The Temuka Leader. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 21, 1878.

Temuka Leader, Volume I, Issue 71, 21 August 1878, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 21, 1878.

The history of the public Press in Britain and her colonies is an exceedingly interesting and instructive history. It is a history of small beginnings, and of great and majestic expansions, It is a history of repeated attempts to check and put it down, and of persistent and heroic efforts to establish and extend it. It is a history of initial weakness, obscurity, and meanness, and in spite of all opposition—as the present epoch in the history of civilisation shows —of advancing splendour, magnificence, and power. Everybody, at least as far as Britain is concerned, knows the great outstanding points in the chronicles of the newspaper Press ; the story, for instance, of John Wilkes and the North Briton ” ; the records of the Senate of Lilliput ; the committal to prison of the six Printers ; the frequent displays of popular sympathy or indignation, as the case may be. The question has often been asked, What is the influence of the Press ? Is it good or is it evil ? Is it for the public weal or public injury ? Which would be the better for all the interests concerned, Press or No Press ? Nor are there wanting persons of great eminence and judgment who take diametrically opposite and conflicting views on this subject. We recall a sentence or two on opposing sides of this controversy :

Dr Draper, author of Intellectual D vehrpmerit of Europe , says : The newspaper editorials, teaching us to expect the pith of a matter condensed into a few sentences, ministers in no small degree to that superficiality which is the bane of our times. Dr Bartol fs of opinion that : The newspaper may be, and often is, a despot woi’se than any king. Its personalities |are an invasion of private rights ; it never handsomely retracts an error once printed ; and it is as corrupt as was the .Romish Church 300 years ago. Its conductors hold themselves forth as representing the public, and will not accept the accountability that properly belongs to each individually. So, whenever a newspaper grows strong it grows bad. Gifford, in the early part of this century, declared that the license shown at that period “ would lead ro the downfall of British liberty and Lord Mansfield, about the same time, declared that : A little sooner or later these newspapers will most assuredly write the Dukes of Northumberland out of their titles and possessions, and the country out of its king.

Take on the other hand a sentence or two commendatory of the Press. Buckle, the famous author of the History of Civilisation , says : Newspapers, by encouraging political discussion, increase the amount of intellect brought to bear upon the political business of the counfoy. They also increase the total strength of the nation by causing large masses of men to exercise faculties which would otherwise lie dormant, but which, by these means, are quickened into activity, and become available for other purposes of social interest. Carlyle, in his Sartor Eesartus, says :

The journalists are now the true kings and clergy. Henceforth, historians, unless they are fools, must write, not of Bourbon dynasties and Tudors and Hapsburgs, hut of Stamped Broad-sheet dynasties, and quite new successive names, according as this or the other able editor, or combination of the world’s editors, gains the world’s ear. Lecky, the author of The History of European Morals , says of newspapers :

From their immense circulation, their incontestable ability, and. the power they possess^of continually reiterating their

distinctive doctrines ; from toe impatience, too, of lon# and elaborate writing which newspapers generate' in the public ; it lias come to pass that these periodicals exercise probably a great r influence than any other productions of the day in forming the ways of thinking of ordinary educated Englishman. Emerson, with his usual sagacity, remarks :

Nobody who has been without these private tutors (the newspapers) can know their educating powers for good or evil. Have you ever thought of the innumerable topics of discussion which they suggest at the breakfast tab’c ; tae important puhbe measures with which thus early our children become acquainted ; the great philanthropic questions of the day to wdiich their attention is unconscious'y awakened ; and the general spirit of intelligence wdiich is evoked by these quiet visits ?

Mr Gladstone puts the matter thus :

The Newspaper Press is interwoven with the wdiolo tissue of modern life. It has been an organ of good immensely preponderating over the mischief. Mr Hallam, to end our quotations with this great writer, says : For almost all that keeps up in us permanently and effectually the spirit of regard to liberty and tlie public good, we must look to the unshackled and independent energies of the Press. For ourselves, it is not under the head cither of indiscriminate laudation or of wholesale condemnation we should like to be placed. The well-known lines of Cowper will be readily recalled :

How shall I speak thee or thy power address, Thou god of our idolatry, the Press ?

