Ministers had 
 undertaken to deal with London Local Government. 
 I believe their proposal for County Councils was 
 before Parliament. Sir William was indignant. 
 These Unionists had opposed his measure of 
 London Government — had fought it tooth and 
 nail ; and now they were doing what he proposed 
 to do, and adopting plans which they had con- 
 demned when in Opposition. " What has become 
 of consistency ? " he asked. " Ah ! " said the 
 gentleman from whom I have the story, and who 
 was present, " Ah ! Sir William, I don't know any- 
 body who has more right to ask that question than 
 you have." Sir William paused, looked doubtful, 
 and then looked black. 
 
 Mention has been made of Sir George Campbell. 
 At one time I saw a good deal of him. I have 
 excellent reason for believing that a pamphlet which 
 he wrote gave Mr. Gladstone the root idea of his 
 Irish Land Bill of 1870. Sir George was un- 
 questionably an able man. I believe that he had a 
 high reputation in India. He was a kindly man in 
 private life ; but, alas, in the House of Commons he 
 was a sad infliction. I think it was Mr. Chamberlain 
 who once said to me that the great difficulty in the 
 way of success in the House of Commons was not 
 knowing when to get up, and not knowing when to 
 sit down. Half this difficulty did not seem to trouble 
 Sir George Campbell. As he was always getting up,
 
 XXIX SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL 423 
 
 he must have hit the right time now and then. But 
 he never knew when to sit down. I once heard Lord 
 Watson tell a story of Sir George. On a certain 
 Wednesday afternoon he was making a speech in 
 the House. Lord Watson, then Mr. Watson and 
 Lord Advocate, was standing at the bar by the side 
 of an Irish member. It was at the time of a colliery 
 accident at Pontypridd by which several men were 
 entombed. There was a good deal of anxiety about 
 their fate. Mr. Watson asked the Irish member, 
 "Is there any news from Pontypridd ? " 
 
 " No. I've heard none." 
 
 " It's a sad business," said Watson. 
 
 "So it is," was the reply. "But, begor, it's all 
 the fault of the Government." 
 
 " Fault of the Government ! What have they to 
 do with it ? " 
 
 "Why don't they send down Sir George there .-^ 
 He'd bore them out in half an hour." 
 
 I chanced to be at Cairo when Sir George died. 
 He was lying ill in the Continental Hotel. Some 
 days the news was that he showed improvement. 
 Again he fell back, and at last death came. 
 
 Lord Watson, whose story about Sir George 
 Campbell has been quoted, is a profound lawyer as 
 well as one of the best story-tellers I have met. 
 There is another Lord — a Lord of Session — Lord 
 Young, about whom many stories are told. He is 
 one of the ablest men on the bench or at the bar, if 
 I may say so without being guilty of impertinence. 
 He is, as I happen to know, one of the kindliest of
 
 424 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT chap. 
 
 men. But he is also credited with many maHciously 
 witty sayings, and he is apt to show impatience on 
 the bench. The fault arises, I am sure, from a keen 
 intellect, that sees, or thinks it sees, the real point in 
 any case almost at a glance. One result is frequent 
 interruptions of counsel when pleading at the bar. 
 
 Some years ago Sir Charles Pearson (now Lord 
 Pearson) and Mr. Comrie Thomson were in a case 
 before the Second Division of the Court of Session in 
 which Lord Young sits. " Sir Charles Pearson," he 
 said, "the best way to plead the case is for you to 
 read the clause in the Act of Parliament, and put your 
 construction upon it ; then for Mr. Thomson to read 
 the clause and put his construction upon it. Then 
 leave us to put our construction upon it." " Yes, my 
 lord," said Sir Charles ; " but the difficulty is to get 
 you to listen to the clause." Lord Young had no 
 answer. 
 
 On one occasion he was met on the Mound 
 leaving Parliament House before the Court had 
 risen. This was remarked upon. " Oh, it's all 
 right," said he. "The Justice-Clerk is writing 
 Brigade Orders, and Rutherfurd Clark is reading 
 Greek. Bob Lee is listening to the case. That is 
 enough." 
 
