CHAPTER XLIV.

The Press—_Morning Post_ and _Times_—Duty on newspapers—Rise in

price—The publication of circulation to procure advertisements—Paper

warfare between the _Times_ and the _Morning Post_—The

British Museum—Its collection, and bad arrangement—Obstacles

to visitors—Rules relaxed—The Lever Museum—Its sale by

lottery—Anatomical Museums of the two Hunters.

OF THE London Daily papers that were then existing, but two are now

alive—the _Morning Post_ (the _Doyen_ of the daily press) and the

_Times_. They were heavily taxed, in 1800, with a 3d. stamp per copy.

In July, 1804, this was made 3½d.; pamphlets, half-sheet, ½d.; whole

sheet, 1d.; an Almanac had to have a shilling stamp; and a perpetual

Calendar, one of 10s. And this oppressive stamp, with a comparatively

limited circulation, meant death to a newspaper. In 1809, the _Morning

Post_, and other papers, boldly went in for a halfpenny rise, and gave

its reasons—May 20: “Since the settlement with Government took place,

which fixed the price at sixpence, every article necessary for the

composition of a Newspaper, has increased in price to an unprecedented

extent. Paper has risen upwards of fifty per cent.; Types upwards of

eighty per cent.; Printing Ink thirty-five per cent.; Journeymen’s

wages ten per cent., and everything else in the same proportion. It

is therefore unnecessary for us to observe, that the advance of One

Halfpenny per Paper will go but a short way towards placing the

Proprietors in the same situation, in respect to profits allowed, in

which they were left by the settlement of 1797; and, under all these

considerations, the Public, we trust, will not deem us unreasonable

in availing ourselves of the parliamentary provision that has just

been made in favour of all Newspapers. The Bill will receive the Royal

Assent this day, and on Monday, the Price of the _MORNING POST_, _in

common with that of other Newspapers_, will be Sixpence Halfpenny.”

Then, as now, the backbone of a Newspaper was its advertisements, and

then also, did each Newspaper laud itself as being the best advertising

medium, owing to its superior circulation. We, who are accustomed

to see huge posters setting forth sworn affidavits that the daily

circulation of some London newspapers amounts to some quarter of a

million if not more, will feel some surprise when we learn that the

_Morning Post_, of June 10, 1800, the then leading paper, published

a sworn return (and exulted over their number and success) of 10,807

newspapers printed in the week June 2-7, or a daily average of 1,800

copies.

The _World_, at one time a rival, had published its circulation when

it reached 1,500 daily, and thus laid claim to be considered a good

advertising medium; and this was when newspapers were selling at 3d.

each. In 1800 they were 6d. each, and the extra tax had diminished

the circulation of the _Morning Post_ during the previous summer by

one-third, which fall they claim to have recovered, and to have raised

their circulation in five years from 400 to 1,800 daily. In June, 1796,

the _Times_ published its number; and again in 1798, when it confessed

to a fall of 1,400 in its daily sale.

In 1806 there was a very pretty little war as to the circulation of

rival newspapers.

The _Times_ opened the ball on the 15th of November by inserting a

paragraph, “Under the Clock”: “[hand]_We are under the necessity of

requesting our Correspondents and Advertisers not to be late in their

communications, if intended for the next day’s publication; as the

extraordinary Sale of THE TIMES, which is decidedly superior to that of

every other Morning Paper, compels us to go to press at a very early

hour._”

The _Morning Post_, November 17th (which number is unfortunately

missing in the British Museum file), challenged the statement—to which

the _Times_ replied on the 18th: “_This declaration of our Sale, a

Morning Paper of yesterday has thought proper to contradict, and boldly

claims the superiority. We have only to say on the subject, that, if

the Paper will give an attested account of its daily Sale for the last

two Months, we will willingly publish it._”

And now the strife was waxing hot, for the _Morning Post_ on the 21st

of November wrote: “We admit the sale of his Paper may, _for the

present_, be many hundreds beyond any other, except the _MORNING POST_,

the decided superiority of which, we trust, he will no longer affect to

dispute.... We pledge ourselves to PROVE that the regular sale

of the _MORNING POST_ is little short of a thousand per day superior to

that of his paper.”

Of course the _Times_, of the 22nd of November, calls this a

preposterous boast, and wishes statistics for the last two months.

Thus goaded, the _Morning Post_, of the 24th of November, issued

affidavits from its printers and publisher, that its circulation,

even at that dead season, was upwards of 4,000 daily, and that during

the sitting of Parliament it reached, and exceeded 5,000, the editor

remarking: “What is meant by regular Sale, is the Number which is

daily served to SUBSCRIBERS.... If those who, by the Low Expedient of

selling their Papers by the noisy nuisance of Horn Boys, take into

their accounts the extra Papers so sold, it is not for us to follow

so unworthy an example; to such means the _MORNING POST_ never has

recourse.”

