CHAPTER IV.--THE UNATTACHED EDITOR.

_The “casual” word--The mighty hunter--The retort discourteous--How the

editor’s chair was broken--An explanation on a clove--The master of

a system--A hitch in the system--The two Alhambras--A parallel--The

unattached parson--Another system--A father’s legacy--The sermon--The

imagination and its claims--The evening service--Saying a few

words--Antique carved oak--How the chaplain’s doubts were dispersed--A

literary tinker--A tinker’s triumph--The two Joneses._

THE “scratch” editor also may now and again be found to possess

some eccentricities. He is the man who is taken on a newspaper in an

emergency to fill the place of an editor who may perhaps be suffering

from a serious illness, or who may, in an unguarded moment, have died.

There is a class of journalists with whom being out of employment

amounts almost to a profession in itself. But the “unattached” editor is

usually no more brilliant a man than the unattached gentleman “in holy

orders”--the clergyman who appears suddenly at the vestry door carrying

a black bag, and probably with his nose a little red (the result of a

cold railway journey), and who introduces himself to the sexton as ready

to do duty for the legitimate, but temporarily incapacitated, incumbent,

whose telegram he had received only the previous day.

As the congregation are glad to get any one who can read the prayers

with an air of authority in the absence of their pastor, so the

proprietors of a newspaper are sometimes pleased to welcome the

“scratch,” or casual, editor.

I have met with a few of the class, but never with one whose chronic

unattached condition I could not easily account for, before we had been

together long. Most of them hated journalism---and everything else

(with one important exception). All of them boasted of their feats as

journalists. A fine crusted specimen was accustomed to declare nightly

that he had once kept hunters; another that he had not always been

connected with such a miserable rag as the journal on which he was

temporarily employed.

“I’ve been on the best papers in the three kingdoms,” he shouted one

night.

“That’s only another way of saying that you’ve been kicked off the most

influential organs in the country,” remarked a bystander.

“If you don’t look out you’ll soon be kicked off another.”

No verbal retort is possible to such brutality of language. None was

attempted.

When I was explaining, the next day, to the proprietor how the chair in

the editor’s room came to be broken, and also how the silhouette of an

octopus came to be executed so boldly in ink upon the wall of the

same apartment, the “scratch” editor (his appellation had a double

significance this day) entered suddenly. He said he had come to explain

something.

Now when a literary gentleman appears with long strips of sticking

plaster loosely adhering to one side of his face, as white caterpillars

adhere to a garden wall, and when, moreover, the perfume that floats on

the air at his approach is that of a peppermint lozenge that has been

preserved from decay in alcohol, any explanation that he may offer

in regard to a preceding occurrence is likely to be received with

suspicion, if not with absolute distrust. In this case, however, no

opportunity was given the man for justifying any claim that he might

advance to be credited.

The proprietor assured him that he had already received an account of

the deplorable occurrence of the night before, and that he hoped mutual

apologies would be made in the course of the day, so that, in diplomatic

language, the incident might be considered closed before night.

The “scratch” man breathed again--heavily, alcoholically,

peppermintally. And before night I managed to sticking-plaster up a

peace between the belligerents.

At the end of a month some busybody outside the paper had the bad taste

to point out to the proprietor that one of the leading articles--the one

contributed by the “scratch” man--in a recent issue of the paper, was

to a word identical with one which had appeared a fortnight before in a

Scotch paper of some importance. The “scratch” man explained--on alcohol

and a clove--that the Scotch paper had copied his article. But the

proprietor expressed his grave doubts on this point, his chief reason

for adopting this course being that the Scotch paper with the article

had appeared ten days previously. Then the “scratch” man said the matter

was a singular, but by no means unprecedented, coincidence.

The proprietor opened the office door.

*****

One of the most interesting of these “casuals” had been a clergyman (he

said). I never was quite successful in finding out with what Church he

had been connected, nor, although pressed for a reply, would he ever

reveal to me how he came to find himself outside the pale of his

Church--whatever it was. He had undoubtedly some of the mannerisms of a

clergyman who is anxious that every one should know his profession, and

he could certainly look out of the corners of his eyes with the best of

them. Like the parson who is so very “low” that he steadily refuses to

cross his t’s lest he should be accused of adopting Romish emblems, he

declined to turn his head without moving his whole body.

He wore rusty cloth gloves.

He was also the most adroit thief whom I ever met; and I have lived

among some adroit ones in my time.