 At the time of the general election of 1892 Lord 
 Young was visiting at Dalmeny House. He was 
 there when the results of the elections in Edinburgh 
 were being ascertained. A report came to hand that 
 Lord Wolmer (now the Earl of Selborne) had been 
 returned for the Western Division by a majority of 3
 
 XXIX LORD YOUNG 425 
 
 over Mr. T. R. Buchanan. Soon after, Mr. P 
 
 came out and said that the majority was 300. He 
 
 added that Lord • • and Lord , two of the 
 
 Lords of Session, had voted for Lord Wolmer. 
 " That accounts for the two cyphers," said Young. 
 
 On a September morning some years ago I met 
 him just as he had driven into town from his place in 
 the country. " Hallo ! " I said, " what are you doing 
 here ? I thought all respectable people were out of 
 town." "Well," said he, "have you seen anything 
 to make you alter your opinion ? I haven't." 
 
 Here I stop ; not for want of material, but because 
 it seems to me to be time to write — Finis.
 
 INDEX 
 
 Abernethy, Mr. A., of The Scots- 
 man, 156 
 
 Aborigines Protection Society, the, 
 109 
 
 Adam, Mr. T., 295 
 
 Adam, Sir W. P., 131-133, 368-382 
 
 Airlie, Earl of, 386, 387 
 
 Alexandra, Princess of Denmark, 
 arrival in England, 135-138 
 
 Anonymous letters, 341-347 
 
 Applegarth, Mr., his printing machine, 
 213 
 
 Archbold, Mr., 24, 25, 27 
 
 Archer, Mr., solicitor, 18, 19 
 
 Armitstead, Mr. G., 394, 401 
 
 Bannister, Alderman, 48, 49 
 Bayne, Mr. Peter, 112 
 Beaconsfield, Lord, 84, 117, 118, 
 
 126, 128, 244, 260, 374, 380 
 Beale, Mr. E., 128, 129 
 Berwick Advertiser, 229 
 Beverley, elections at, 37-39 
 Black, Mr. Adam, 253-255 
 Black, Mr. William, 85, 86, 98 
 Blackie, Prof., 327-337 
 Blackie Brotherhood, the, 329-331 
 Boyes, Mr. Daniel, 37-39 
 Boys, Mr. C. V., 178 
 Bradlaugh, Mr. C., 129, 130 
 Brigg, murder at, 14 
 Bright, Mr. John, 84, 100, 1 10-128, 
 
 147, 148; on trades unions, 119- 
 
 121 
 Broadley, Mr. Henry, 33 
 Brooke, Mr. G. V., 58 
 Brough, Mr. W., 61, 62 
 Brown, Dr. J., 325-327 
 Bruce, Mr. J., 229, 230 
 Buccleuch, Duke of, 384, 385 
 
 Buchanan, Mr., 402 
 
 Buckingham, Mr. Leicester, 98, 103- 
 
 105 
 Burton, Mr. J. Hill, 273, 290, 317- 
 
 324 
 Butterfield, a " liner," 86-88 
 
 Caird, Sir J., 265, 266 
 
 Campbell, Sir G., 386, 387, 422, 
 
 423 
 Cantyre, Mull of, 298 
 
 Cathcart, Sir R. , 366, 367 
 Celeste, Mme., 53, 55 
 Chamberlain, Mr., 401, 405, 410, 
 
 422 
 Chesson, Mr. F. W., 98, 108, 109, 
 
 113. 147 
 
 Childers, Mr., 402-406, 409-412 
 Churchill, Lord Randolph, 418-421 
 Clay, Mr. J., 35-37 
 Clifford, Mr. F., 375, 376 
 Cobden, 96, 97 
 Cockburn, Lord, 159 
 " Count Carlo Borromeo," 92-95 
 Cowan, Mr. C, 252, 253 
 Cowen, Mr. J., 204, 205 
 Cowper machine, the, 3 
 Cox, Mr. R., 324, 325 
 Craig, Sir W. G., 257 
 Creswick, 53, 58 
 Crosskill, Mr. \V., 39, 40 
 Currie, Sir D., 393-395 
 Cushman, the sisters, 53 
 
