THE "SATURDAY."

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 57, 8 March 1930, Page 2 (Supplement)

THE "SATURDAY."

DIRECTORS AND POLICY. FAMOUS WEEKLY>S HISTORY. MANY CELEBRATED CONTRIBUTORS (By CYRANO.) New volumes came across the sea From Mister Mudie's library, The "Times" and "Saturday Review" Beguiled the leisure of the crew. When Gilbert wrote this verse in the immortal story of Captain Reece of Her Majesty's ship Mantelpiece—the germ of "Pinafore" —no doubt he was glad that "Review" rhymed with "crew," but the choice of the "Saturday Review" to go with the "Times" to indicate the solicitude of the captain for the welfare of his men, was perfect. None other would have been so humorous. Eor the "Times" then was the voice of England to the foreigner, and its prestige at Home was immense, and the "Saturday" represented an independent and formidable intellectualism that filled some hearts with awe and others with terror. It was the weekly organ of a large section of the educated classes, and of all the weeklies it was the most feared. Education on the lower deck has been greatly developed since Gilbert wrote the "Bab Ballads," but with all due respect to the bluejacket of to-day, I take leave to doubt whether he reads the "Saturday." The idea of such intellectual provision in the 'sixties and 'seventies must have been delicious.

Wholesale Resignation. I recall this because the "Saturday Review" has suddenly had the limelight turned upon it in an unpleasant way. Last week it was announced that, without consulting the editor, who, indeed had strongly opposed the policy, the directors had given their support to Lord Beaverbrook's Empire Free Trade movement, and the editor, his staff and his contributors had promptly resigned. In any circumstances this would be an interesting piece of news, but it happens that the "Saturday," under the control of Mr. Barry, has regained a good deal of the position it occupied many years ago in English journalism. It is brilliantly edited and written. There is distinction in every page of it. It is Conservative in politics, but not uncritically. Indeed, it often plays the part of the candid friend to its own party. It may be said to represent the progressive and younger wing of the Conservative party, a section that can command much talent and enthusiasm, but has not been given the place in the party councils that is its due. Its list of contributors is impressive, and it is noteworthy that they are, for the most part, like the editor, young men. There is Mr. J. B. Priestley, one of the most amusing essayists of the day, author of that very successful novel in the Dickens manner, "The Good Companions," and a delightful wrfter on English humour. There are Mr. Gerald Gould and Mr. Edward Shanks, both of them poets and critics of distinction. There is, for dramatic critic, Mr. Ivor Brown, the most brilliant of the younger school, a "Manchester Guardian" product, who follows that famous paper's tradition of combining learning with wit. I should say that some of Mr. Brown s notices are a good deal more amusing than the plays themselves.

The Early " Saturday." The "Saturday," however, was not always exactly like this. In its early days it was the best written weekly m England, but its iciness was terrible. Founded in 1855, it at once made a position for itself by its unequalled intellectual force and daring, and in self-defence the other weeklies had to improve themselves Thus it raised the whole standard* in ideas and style, of weekly journalism. Its founder was one Beresford Hone, brother-in-law of that Robert Cecil who became Lord Salisbury, and Prime Minister of Britain. Hope was a Hiffh Anglican of artistic tastes, and though he and his paper were Conservative, he attacked Disraeli Once he wrote of himself as having "jeopardised his political career by refusing to fall down and worship the golden image set up in th T deserts of Arabia," a remark typical of the "Saturday's" style. Robert Cecil then a relatively poor man, wrote articles for the "Saturday," and he and his colleagues on the "Saturday were a band of young men without equal for brains in the history of any periodical Look at this list: William Vernon Harcourt, afterwards Chancellor 01 the Exchequer; Charles Bowen, afterwards a iucl°e, famous for his learning and Wit- E A. Freeman and J. R. Green, famous historians; James Eitzjames Stephen, jurist, and his brother Leslie, eminent as a critic; Stopford Brooke, theologian and critic; Henry Maine, another great jurist, Goldwin Smith, historian and publicist. "The iren who wrote for the 'Saturday, ' says Mr. Herbert Paul in his "History of Modern England," "were masters of English; they never used 'journalese, and they thoroughly understood the subjects with which they dealt. They were a band of purely intellectual critics, fearless, disinterested, learned and acute. The foundation of such a paper was an event of real importance in the history of England." Its chief

weakness was the aridity of its intellectualism. Enthusiasm it abhorred. "With the generation of the Reform Bill everything had been new, everything true, and. everything had been of the highest importance," wrote one of its contributors. "With us, nothing was new, nothing was true,* and nothing was of any importance." The Later Journal. In time the "Saturday" declined from its position beside the "Times" and became one of several journals. When I first read it, it was as a boy with a passion for the theatre, and I used to go down to the public library at odd times to see what one George Bernard Shaw, then just beginning to be really famous, had to. say every week about new plays. Shaw was succeeded by the brilliant but fatigued Max Beerbolm, who began his regime as a dramatic critic by saying that he was not greatly interested in the theatre! Did it never strike the editor that a man without enthusiasm could not be a really good critic? Perhaps the editor was Frank Harris. At any rate, Harris was in charge somewhere about that time, and it was during his reign that a very curious thing happened in the political department. The "Saturday" published an article in which the deliberate destruction of the German fleet—the first suspicion that Germany might be an enemy was then coming to the English mind —was suggested. The article was noted in Germany, and right up to the war was used as evidence of English hostility and bad faith. Yet during the war, Harris, who was then in America, was a bitter critic of English pre-war diplomacy on the ground that it was largely responsible for the war.

Intellect and Humour. Mr. Barry and his associates made the "Saturday" a real power in the land, but their foundations were different from those of the old "Saturday." There was plenty of enthusiasm in the journal. Moreover, it skilfully combined intellectualism with humour and broad sympathies. The engagement of Mr. Priestley, who is in the tradition of English good humour, was significant. The Liberal "Nation," though less priggish than it was under Massingham, still has an irritating touch of intellectual and moral superiority; there is about it a faint suggestion of weariness in a sad and bad world. Like Mr. Wodehouse's tea shop attendants, it seems to be thinking of the corpse upstairs. The "Saturday" is more hearty, more robustly English. And now the staff have gone, bag and baggage. They are not the first to be bundled out through change of conviction in owners. Nearly forty years ago the famous "Pall Mall Gazette," with a long and splendid record of campaigning for Liberalism behind it, was bought by an American millionaire for use in the Conservative cause. The staff walked out in a body, and the "Pall Mall" was never the same afterwards. The owners of the "Saturday" will be lucky if they are able to replace their staff with one equally good. That is putting it mildly. What Mr. Baldwin, who needs all the intelligent assistance in the Press he can get, thinks of this development, may be imagined. I can picture him throwing up his hands in something like despair.