I never read such brilliant articles as he wrote nightly--never, until I

came upon the same articles in old files of the London newspapers, where

they had originally appeared. The original articles from which his were

copied _verbatim_ were, I admit, quite as brilliant as his.

His _modus operandi_ was simplicity itself. He kept in his desk a

series of large books for newspaper cuttings, and these were packed with

articles on all manner of subjects, clipped from the best newspapers.

Every day he spent an hour making these extracts, by the aid of a pot of

paste, and indexing them on the most perfect system of double entry that

could be conceived.

At night I frequently came down to my office and found that he had

written two columns of the most delightful essays. One might, perhaps,

be on the subject of Moresco-Gothic Architecture and its influence

on the genius of Velasquez, another on Battueshooting and the

Acclimatisation of the Bird of Paradise in English coverts; but both

were treated with equal grace. That such erudition and originality

should be associated with cloth gloves astonished me. One day, however,

the man wrote a column upon the decoration of one of the courts of the

Alhambra, and a more picturesque article I never read--up to a certain

point; and this point was reached when he commenced a new paragraph as

follows:--

“Alas! that so lovely a piece of work should have fallen a prey to the

devastating element that laid the whole structure in ruins, and eclipsed

the gaiety, if not of nations, at any rate of the people of London, who

were wont to resort nightly to this Thespian temple of Leicester Square,

feeling certain that under the liberal management of its enterprising

_entrepreneur_ some brilliant stage spectacle would be brought before

their eyes. Now, however, that the company for the restoration of the

building has been successfully floated, we may hope for a revival of the

ancient glories of the Alhambra.”

I inquired casually of the perpetrator of the article if he had ever

heard of the Alhambra?

“Why, I wrote of it yesterday,” he said.

“I’ve been in it; it’s in Leicester Square.”

“Did you ever hear of another Alhambra?”

I asked blandly.

“Yes; there’s one in Glasgow.”

“Did you ever hear of one that wasn’t a music-hall?”

“Never. Maybe the temperance people give one of their new-fashioned

coffee places the name to attract sinners on false pretences.”

“Did you ever hear of an Alhambra in Spain?”

“You don’t mean to say that they have music-halls in Spain? But why

shouldn’t they? Spaniards are fond of dancing, I believe.”

“Why not indeed?” said I.

The next day he had an explanation to offer to the chief of the staff.

In the evening he told me that he was going to leave the paper.

“How is that?” I inquired.

“I don’t like it,” he replied. “My ideas are cribbed, cabined, and

confined here.”

“They are certainly cribbed,” said I. “Did you never hear of the Alhambra

at Grenada?”

“Never; that’s what played the mischief with the article. You’ll see how

the mistake arose. There was a capital article in the _Telegraph_ about

the Alhambra--I see now that it must have referred to the one in

Spain--about four years ago; well, I cut it out and indexed it. A year

ago, when the Alhambra in Leicester Square was about to re-open, there

was an article in the _Daily News_. I found it in my index also, and

incorporated the two articles in mine. How the mischief was I to know

that one referred to Grenada and the other to London? These writer chaps

should be more explicit. What do they get their salaries for, anyway?”

*****

I have referred to a certain resemblance existing between the unattached

parson and the unattached editor. This resemblance is the more impressed

on me now that, after recalling a memory of an appropriator of another

man’s literary work by the “casual” editor, I can recollect how I lived

for some years next door to a “casual” parson, who had annexed a bagful

of sermons left by his father, one of which he preached whenever he

obtained an engagement. It was said that on receiving the usual telegram

from a disabled rector on Saturday evening, he was accustomed to go to

the sermon-sack, and, putting his hand down the mouth, take out a sermon

with the same ease and confidence as are displayed by the professional

rat-catcher in extracting from his bag one of its lively contents for

the gratification of a terrier. It so happened, however, that upon

a fine Sunday morning, he set out to do duty for a clergyman at a

distance, having previously felt about the sermon-sack until he found

a good fat roll of manuscript, which he stuffed into his pocket. He

reached the church--in which, it should be mentioned, he had never

before preached--and, bustling through the service with his accustomed

celerity, ascended the pulpit and flattened out with a slap or two

the sermon on the cushion in front of him. The sermon proved to be the

valedictory one preached by his father in the church of which he had

been rector for half a century. It was unquestionably a very fine

effort, but it might seem to some people to lack local colour. Delivered

in a church to which the preacher was a complete stranger, it had a

certain amount of inappropriateness about it which might reasonably be

expected to diminish from its effect.