By thee religion, liberty, and laws

Exert their influence and advance their cause. By thee worse plagues than Pharaoh’s

land befel, Diffused, make earth the vestibule of Hell, Thou fountain, at which drink the good

and wise ! Thou ever-bubbling spring of endless lies ! Like Eden’s dread, probationary tree—

Knowledge of good aud evil is from thee ! The creed of Cowpeu is the conviction of ourselves. The influence of the Press may be for good or evil, may be benign or baneful, may be fraught with blessings or be the vehicle of unspeakable calamity, just according as its power is wielded, and according as the genius which provides over it is, for the time, allied with the powers of light, liberty, and truth ; or in cordial sympathy with those of darkness, bondage, and falsehood.

When is the public Press to be deemed a calamity, and when is its influence to be deeply deplored ? We ansq^r —When, for the sake of mere party purposes, it upholds an incapable and tyrranous government, saying “ Amen” to all its ignorant and despotic acts, —when, without any justification in the history, politics, or social condition of a people, it disseminates the seeds of anarchy, fosters the spirit of rebellion, and arouses general discontent. —When it opens its columns to chronicle the obscene and immoral, and helps to give currency to the impious and profane.—When, to gratify some personal pique, or to please an important supporter, it makes persons the object of attack, heaping on their unfortunate heads persistent and virulent abuse. Nor less, when it either directly assails religion, or gives currency only to that which is calculated to misrepresent it, cud to engender scepticism and doubt.

When, on the other hand, is the influence of the Press good, and its power to be jealously upheld and guarded? When, we answer, putting aside all party cries—Whig or Tory, Conservative or Liberal, —Democracy, Aristocracy, or Oligarcy—it forms a solid judgment of Avhat is just, philanthropic, national, and, like the old Roman warrior, Pabricius, is as true as the sun to the path of honor. When, deeply read in the principles both of constitutional history and political economy and social science, its counsels to the Government and nation are in harmonious accordance with stability, liberty, and progress. When, instinct with the feelings of true manliness, it defends the weak, vindicates the innocent, takes the part of the maligned, watches over the administration of the law, and endeavours to keep the fountains of justice pure and unde Sled. When,, noting carefully the progress of invention and discovery, it duly chronicles those events and phenomena which expand the mind, stimulate the genius, and, by lightening labour, increasing the productiveness of the soil, and developing commerce, tend to the greater social and. physical well-being’ of mankind ; and when, finally, cherishing the conviction that religion in some form, but, par excellence the religion of Christ, is essential (to say nothing of the concerns of an after life) to the temporal welfare of mankind, it sternly rebukes vice, exposes error, and holds out its cordial hand of help to rectitude, purity, and every form of social virtue.

With regard to the Press of New Zealand we cannot say that, on the whole, it is inferior in moral tone, high purpose, or intellectual ability to that of any other portion of the British Colonies. It is trim, indeed, that the Press of this country includes journals void of all moral principle, political creed, or earnest puypose of any kind—journals that to-day assail and vilify whom yesterday they upheld and flattered —journals that to-day will preach manhood suffrage, or, at least, “ residential qualifications,” and to-morrow will denounce the electoral privileges of

the undowcrod and unpropertied—-jour-nals that this' week are “free trade/’ and the next “ protectionist ” —journals that to-day will write up anything that suits, and the next day, as personal interest or the nod of patronage dictates, maintain the opposite. Were it not that the task would prove so invidious, we fancy we could illustrate our remarks by the case of journals whose scene of publication is not so far distant.

We arc aware it docs not do to boast. Performance is better than promise. It is witii the subscriber to a newspaper as with the physical philosopher—experiment is better than prophecy—actual result is more convincing' than any amount of speculative forecast. We may say, however, for ourselves that we hope —whatever .may be our temptations to the contrary—that we shall ever he found the 'warm friends of Truth, Justice, and Advancement, while the stern and uncompromising foes of Falsehood, Chicanery, and Inanition, both social and political, whether at homo or abroad. This being our programme we hope to live, and with someW'asure of efficiency, to play ou part in the interesting field of New Zealand journal ism.