 Dearsly, Mr., 28, 29 
 
 Dial, The, I11-I13, 142, 149 
 
 Diary of a Late Physician, Samuel 
 
 Warren, 22 
 Dickens, Charles, 44 
 Dilke, Sir C, 377
 
 428 
 
 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT 
 
 Douglas, F. Brown, 253, 254, 273 
 Dramatic criticism, 52-59 
 Dymond, Mr. A. H., 143 
 
 Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, The, 
 
 1 16, 240-244 
 Edwards, Sir H., 39 
 Electioneering in past years, 30-40 
 Ellice, Mr. E., 323, 324 
 
 Faucit, Miss Helen, 53 
 
 Fenn, Mr. G. Manville, 146 
 
 Fife Herald, The, 2.2.() 
 
 Findlay, Mr. J. R., 225; on Mr. 
 
 A. Russel, 285-296 
 Flood, Mr. Solly, 36, 37 
 Forbes, Mr. Archd., 146, 166 
 Forster, Mr. W. E., 371-373 
 Fowler, a "liner," 86 
 Fox, Mr. S. L., 38 
 Friswell, Mr. Hain, 145 
 Funerals in the Highlands, 304, 305 
 
 Gallery, Reporting, of the House 
 
 of Commons, 75-84, 191-208 
 Garibaldi, arrival in London, 133-135 
 Geary, brothers, " liners," 88, 89 
 Gladstone, Rt. Hon. W. E., 78, 106, 
 1 18-128, 140, 201-204, 244-246, 
 265, 271, 272, 370-398; Mid- 
 lothian Campaign, 383-393. In 
 
 1895. 393-398 
 Glover, Mr. F., 62 
 Goderich, Viscount, 35, 36 
 Goldsmid, Baron, 37, 38 
 Gomersal, "Little," 57, 58 
 Gordon, Hon. H. A., 38 
 Gorrie, Mr. J., 147-149 
 Goschen, Rt. Hon. G. J., 402 
 Gough, Mr., 44 
 Gourlay, Mr., 392 
 Granville, Lord, 376, 377, 380 
 Greaves, Mr., 18, 19 
 Grisi, 59 
 
 Hamilton, Sir E., 391 
 
 Harcourt, Sir W., 377-379. 415-417, 
 
 422 
 Harrison, Sir G., 402 
 Harrison, Mr., actor, 60-62 
 Hartington, Marquis of, 371-381, 
 
 385 
 Hedderwick, Mr. J., 287 
 Hennessy, Mr. Pope, 122 
 Hodgson, Mr. W. B., 279, 291 
 
 Hoe, Col., his printing machines, 
 
 214, 215 
 Holmes, Mr. T., 58 
 Home Rule, 399-412 
 Hope, Mr. Beresford, 79 
 Horsman, Mr., 125 
 Hotham, Lord, 33, 34 
 Hull, murder at, 16-20 ; elections, 
 
 35-37 
 Hutchinson, Mr. J. D., 204, 205 
 Hyde Park meetings, 129 
 
 Johnston, Sir W., 252, 254 
 Journalism, pros and cons, I, 2 ; 
 
 advances, 2, 3 ; of past years, 4-6 ; 
 
 provincial, 63-73 '■> some stories of, 
 
 338-341, 350-352 
 
 Kean (the younger), 53, 58 
 
 Kemble, Miss Fanny, 44 
 
 Kent, Duchess of, her funeral, 106, 
 
 133 
 Kingston, Mr. Beatty, 166 
 
 Langley, Mr. Baxter, 93-95, 130 
 Law, Mr. James, 176-190, 216-219, 
 
 225 
 Lawley, Hon. F., 38 
 Leclercq family, the, 53 
 Lewis, Mr. Cornewall, 116 
 Lincoln, murder trial at, 12-14 
 " Liners," 86-95 
 Littler, Mr., 25 
 Liverpool Daily Post, The, 73, 98, 
 
