THE RESIGNATION OF MR BUCKLE.

Press, Volume XLVIII, Issue 14472, 28 September 1912, Page 9

THE RESIGNATION OF MR BUCKLE.

The resignation of Mr G. E. Buckle, the editor" of "The Times" (writes Sir W. R. Nicoll in the "British Weekly"), is received with-regret, but not with surprise. Tho wonder is that Mr Buckle should have held on for more than twenty-eight years through si*i. heavy seas. When he became editor of "The Times" it had lost little of its prestige under Delano. Chenery ("the Arabian," as Edmund Yates wickedly called him) was too sensitive and irresolute v to make a first-rate editor, but he had a very able staff. Mr Buckle, though in no way responsible, had to bear the brunt of the Parnell business, which cost "The Times" \ a quarter of a million in money and much in other ways. Goldwin Smith always maintained that "The Times" - never got proper justice from the Unionists for its great sacrifices. Of other difficulties I need not speak. Mr Buckle stuck to his work through all vicissitudes, and steadfastly upheld the standard of his paper. flis father, Prebendary Buckle, was a great and enlightened journalist, though unknown to the general public. He was a leading contributor to the "Guardian," along with Dean Church, in its palmiest days. It was he who contributed to the chief Church paper that enlightened and prophetic review, of Darwin's "Origin of Species," which contrasted so happily with the average criticism of tho time. From him, no doubt, Mr Buckle learned that width of sympathy, that calm'reasonableness, that aversion from unfair criticism which so markedly distinguish him. He leaves "The Times" a still better paper than he found it—the best daily paper in tho world. Journalists know best how good "Tho Times" is, and it is they who most appreciate it. Who is the oldest journalist? If I am not mistaken, Mr Buckle has occupied one editorial chair longer than any

other journalist in London. He has teen all the niorrrinu dailies change editors —often more than onee —unless wo except tho "Telegraph." Ho has seen all the evening dailies change and change again. All tho illustrated papers, all the weekly reviews, all tho monthly magazines and reviews have new editors. Who succeeds him m this capacity? Nobody is astonished at a doctor'or a clergyman or a business man who keeps one place for thirty years. No editor in London has done it, so far as I know, unless it bo Lord Burnlnyn. Such is journalism I.