The _Times_, November 25th, has the last of this wordy warfare,

declaring that its circulation sometimes reached 7,000 or 8,000 a day:

and I should not have introduced this episode, had it not have given

such a perfect insight into the working of the press of that date,

which would have been unobtainable but for this quarrel.

The British Museum then stood where now it does, only Montague House,

in which its treasures were then enshrined, was totally unfitted for

their reception—for instance, a collection of Egyptian antiquities

were kept in two sheds in the courtyard. The whole of the antiquities,

and rarities, were in sad want of arrangement, and classification, and

as many impediments, as possible, were placed in the way of visitors.

Take what it was like in 1802: “Persons who are desirous of seeing the

Museum, must enter their name and address, and the time at which they

wish to see it, in a book kept by the porter, and, upon calling again

on a future day, they will be supplied with printed tickets, free of

expense, as all fees are positively prohibited. The tickets only serve

for the particular day and hour specified; and, if not called for the

day before, are forfeited.

“The Museum is kept open every day in the week, except Saturday, and

the weeks which follow Christmas day, Easter, and Whitsunday. The hours

are from nine till three, except on Monday and Friday, during the

months of May, June, July, and August, when the hours are only from

four till eight in the afternoon.

“The spectators are allowed three hours for viewing the whole—that is,

an hour for each of the three departments. One hour for the Manuscripts

and Medals; one for the natural and artificial productions, and one

for the printed books. Catalogues are deposited in each room, but no

book must be taken down except by the officer attending, who will also

restore it to its place. Children are not admitted.

“Literary characters, or any person who wishes to make use of the

Museum for purposes of study and reference, may obtain permission,

by applying to the trustees, or the standing committee. A room is

appointed for their accommodation, in which, during the regular hours,

they may have the use of any manuscript or printed book, subject to

certain regulations.”

On the 8th of June, 1804, the Trustees somewhat modified the

arrangements, and instead of visitors having to call twice about

their tickets, before their visit, they might be admitted the day

of application (Monday, Wednesday, or Friday only) subject to the

following rule:

“Five Companies, of not more than 15 persons each, may be admitted in

the course of the day; namely, one at each of the hours of 10, 11, 12,

1, and 2. At each of these hours the directing officer in waiting shall

examine the entries in the book; and if none of the persons inscribed

be exceptionable, he shall consign them to the attendant, whose turn it

will be to conduct the companies through the House.

“Should more than fifteen persons inscribe their names, for a given

hour, the supernumeraries will be desired to wait, or return at the

next hour, when they will be admitted preferably to other applicants.”

The Museum Gardens were a great attraction, and were much visited. So

much, indeed, were they thought of, that, in an advertisement of a

house to let, it is stated, as a great recommendation that it commands

“a view of the Museum Gardens, and a part of Hampstead Heath.”

There were other museums, notably the Leverian Museum, the collection

of Sir Ashton Lever, of Alkington, near Manchester, a _virtuoso_ of

the first water. He spent very large sums on this collection, which

consisted mainly of specimens of natural history (over 5,000 stuffed

birds), fossils, shells, corals, a few antiquities, and the usual

country museums’ quota of South Sea Island weapons, and dresses. There

was much rubbish, as we should term it—according to the _Gentleman’s

Magazine_ of May, 1773 (p. 200), like a double-headed calf, a pig with

eight legs, two tails, one backbone, and one head. Some pictures of

birds in straw very natural, a basket of paper flowers, a head of his

present Majesty, cut in Cannel Coal; a drawing of Indian ink of a head

of a late Duke of Bridgwater, &c., &c.

The collection had, of course, much increased, when in 1785, Sir

Ashton Lever, shortly before his death, disposed of it by lottery.

The winner, Mr. Parkinson, built “a very elegant and well-disposed

structure for its reception, about a hundred yards from the foot of

Blackfriars Bridge, on the Surrey side.”[68] The admission was one

shilling. Presumably it did not pay, for it was sold by auction in

1806. The sale lasted sixty-five days. The number of lots being 7,879,

and the catalogue occupying 410 octavo pages. Then there were the

museums of the two Hunters—that of Dr. William Hunter, F.S.A., &c. In

the period of which I treat, his anatomical specimens, coins, &c., were

exhibited at the Theatre of Anatomy, in Great Windmill Street, whence,

according to his will, they were after a certain time transferred to

the University of Glasgow, where they now are. His brother John, who

was also a F.R.S., had a grand collection of anatomical preparations,

which was purchased by the Government for £15,000, and deposited, _pro

bono publico_, in the College of Surgeons.

[Illustration]

[Illustration]

The Dawn of the XIXth Century in England: A social sketch of the times · 第 44 / 53 章