 393 
 
 Live7-pool Journal, The, T2.,']^ 
 
 Loch Leven, 353-355 
 
 Loch Maree, 361-365 
 
 Loch Tay, 365, 366 
 
 Lowe, Mr. Robert, 125 
 
 Lucas, Mr. Samuel, 96-98, 100-103, 
 
 I43> 144 
 
 Macaulay, at Edinburgh, 252, 253 
 Macdonald, Mr. John, 70, 71, 212- 
 
 216 
 Macready, 53, 58 
 Manager in Distress, The, 56-58 
 Manchester Examiner and Times, 
 
 The, 194, 195 
 Manchester Guardian, The, 195 
 Manning, Cardinal, 107, 108 
 Mannock, Mr., 93, 98, 100, lOl 
 Marjoribanks, Mr. E., 416-418 
 Matthews, Mr. C, 53
 
 INDEX 
 
 4=9 
 
 M'Carthj-, Mr. Justin, 96, 9S, loi- 
 
 103, 146-149 
 M'Culloch, Mr., 224 
 M'Diannid, Mr. J., 1 5 6- 1 60 
 M'Donald, Mr. J., 156 
 Mellon, INIr. A., 60-62 
 Midhurst, S. Warren member for, 26 
 Mirfield, murder at, 14-16 
 Mitchell, Sir A., 279 
 Mitchell, Mr. S., 324 
 M'Laren, Mr. Charles, 154-160, 224, 
 
 230, 231, 291 
 M'Laren, Mr. Duncan, 123, 14S, 247- 
 
 261, 275 
 Moncreiff, Lord, 257 
 Morley, Rt. Hon. John, 65, 98, 149 
 Morning Star, The, 75, 80- 1 49 
 Mull, Sound of, 299 
 Mundella, Rt. Hon. A. J., 401 
 Musical criticism, 59-62 
 
 Nepean, Sir Molyneux, 363, 364 
 Northcote, Sir Stafford, 375 
 Norton, Mr. Bruce, 55, 56 
 
 Palmerston, Lord, 78-80,84, 115, 
 
 116, 125 
 Paper duty, abolition of, 139-142 
 Pearson, Sir C, 424 
 Peel, Sir Robert, 117 
 Phelps, Mr., actor, 53, 58 
 Playfair, Lord, 78 
 Portree (Scotland), excursion to, 300- 
 
 30s 
 Press Association of 1865, 183-190, 
 
 200-208 
 Prince Consort, funeral of, 133 
 Pritchard, Mr. J. L., 54 
 Pyne and Harrison Company, the, 
 
 59-62 
 
 QuiRAiNG.The, excursion to, 302-306 
 
 Rawson, Mr., no, 149 
 
 Reform agitation, 125-133 
 
 Reform Club, the, 265 
 
 Reporting, 10-14, 21 
 
 Ritchie, Mr. J., 156, 230 
 
 Ritchie, Mr. W., 153-160 
 
 Robertson, Mr. J., 155, 156 
 
 Rosebery, Lord, 384-386 
 
 Russel, Mr. Alexander, of The Scots- 
 vtan, 147, 224-296; religion, 237- 
 242; ])olitics, 243-246; style, 267- 
 278; humour, 278-285; Mr. J. R. 
 Findlay on, 285-296 
 
 Russell, Lord Charles, 198 
 
 Russell, Sir E. R., 73, 98, 125, 
 
 147, 393 
 Russell, Lord John, 116, 117,240-244 
 Russell, Mr. W., 165 
 
 Sabbatarianism in Scotland, 311- 
 
 314 
 Sala, Mr. G. Augustus, 106-10S 
 "Salt Tom," 45-47 
 Scotland, excursions in, 297-314 ; 
 
 prejudices, 3I5-3I7 ; fishing, 353- 
 
 367 
 
 Scotsman, The,6'j-6g ; founded, 151- 
 162; management, 163-175; 
 special wires, i So -182; parlia- 
 mentary staff, 208 ; special trains, 
 209-213; machinery, 213-217 ; 
 "London Letter," 219, 220 ; book 
 reviewing, 221-223 ; on Free 
 Trade, 251 ; anonymous letters, 
 etc., 341-350 
 