“It is a solemn moment for us all, my dear, dear friends. It is a solemn

moment for you, but ah! how much more solemn for me! Sunday after Sunday

for the past fifty years I have stood in the pulpit where I stand to-day

to preach the Gospel of Truth. I see before me now the well-known faces

of my flock. Those who were young when I first came among you are now

well stricken in years. Some whom I baptised as infants, have brought

their infants to me to be baptised; these in turn have been spared to

bring their infants to be admitted into the membership of the Church

Militant. For fifty years have I not taken part in your joys and your

sorrows, and now who shall say that the hour of parting should not be

bitter? I see tears on the faces before me----”

And the funny part of the matter was that he did. No one present

seemed to see anything inappropriate in the sermon; and at the pathetic

references to the hour of parting, there was not a dry eye in the

church--except the remarkably bright pair possessed by a female scoffer,

who told the story to me. It was not to be expected that the clergyman

would become aware of the mistake--if it was a mistake--that he had

made: he had for years been a preaching machine, and had become as

devoid of feeling as a barrel organ; but it seemed to me incredible that

only one person in the church should discover the ludicrous aspect of

the situation.

So I remarked to my informant, and she said that it was all the same a

fact that the people were weeping copiously on all sides.

“I asked the doctor’s wife the next day what she thought of the sermon,”

added my informant, “and she replied with a sigh that it was beautifully

touching; and when I put it straight to her if she did not think it was

queer for a clergyman who was a total stranger to us to say that he had

occupied the pulpit for fifty years, she replied, ‘Ah, my dear, you’re

too matter of fact: sermons should not be taken too literally. _You

should make allowance for the parsons imagination_.’”

It is told of the same “casual” that an attempt was made to get the

better of him by a parsimonious set of churchwardens upon the occasion

of his being engaged to do duty for the regular parson of the parish.

The contract made with the “casual” was to perform the service and

preach the sermon in the morning for the sum of two guineas. He turned

up in good time on the Sunday morning and performed his part of the

contract in a business-like way. In the vestry, after he had preached

the sermon, he was waited on by the senior churchwarden, who handed him

his fee and expressed the great satisfaction felt by the churchwardens

at the manner in which the work had been executed. He added that as the

clergyman’s train would not leave the village until half-past eight at

night, perhaps the reverend gentleman would not mind dining with him,

the senior churchwarden, and performing a short evening service at six

o’clock.

“That will suit me very well indeed,” said the reverend gentleman. “I

thank you very much for your hospitable offer. I charge thirty shillings

for an evening service with sermon.”

The hospitable churchwarden replied that he feared the resources of the

church would not be equal to such a strain upon them. He thought that

the clergyman might not object under the circumstances to give his

services gratis.

“Do you dispose of your excellent cheeses gratis?” asked the clergyman

courteously. The churchwarden was in the cheese business.

“Well, no, of course not,” laughed the churchwarden. “But still--well,

suppose we say a guinea for the evening service?”

“That’s my charge for the service, leaving out the sermon,” said the

clergyman.

He explained that it was the cheapest thing in the market at the time.

It was done with only the smallest margin of profit. Allowing for the

wear and tear, it left hardly anything for himself.

The churchwarden shook his head. He feared that they would not be able

to trade on the terms, he said. Suddenly, however, he brightened up.

Could the reverend gentleman not give them a good, sound, second quality

sermon? he inquired. They did not expect an A-1, copper-fastened,

platinum-tipped, bevelled-edged, full-calf sermon for the money; but

hadn’t the reverend gentleman a sound, clump-soled, celluloid-faced,

nickel-plated sermon--something evangelical that would do very well for

one evening?

The clergyman replied that he had nothing of the sort in stock.

“Well, at any rate, you will say a few words to the congregation--not

a sermon, you know--after the service, for the guinea?” suggested the

churchwarden.

“Oh, yes, I’ll say a few words, if that’s all,” said the clergyman.

And he did.

When he had got to that grand old Amen which closes the Evening Service,

he stood up and said,--

“Dear brethren, there will be no sermon preached here this evening.”

