The Dominion. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1009. THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE PRESS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 681, 4 December 1909, Page 4

The Dominion. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1009. THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE PRESS.

Sosic days ago wo gave, in ouV "Notes of tho Day,", the substance, of a very .protty quarrel between the Westminster Gazette and M.t, Geoege Edwardes, the wall-known theatrical manager, who withdrew hia advortibements from the Gazette in order to emphasise his disgust at such an "anomaly" as ■ "advertising in one column and being attacked in another." The English newspapers to hand this week show that the quarrel promptly became a topic of the day; nearly every newspaper of high standing in England or tho provinces joined the Gazette in its fight, for the .great principle involved in the dispute with Mr. Edwardes. In New York the theatrical combine is so strong that it lately forced such a great newspaper as the Tribune to secure tho removal from its j staff of one of tho most eminent dramatic critics living, but tho united protest of tho British press has crushed any prospect of a similar achievement by theatrical commercialism in Britain. Although multitudes of correspondents supported the Gazette and its contemporaries in the stand which was made for tho liberty of Press criticism, the public was, as a whole, very probably unawaro of the importance of tho general principle of which this was a particular case, and unaware of what it would suffer if newspaper opinions upon public institutions of any kind could bo wholly determined by the financial power of those at tho head of such institutions. The opinions of the British Press in the case under notice are all alike in tenor, but many separate points were made, and these are worth noticing in some little detail.

\Mr. G. B. Shaw took a Very practical view of the situation.I'-.1'-. Mr.-Edwardes. he contended; was quite within his ; rights in. seeking, to put pressure upon theGazette.:: . But .that ::; ; Mr. .Edwardes's: "rights" are- not the deciding factor, arc anti-social, and of infinitely little '■, im- ; portanco compared, with what really is the deciding interest, is made very plain by 'Mr. Shaw, whe, after, discussing the possibility that the ■ theatrical manager might, buy; what we may call the critical rights of a newspaper, points out that in that case the manager "would have to consider very carefully whether •; it does not pay him, better- to! havehis feclingß hurt by an honest, readable; critic than to be flattered by a worthless and unreadable one." ; Mb', WiLliam; Archer, the famous critic of Thc'Nation, consid-. ored■■: that the incident-:; illustrated the fact that' "some managers are so habituated to'servile puffery' that they regard honest criticism as a Bort'of lhe-majesl6" —a comment the forco of which will not bo lost oh a community which is : told almost every day that adverse criticism of the public finances is "disloyal" : and that the hostile critics are "traitors to the country." v The! Saturday Review, which in almost everything is poles apart from the Qdzctie, hinted pretty plainly that tho : boycott -of a. nowspaper: is equivalent to blackmail, and The Times, which is equally opposed to the Gazette, roundly declarod in its brilliant and vivacious article that Mr. Edwardes's action implied "that he regards advertisement charges, as so much hush money." "Like tho gentleman with the dancitigbcar in 'She" Stoops to Conqtier. u .: TJie Times continues, "he desires everything to' be 'in a "concatenation • according.' 1 . : .■-'■:'.

It would bo moro seemly, no doubt, more symmetrical and congruous, if the people who buy newspapers would be content to confine thdr reading to Ma. Ed- *» — L I. • ~ M" .

wardes's advertisements and then go and throng his various theatres. But people, in their folly, will not be content to live this simple life. Of course," The Times sarcastically adds, "these poor pandors of the Prebs brazen it out with fine words, They even go so far as to talk of their 'duty' to their readers, of 'liberty of the Press,' 'independent criticism,''arid other pretentious abstractions. ' '-"What weight, it may well be,asked, have such paltry considerations against the immunity of Daly's from 'attack', against the liberation of the' Gaiety from 'menace' 1"

One of.the most satisfactory results.of the agitation was a series of resolutions! adopted by'the London Committee of tho Instituto i of Journalists, ' condemning Mr. Edwahjies's offensive assumption, and approving the action of The Timet and other newspapers in supporting the Gazette. It was left to the Athenaeum to discover the most serious practical lesson of the'. incident, namely, the-sig-nificance of "Mr. Edwardes's apparent expectation that the presence of his advertisements in a paper would lead to his protection from criticism of which he does riot approve. The obvious deduction is ;that some present-day critics and' newspapers are not unwilling to arrange 'good notices'.in return for'good money in: the shapo of advertisements." ■;,.■ Tho conclusion of tho Daily News, also, is too important to be neglected:,," Any unfavourable remark may be construed as an 'attack'; if: anything which was .regarded as an r '.'attack' were:.to. be penalascd by;'the withdrawal of advertising, the position' would bo that no honest criticism, other, than a goneral panegyric, could be printed with impunity." It is subject for. rejoicing that so many representative, .British .newspapers lof high standiug—those mentioned arc: only a selection—shbiild be agreed upon tho urgency of preserving against improper pressure the freedom of the Press' to; guard the public in the world of art and literature. ~.':

, Anyone can see that good guardianship through-honest criticism is of' high ; im-. portance, in these •' spheres. ■: of life'; and ■ thought.' How much more important is it, therefore, that the evil .'influences to be fought against in these relations should bo fought against and destroyed in the of- politics and' -government?- Every one of the articles from which we have ma'de' our frugal ; quota-, tiqns would,: with the proper verbal trans'-; positions— mutatis mutandis, as the goes—be an uncannily up-to-date; discussion of a .current i topic in this country. 'If it is important that the suppliers of the drama in 'Britain shall' bo* dcriied the.'right of:.buying Press,criticism, by : penalising:'" free criticism,, it is infinitely more 1 important that the enemieß ; of honesty and freedom ; in political criticism I :■should;bp treated Mis the enemies of,-the,public' good. ~ > ; ! ..'<{