I cannot say how it may have been in other large cities and towns, but
certainly the newspaper mortality in Birmingham during the past half
century has been quite distressing. I think that without difficulty I
could reckon up from twenty-five to thirty papers and journals that have
been first published and last published in the period named. I do not
propose to say much or to give a list of the dear departed. They were
born, they struggled for existence, and they died in the effort. That is
all that need be said of most of them.
There is, however, one defunct paper to which I must make a short
reference, partly because I remember something about its birth and
death. I refer to the _Birmingham Daily Press_, which first appeared in
May, 1855. If my memory serves me, the Act of Parliament repealing the
newspaper duty had not passed and become law when the _Birmingham Daily
Press_ appeared. Its first issues were, I believe, marked "specimen"
copies, which would seem to show that the new penny paper was really
published in anticipation of the passing of the Act.
Anyway, the _Birmingham Daily Press_ appeared in the year mentioned, and
considering that it was altogether a new venture, and that much had to
be learned by experience, it was a highly creditable production. It soon
made its mark, too, and became popular and largely read. And no wonder.
It supplied a real want. Its contents were readable and useful, and its
pages contained smart and attractive articles and papers that excited
notice and were much appreciated. Mr. George Dawson was connected with
the paper. Mr. William Harris was editor, or co-editor, of it, and on
its staff and among its contributors were some sharp and able writers.
With all these merits and recommendations it will be asked, why did not
the _Birmingham Daily Press_ succeed? Well, I do not think I can quite
answer the question. I can only say that judging by what I have observed
and heard literary excellence, good reporting, and able editing will not
make a paper commercially successful. If a newspaper is to succeed in
paying its way and making a profit, its business management must be in
experienced and competent hands. A daily newspaper is apt to be a deadly
drain if its expenditure exceeds its receipts--as the daily loss has to
be multiplied by six every week--and this tells up large in the course
of a year.
There can be no question that the _Birmingham Daily Press_ had a fine
start, and a splendid chance. But the chance was not turned to the best
account, and the promising start ended in a lamentable finish. This,
too, in spite of the fact that the paper became really well established.
Indeed, Mr. (now Sir John) Jaffray was heard to say that for a long;
time the _Birmingham Daily Post_, which was started some two years or
more after the _Birmingham Daily Press_, could make no impression, so
firm a footing had the latter paper obtained in the town. But Messrs.
Feeney and Jaffray had put their hands to the plough; they pegged away
with the _Birmingham Daily Post_ till it did make an impression, and the
proprietors being able and experienced in the matter of newspaper
business management, they stood very firm when they did begin to feel
their feet. They drove the town--not from pillar to post, but from
_Daily Press_ to _Daily Post_. They established their position, and that
position they have gone on improving unto this day.
As for the unfortunate _Daily Press_, it fell into a very serious
decline, and finally expired somewhat suddenly in November, 1858. Its
successful rival remarked in a not over sympathetic paragraph that "it
went out like the snuff of a candle leaving behind it something of the
flavour of that domestic nuisance." I remember poor George Dawson, who
had lost a good deal of money through the failure of the _Birmingham
Daily Press_, thought the _Post's_ spiteful little obituary notice the
unkindest cut of all. For victors to crow over the vanquished in such
language he thought was worse than ungenerous, it was mean.
I will not now pause to say anything in detail concerning the
_Birmingham Daily Gazette_, started in 1862, the _Daily Mail_ in 1870,
the _Globe_ in 1879, the _Echo_ in 1883, the _Times_ in 1885, and the
_Argus_ in 1891. I must, however, just note that the most important new
journalistic venture in recent years was the production of the
_Birmingham Morning News_, which was started in 1871. This daily morning
paper was established on lines which should have led to a permanent
success. There was plenty of capital at its back.
Mr. George Dawson--whose name it was thought would be a tower of
strength--took an active part in its editorial work. It had an excellent
staff, and, in a journalistic sense and as a newspaper production, it
was a credit to itself and to the town.
The _Birmingham Morning News_ was carried on for some four years at a
very considerable loss, and just when it seemed to be about to turn the
corner and get into a more profitable groove, its capitalist proprietor
gave it up in disappointment and disgust. For one thing, he found it
difficult to get all the influential help he wanted in the news
department, and he was probably getting a little weary of putting money
into a basket that seemed to have no bottom to it. Yet it was believed
by those well experienced in newspaper management that another year
would have seen a favourable turn in the fortunes of the paper. The
costly ground baiting which is necessary in a newspaper establishment
had been done, and the expensive seed which has to be sown was about to
come up when the proprietor resolved to plough the paper up and so add
another to the formidable list of local newspaper failures.
