THE "THUNDERER" DESCENDS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXIII, Issue 70, 23 March 1907, Page 4

THE "THUNDERER" DESCENDS.

The Times holds a position unique in British journalism, and is regarded with a cortain amount of pride, even by mose adverse to its politics, as a national institution. One thus hostile, the late John Bright, in 1864 described it as "a power in this country and a power in Europe." Thirty years earlier, the Duke of Wellington's administration opened negotiations with Thomas Barnes, the editor, the result being that tho silpport of the naper was secured on certain written conditions — the first being "No mutilation of the Reform Bill." In fact, the condition of support was the dictation of tho Ministerial policy, and the Duke, in reluctantly acquiescing, remarked to Greville, "Why, Barnes is the most pov;erful man in the country." [t >vas while the paper was under the same editorial control that Bulwcr said "If I desired to leave to remote posterity some memorial of existing British civilisation, I would prefer, not our docks, not our railways, not our public buildings, pot even the palace in which we hold our sittings — I would prefer a file oi The Times." A tablet in the Stock Exchange and two Walter Scholarships — for the proprietor was too independent to accept the funds subscribed in reimbursement of legal expenses — still commemorate ihe signal service rendered by the 'paper in 1840, whon it exposed a swindling conspiracy which was on tho point of defrauding London bankers of a million sterling. Ib has been hoaxed at times, bub nob often; and it has never been suspected of having wilfully deceived the public. In its obituary of its greatest editor, Delane, it wrote of his "continual experience of mistakes and disappointments — for," it added, "the nightly birth of tho broadsheet is nob without its agonies and mishaps." A remarkable circumstance connected with the paper is that, it 3 institution in 1785, it has been in the possession of tho Walter family, its management being governed by the wills of successive proprietors. The Times, published at threepence, is the most expensive daily paper in England ; it is printed on the Ibcst quality of paper, and more carefully produced than any other. Its historic reputation is its great asset, and is worth maintaining. Recently, however, the proprietors have taken alarm at certain remarkable innovations in its management, and failing to restrain the policy of the controlling partner, sought relief in the courts, applying that the concern shonld bo constituted a regular joint-stock company. That change, it is now reported, has been made. In 1889, when the Parnell litigation brought the private details of tho business before the public, tho late Mr. Walter stated that though ho was tho registered proprietor, his share amounted to a fraction less than one-tenth of the whole ; there were more than a hundred proprietors, some quite unknown to him, some were miners, and in some cases the share was in finitosinal. The profits at that time wore- very great. The paper has always sought tho best contributors and dealt liberally with them Barnes discovered Captain Steiling and John Thaddeus Dolanc, who •succeeded him. Ho astonished Mooro by paying (with an apology) £100 for a political squib in vorso, and gave him £200 a year as a retaining fee — leaving the consideration entirely to tho poeto discretion. A atrong point of the paper — as of tho best British journalism — has always been its impersonality. The Morning Herald, an oldor rival, made it its policy to securo the services of distinguished casual contributors to Tho Times by offering higher remuneration ; but discovered that their articles—effective in the greater journal-— passed almost unnoticed in tho Horald. Tho chango in The Times' policy of late years has been a remarkable* invasion of speculative fields outside of tho ordinary limits of journalism. Its old opponont, Truth, asserts that the p.-ipcr has boon losing money, and that these opeculations were designed to supplement its finances. Its first notable plungo was into book-agency. Lending its namo and unrivallod advertising facilities to an American syndicate which kept discreetly out of sight, it v placed on tho market an incrodiblo numbor of copies of tho costly Encyclopedia Britannia, and netted an onormous profit; following up tho experiment by a largo literary anthology and tho back volumes of Punch. Tho next step was tho institution of a book-club, which offered such advantages to subscribers as to excito much speculation as to how it could bo successfully financed, and this, apparently, is 'what haG excited ihc alarm of tho shuroholdei'B. It has, moreover, had the oft'ect of bringing .Tho Times into direct conflict with several important sections of tho community — with tho loading London publishing houses, with the lending libraries, such as Mudio's, and, last of nil, with tho authors who hold valuable copyrights and find tho sale of their volumes fulling off in a few weeks through Tho Timos flooding the markot with .copies &t wcoad-haud jjrices, .with thp furtheV

disastrous effect that tho writer finds the cheaper edition— -often the most profitable — forestalled. Whatever financial gain the paper has mado must have been counterbalanced by loss of prestige. It is impossible to maintain the old dignified and judicial lono when the paper is financially interested in the issue of' the -controversy. It criticises rings and ' monopolies, and livals appositsly apply its own phrases to its own speculations. It denounces public bodies for departing' from' their regular business to enter into illegitimate competition with private traders, and again the mirror is held up before its face. It repeats the old charge of disappointed authors about the rapacity ■of publishers, and its figures are refuted and its arguments riddled. It puts the fine books in limited editions, produced by tha best publishers, on the same level as the cheaply produced trash of the "popular" concerns, and the obvious retort is made — Why, then, docs The Times itself charge as much foT one copy as the Daily Mail does for six? Mr. John Murray, in the Contemporary Review, has shown that The Times' estimates allow nothing for establishment expenses, for advertising — and after the encyclopedia experiment the paper should have some notion of the magnitude of that item — for corrections, nor for unsold copies, an uncertain but sometimes very serious item. "The estimates of production set forth by Tho Times,"' says Mr. Murray, "are incomplete and inaccurate in every detail ; but even assuming them to be correct, their whole justification rests on such cheapness as sweated labour and inferior materials alone can produce." It is idle for Tho Times to argue that any philanthropic motive enters into its latest speculation, the outcome of which the most skilful financier could not certainly foresee. IvTow that the general body of tho ehaTeholders have secured a voice in tho management a change in policy seems imminent — probably a rever?ion to the traditional methods. Tho readers of the paper will rejoice, for they are tired of the embittered controversy which for weeks has occupied tlie advertising, correspondence, and even the leading columns of the great journal. The sooner it "sinks the shop' 1 and retires with the best grace it can to its old Olympian heights, the better it will be for the public in general, authors, and publishers — and, best of all, for The Times itself