 Scott, Sir Walter, 151 
 
 Scott, Miss Waverley, 58 
 
 Scudamore, Mr., 68, 189 
 
 Sellar, Mr. Craig, 378-380 
 
 Seymour, Mr. Digby, 15, 16, 24-2S 
 
 Shiel House, e.\cursion to, 306-309 
 
 Shorthand, lo, II 
 
 Skye, weather, etc., 300-306 
 
 Smibert, Mr. T., 287 
 
 Smith, Mr. W. H., 204, 205 
 
 Spellan, Mr., 220, 221 
 
 Stamp Act, abolition of, 72 
 
 Tait, Prof., 232, 233 
 
 Tantallon Castle, a cruise on board 
 
 the, 393-398 
 Telegraphic communication, 66-70, 
 
 176-190 
 Ten Minutes Bill, the, 125, 126 
 Ten Thousand a Year, Samuel 
 
 Warren, 22 
 Thackeray, 41-44 
 Thomas, Rev. Dr., of The Dial, 
 
 I10-113 
 Thompson, Mr. P., 24-27 
 Thompson, Mr. T., 45-47. 
 Titiens, 59 
 Tongue (Scotland), fishing round, 
 
 355-359 
 Tree, Miss Ellen, 53 
 Trevelyan, Sir G., 106, 405, 410 
 Turner, Mr. Godfrey, 106, 107
 
 430 
 
 AN EDITOR'S RETROSPECT 
 
 UiG (Scotland), excursion to, 300-306 
 
 Vandenhoff, 53 
 Vestris, Mme., 53 
 Villars, Miss, 58 
 
 Wallace, Rev. Dr., 225 
 
 Walpole, Mr., 130 
 
 Walter, Mr. J., of The Times, 204, 
 
 205, 216 
 Warren, Mr. Samuel, 22-27 
 Watson, Lord, 423 
 
 Weaver, Mr., 184-187 
 
 Whiteing, Mr. R., 146 
 
 Whitty, Mr. M. J., 72, 73, 141 
 
 Wilde, Sammy, 37 
 
 Wilks, Washington, 98-100 
 
 Wilson, Mr. E., 98 
 
 Wilson, Mr. J., 402 
 
 Wooden press days, 2, 3 
 
 Woods, Mr. Nicholas, 106, 107, 166 
 
 Yates, Mr. E., 68, 144, 145, 219 
 Young, Lord, 423-425 
 
 THE END 
 
 Printed by R. & R. Clark, Limited, Edinburgh.
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S STANDARD WORKS. 
 
 LIFE OF NAPOLEON BONAPARTE. 
 
 B)' William Milligan Sloane, Ph.D., L.H.D., Professor of 
 
 History in Princeton University. 
 
 Illustrated with 88 Reproductions of the Masterpieces of Painting, in their 
 
 Original Colours, and 220 Full-page Engravings in Tint and Black and White. 
 
 In Twenty Parts at 4s. net each ; or in Four Volumes at 24s. net each. 
 
 {Supplied only in Sets. ) 
 
 Times. — "The most magnificent of modern lives of Napoleon. . . . The serious and 
 careful work of a very competent historian." 
 
 Atluno'itiii. — " Its conspicuous fairness is most attractive, and it strikes us as being 
 thoroughly well-informed." 
 
 MEMORIALS (Part I.) FAMILY AND PERSONAL. 1766-1865. 
 RouNDELL Palmer, Farl of Selborne. With Portraits and Illustrations. 
 Two vols. Demy Svo. 25s. net. 
 