In the grave of the _Birmingham Morning News_ were buried many hopes.
The proprietor hoped to make a fortune. Mr. Dawson hoped to make an
income and secure a still wider influence through its medium. Its rivals
hoped it would not succeed, and by its death and burial their hopes were
realised.
One little incident in connection with local journalism I must record
here as being something almost unique. I refer to the astounding sketch
Mr. H.J. Jennings--for many years editor of the _Birmingham Daily
Mail_--wrote of himself in 1889, and the circumstances that led to its
publication. After many years' connection with the _Daily. Mail_, Mr.
Jennings went over to another local evening paper, the _Daily Times_,
and by way of giving it a fillip he published in its columns a series of
papers on "Our Public Men."
That these sketches were not entirely flattering to the subjects of
them will be readily understood. Mr. Jennings always was a smart, spicy,
and sometimes even brilliant writer, but he could not help being more or
less cynical. He rather liked to stick the toasting fork into his
subjects, and then hold them pretty close to the bars of a decidedly hot
fire. The result was that many of them burned and smarted under the
ordeal. One of the victims went so far as to propose that this
self-appointed censor of public characters should be fought with his own
weapons, and have a taste of his own nasty physic. In a word it was
suggested that someone should draw Mr. H.J. Jennings' portrait on his
own lines after his own manner.
Mr. Jennings promptly took up the gauntlet that was thrown down and
immediately proceeded to write a sketch of himself, which appeared in
the _Birmingham Daily Times_ of May 29th, 1889, and was, perhaps, one of
the most daring and audacious feats of contemporary journalism on
record. If he had entrusted his task to his most bitter enemy it could
hardly have been more scathing than it was.
Mr. Jennings certainly did not blunt his steel when he proceeded to
operate upon himself. He did not spare himself, but dug the knife in and
turned it round. It was, indeed, a singularly curious piece of
biography, written with all the pungency and point its writer could
command, and it need hardly be said that such a sketch silenced the guns
of some of his foes and made something of a sensation in the town.
This clever and amazing article was a sort of dying swan's song so far
as Mr. Jennings and Birmingham were concerned. If I remember rightly,
soon after its appearance he severed his professional connection with
the town. He went to London and joined the staff of a financial journal.
Whether he has made his own fortune or the fortunes of others by his
London work I do not know and need not enquire. I will be content to
record the remarkable achievement I have mentioned in connection with
his Birmingham journalistic career.
One special reason why I am devoting some consideration and space to the
Birmingham press is because I wish to refer to one local publication
which had something to do, indirectly at least, with the making of
Modern Birmingham. I allude to the _Birmingham Town Crier_. This
serio-comic, satirical little paper was started in the year 1861, and
was for many years a monthly publication. On its first appearance it
created some stir by its original and, in some respects, unique
character, also by the general smartness and humour of its contents.
When it first appeared many were the guesses made as to its promoters
and contributors, and, so far as these came to my knowledge, not one
proved correct. Certain quite innocent men were credited with being
contributors to the new paper, and some of these did not deny the soft
impeachment. The general guessing, however, ranged very wide, and
included all sorts and conditions of men, from the Rev. Dr. Miller, then
rector of St. Martin's, to the bellman in the Market Hall. Considering
that the _Town Crier_ was started with a purpose, as I shall presently
show, and that it exerted some influence in its own way upon the
progress of the town, it is, I think, fitting that the story of its
early beginnings should be told, and I am in a position to tell the
tale.
As all the first contributors of the _Town Crier_ have ceased--most of
them long since ceased--to have any connection with the paper, there can
be no harm now in referring to its original staff, if only as a little
matter of local history. I may, therefore, place it on record that the
contributors to the first number of the _Town Crier_, which was
published in January, 1861, were Mr. Sam Timmins, Mr. J. Thackray Bunce,
Mr. G.J. Johnson, Dr. (then Mr.) Sebastian Evans, and the present
writer, Thomas Anderton.
Some two or three months after its first appearance the late Mr. John
Henry Chamberlain joined the staff, and a little later still Mr. William
Harris became one of the "table round." With this staff the paper was
carried on for many years, and with more or less success, according to
the point of view from which it was considered. Being of a satirical
character it, of course, often rapped certain people over the knuckles
in a way they did not appreciate. They naturally resented being chaffed
and held up to ridicule, but as there was nothing of a malicious or
private character in the sarcasms published any little soreness they
created soon died away.
One reason why the _Town Crier_ came into existence was because it was
felt that there were certain things, and perhaps certain people, who
could be best assailed and suppressed by ridicule. They could be laughed
and chaffed rather than reasoned out of existence. Certainly the paper
was not established with any idea of profit, nor for the gratification
of indulging in scurrilous personal attacks. It only dealt with public
affairs and with men in their public capacity. Indeed, I may say that
all the men connected with the _Town Crier_ at its starting were
interested in the good government and progress of the town, and they
used the influence of the paper for the purpose of removing stumbling
blocks, and putting incompetent and pretentious persons out of the way.
As so much interest has lately been created by the descriptions given of
the _Punch_ dinners and the doings of the _Punch_ staff, I may state
that the promoters of our local _Charivari_ also combined pleasant
social intercourse with their journalistic functions. The monthly
dinners of the _Town Crier_ staff remain in my memory as being among the
most delightful and genial evenings I have ever spent in my life. We met
at each other's houses, and after a nice satisfying dinner we proceeded
to pipes and paths of pleasantness, and to planning the contents for the
next number of our paper.
Large and hearty was the hilarity at these monthly meetings, and I
think I may say that the talk was interesting and smart. Mr. J.H.
Chamberlain was often positively brilliant in his little sallies of
speech, whilst Mr. J.T. Bunce would put in dry, sententious words of wit
and wisdom. Mr. G.J. Johnson laid down the law with pungent perspicuity,
and Mr. William Harris was amusingly epigrammatic. Mr. Sam Timmins on
these occasions was ever ready with an apt remark, very often containing
an apt quotation, and Mr. Sebastian Evans smoked and laughed much, made
incisive little observations, and drew sketches on blotting paper.
As we were all more or less interested in or concerned with the most
important matters that were then going on in the town, there was much to
be said that was worth saying and hearing. Even in the wheels that were
within wheels some of the _Town Crier_ men had spokes. A bank could not
break without some of us being concerned in the smash, and I remember
to my sorrow that when the Birmingham Banking Company came to grief I
was an unfortunate shareholder.
I do not think it necessary to say much more concerning the early days
of the publication in question. Its first promoters became busy, and, in
some cases, important men as time went on, and gradually they had to
give up their connection with a periodical whose pages for some years
they had done so much to enliven and adorn. The _Town Crier_, I think it
will be admitted, did good work in its own peculiar way, and those who
remain of its early promoters (and the small number has been thinned by
the death of Mr. J.H. Chamberlain and Mr. J.T. Bunce) need not be
ashamed to speak with the enemy at the gate--I mean, to own their former
connection with a publication which was not regarded as being
discreditable to its contributors, or to the town.
One matter in connection with the publication of the _Town Crier_ may be
mentioned as being curious, and perhaps a little surprising. It is
this: that during the many years that the paper was conducted by its
original promoters it steered clear of libel actions. In only one case
was an action even threatened, and this was disposed of by an accepted
little explanation and apology. We often used to hear rumours that
Alderman, Councillor, or Mr. Somebody intended wreaking vengeance upon
writers who had belaboured or ridiculed him; but these threats ended in
nothing, and the first proprietors of the _Town Crier_ never had to pay
even a farthing damages as the result of law proceedings. This is
something to record, because papers of a satirical character necessarily
sail pretty close to the wind in the way of provoking touchy people to
fly to law to soothe their wounded feelings and pay out their supposed
persecutors.
I confess I often used to shiver slightly in my shoes when I considered
the possible consequences of what I myself and others had written in the
_Town Crier_. The law of libel is a wide-spreading net, anything that
brings a man into ridicule or contempt or damages him in his trade or
profession being libellous. To criticize adversely a painter, actor, or
singer is necessarily damaging, and is really a libel, but to sustain an
action real damage must be proved, or it must be shown that malice and
ill-will have prompted the objectionable adverse opinions. But, as we
know, there are certain pettifogging men of law who are ever ready to
encourage people to bring actions for libel for the mere sake of getting
damages. I believe I have thus stated the case correctly, but I am not a
"limb of the law," not even an amputated limb, or a law student. I speak
from what I have seen in the Libel Acts and in the judgments I have
read. Having been one of the Press gang for many years, I have never
thought my liberties quite safe, and have often felt that any day I
might be brought up to the bar for judgment. But I escaped, even when I
was writing for the _Town Crier_, and have escaped since. But let me not
boast. Before these lines are read my ordinary clothes may be required
of me.
On the shelves of my small library are some bound volumes of the early
numbers of the _Birmingham Town Crier_, in which are some pencil marks.
If I should sooner or later have to retire to live _en pension_ at
Winson Green, or at the Bromsgrove or other Union, I hope to be able to
take these cherished books with me to look at from time to time, and to
keep green my memory of past pleasant days.