 LIFE AND LETTERS OF FENTON JOHN ANTHONY HORT, 
 D.D., D.C.L., LL.D. By his Son, Arthur Fenton Hort, late Fellow 
 of Trinity College, Cambridge. Extra crown Svo. With Portraits. 
 17s. net. 
 
 THE LIFE OF CARDINAL MANNING, ARCHBISHOP OF 
 WESTMINSTER. By Edmund Sheridan Purcell. With Portraits. 
 Fourth Thousand. In two vols. Svo. 30s. net. 
 
 THE LETTERS OF MATTHEW ARNOLD, 1848-1888. Col- 
 lected and arranged by George W. E. Russell. Two vols. Crown 
 Svo. 15s. net. 
 
 ALFRED THE GREAT. By Thomas Hughes. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 
 FRANCIS BACON. AN ACCOUNT OF HIS LIFE AND 
 WORKS. By Edwin A. Abeott, D.D., Author of " Bacon and Essex," 
 and Editor of Bacon's Essays. Svo. 14s. 
 
 LIFE OF WILLIAM BLAKE. "PICTOR IGNOTUS." With 
 selections from his poems and other writings by the late Alexander 
 Gilchrist, of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law ; Author of "The 
 Life of William Etty, R.A." Illustrated from Blake's own works, in 
 facsimile by W. J. Linton, and in photo-lithography ; with a few of 
 Blake's original plates. In two vols. Second Edition. Medium Svo. 42s. 
 
 ANNE BOLEYN: A CHAPTER OF ENGLISH HISTORY. 
 1527-1536. By Paul Friedmann. In two vols. Svo. 2S?. 
 
 THE LIFE AND LETTERS OF DEAN CHURCH. Edited by 
 his Daughter, Mary C. Church. With a Preface by the Dean of Christ 
 Church. A New and Cheaper Edition. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 THE LIFE AND LETTERS OF MARCUS TULLIUS CICERO. 
 Being a New Translation of the letters included in Mr. Watson's Selection, 
 with historical and critical notes by the Rev. G. E. Jeans, M.A. Second 
 Edition. Crown Svo. IDs. 6d. 
 
 SAMUEL TAYLOR COLERIDGE: A NARRATIVE OF THE 
 EVENTS OF HIS LIFE. By James Dykes Camtkell. With Por- 
 trait. With a Memoir of the Author by Leslie Stephen. Demy Svo. 
 los. 6d. 
 
 LETTERS OF CHARLES DICKENS. Edited by his Sister-in- 
 Law and his eldest Daughter. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 A MEMOIR OF RALPH WALDO EMERSON. By James 
 Elliot Cahot. In two vols. Crown Svo. iSs. 
 
 LETTERS AND LITERARY REMAINS OF EDWARD FITZ- 
 GERALD. Edited by W^iLLiAM Aldis Wright. In three vols. 
 Crown Svo. 31s. 6d. 
 
 REMINISCENCES OF THE GREAT MUTINY. By W. 
 Forhes Mitchell. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 FRANCIS OF ASSISI. P>y Mrs. Oi.iphant. Crown Svo. 6s. 
 
 JAMES FRASER, SECOND BISHOP OF MANCHESTER. A 
 Memoir. By T. Hughes, Q.C. Crown Svo. 6s. 
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd., LONDON.
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S STANDARD WORKS. 
 
 LIFE AND LETTERS OF E. A. FREEMAN. By W. R. W. 
 
 Stephens. Two vols. 8vo. 17s. net. 
 MALTHUS AND HIS WORK. By James Bonar, M.A., Balliol 
 
 College, Oxford. 8vo. 12s. 6d. 
 LETTERS AND MEMORIES OF THE LIFE OF CHARLES 
 
 KINGSLEY. Edited by his Wife. Two vols. Crown 8vo. 12s. Cheap 
 
 Edition. One vol. 6s. 
 BISHOP LIGHTFOOT. Reprinted from the Quarterly Review. 
 
 With a Prefatory Note by the Bishop of Durham. With Portrait. 
 
 Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
 THE NEW CALENDAR OF GREAT MEN. Biographies of the 588 
 
 Worthies of all Ages and Countries in the Positivist Calendar of Auguste 
 
 Comte. Edited by Frederic Harrison. Extra crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. net. 
 LIFE OF FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE. By his Son F. 
 
 Maurice. Two vols. 8vo. 36s. Popular Edition. Two vols. Crown 
 
 8vo. i6s. 
 A LIFE OF PROFESSOR CLERK MAXWELL. By Prof L. 
 
 Campbell, M.A., and W. Garnett, M.A. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 THE LIFE OF JOHN MILTON. By Prof David Masson. 
 
 Vol. L, 2IS.; Vol. II., i6s.; Vol. III., l8s.; Vols. IV. and V., 32s.; 
 
 Vol. VI., with portrait, 2is. ; Index to six vols., i6s. 
 HISTORY OF NAPOLEON I. By P. Lanfrey. Four vols. 
 
 Crown 8vo. 30s. 
 RECOLLECTIONS OF A HAPPY LIFE. Being the Auto- 
 biography of Marianne North. Edited by Mrs, J. A. Symonds. 
 
 Second Edition. Two vols. Extra crown 8vo. 17s. net. 
 THE LIFE OF SIR HARRY PARKES, K.C.B., G.C.M.G., some- 
 time Her Majesty's Minister in China and Japan. In two vols. Vol. I., 
 
 Consul in China. By Stanley Lane-Poole, Author of "The Life of 
 
 Viscount Stratford de RedcHffe." With a Portrait and Maps. Vol. II., 
 
 Minister Plenipotentiary to Japan, by F. V. Dickins, and Minister 
 
 Plenipotentiary to China, by S. Lane-Poole. 8vo. 255. net. 
 LIFE OF JOHN COLERIDGE PATTESON, Missionary Bishop 
 
 of the Melanesian Islands. By Charlotte Mary Yonge. In two 
 
 vols. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 12s. 
 LIFE OF SIR A. C. RAMSAY. By Sir A. Geikie, F.R.S. 8vo. 
 
 I2S. 6d. net. 
 ERNEST RENAN : In Memoriam. By the Right Hon. MOUNT- 
 
 STUART E. Grant-Duff, G.C.S.I., F.R.S. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 CHAPTERS FROM SOME MEMOIRS. By Anne Ritchie. 
 
 8vo. I OS. 6d. 
 THE LIFE AND TIMES OF ST. BERNARD, Abbot of Clair- 
 
 vaux. By J. C. Morison, M.A. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 LIFE OF ADAM SMITH. By John Rae, Author of "Eight 
 
 Hours for Work." 8vo. 1 2s. 6d. net. 
 SPINOZA : A Study by Dr. J. Martineau. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 LIFE OF ARCHIBALD CAMPBELL TAIT, ARCHBISHOP 
 
 OF CANTERBURY. By Randall Thomas, Bishop of Rochester, 
 
 and William Benham, B.D., Hon. Canon of Canterbury. With portraits. 
 
 Third Edition. Two vols. Crown 8vo. los. net. 
 CATHARINE AND CRAUFURD TAIT, Wife and Son of 
 
 Archibald Campbell, Archbishop of Canterbury : A Memoir. Edited by 
 
 Rev. W. Benham, I3.D. Crown 8vo. 6s. Popular Edition, Abridged. 
 
 Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 A RECORD OF ELLEN WATSON. Arranged and Edited by 
 
 Anna Buckland. W^ith a Portrait. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd., LONDON.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 fiECfliis hook-is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 -' 3 1 1975 
 
 Form L9-Series 444 
 
 UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA 
 
 AT 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I'! 
 i! 
 
 llillinnill!Mnf^Mi,;^n'''°'-''''^'BRARy FACILITY 
 
 AA 000 407 054 
 
 'if 
 
 I 
 
 ir 
 
 II 
 
 ii 
 |i 
 
 
 i
 
 ilillHIIII !l!!i 
 
 iitUillliltlllliiniiliiiiiillliillliiJiilllhillilllimiiiiil