*****

Having entered upon the perilous path that is strewn with stories of

clergymen, I cannot leave it without recalling certain negotiations

which a prelate once opened with me for the purchase of an article

of furniture that remained at the palace when he was translated (with

footnotes in the vernacular by local tradesmen) to a new episcopate. I

have always had a weakness for collecting antique carved oak, and the

prelate, being aware of this, called my attention to what he termed an

“antique carved oak cabinet,” which occupied an alcove in the hall. He

said he thought that I might be glad to have a chance of purchasing it,

for he himself did not wish to be put to the trouble of conveying it to

his new home--if a palace can be called a home. Now, there had been a

three days’ auction at the palace where the antiquity remained, and,

apparently, all the dealers had managed to resist the temptation that

was offered them of acquiring a rare specimen of old oak; but, assuming

that the dignitary had placed a high reserve price upon it from which

he might now be disposed to abate, I replied that it would please me

greatly to buy the cabinet if it was not too large. By appointment

I accompanied a seemingly meek domestic chaplain to the dis-.mantled

palace; and there, sure enough, in a dark alcove of the long and narrow

hall--for the palace was not palatial--I saw (dimly) a huge thing like

a wardrobe with pillars, or it might have been a loose box, or perhaps a

bedstead gone wrong, or a dismantled hearse.

“That’s a dreadful thing,” I remarked to the meek chaplain.

“Dreadful, indeed,” he replied. “But it’s antique carved oak, so I

suppose it’s a treasure.”

“Have you a match about you?” I asked, for the place was very dark.

The meek chaplain looked scandalised--it was light enough to allow of

my seeing that--at the suggestion that he carried matches. He said he

thought he knew where some might be had. He walked to the end of the

passage, and I saw him take out a box of matches from a pocket. He came

back, saying he recollected having seen the box on a ledge “down there.”

I struck a match and held the light close to the fabric. I gave a

portion of it a little scrape with my knife, and then tested the carving

by the same implement.

“How did his lordship describe this?” I inquired.

“He said it was antique carved oak,” said the meek chaplain.

“Did you ever hear of Cuvier and the lobster?” I inquired further.

He said he never had.

“That being so, I may venture to say that his lordship’s description

of this thing is an excellent one,” I remarked; “only that it is not

antique, it is not carved, and it is not oak.”

“What do you mean?” asked the meek chaplain..

I struck another match, and showed him the white patch that I had

scraped with my knife, and he admitted that old oak was not usually

white beneath the surface. I showed him also where the carving had

sprung up before the point of my knife, making plain the ‘fact that the

carving had been glued to the fabric.

“His lordship got that made by a local carpenter twenty-five years ago,”

said I; “and yet he tries to sell it to me for antique carved oak. It

strikes me that in Wardour Street he would find a congenial episcopate.”

The meek chaplain stroked his chin reflectively; then, putting his

umbrella under one arm, he joined the tips of his fingers, saying,--

“Whatever unworthy doubts I may once have entertained on the difficult

subject of Apostolic succession are now, thank God, set at rest.”

“What do you mean?” I inquired.

“Is it possible,” he asked, “that you do not perceive how strong an

argument this incident furnishes in favour of our Church’s claim to the

Apostolic succession of her bishops?”

I shook my head.

“St. Peter was a Jew,” said the meek chaplain.

*****

Another of the casual ward of editors who appears on the tablets of my

memory was a gentleman who came from Wales--and a large number of other

places. He had a rooted objection to write anything new; but he was the

best literary tinker I ever met. In Spitzhagen’s story, “Sturmfluth,”

there is a most amusing account of the sculptor who made the statues of

distinguished Abstractions, which he had carved in his young days, do

duty for memorial commissions of lately-departed heroes. A bust of Homer

he had no difficulty in transforming into one of Germania weeping for

her sons killed in the war, and so forth. The sculptor’s talent was the

same as that of the editor. He had the draft of about fifty articles,

and three obituary notices. These he managed to tinker up, chipping a

bit off here and there, and giving prominence to other portions, until

his purpose of the moment was served. I have seen him turn an article

that purported to show the absurdity of free trade, into an attack upon

the Irish policy of the Government; and in the twinkling of an eye upon

another occasion he made one on the Panama swindle do duty for one on

the compulsory rescue of Emin by Stanley. With only a change of a line

or, two, the obituary notice of Gambetta was that which he had used for

Garibaldi; and yet when the Emperor Frederick died, it was the same

article that was furbished up for the occasion. Every local medical man

who died was dealt with in the appreciative article which he had written

some years before on the death of Sir William Gull; and the influence of

the career of every just deceased local philanthropist was described in

the words (slightly altered to suit topography) that had been written

for the Earl of Shaftesbury.

It was really little short of marvellous how this system worked. It was

a tinker’s triumph.

I must supplement my recollections of these worthies by a few lines

regarding a man of the same type who, I believe, never put pen to paper

without being guilty of some extraordinary error. A high compliment was

paid to me, I felt, when I had assigned to me, as part of my duties,

the reading of his proof sheets nightly. In everyone that I ever read

I found some monstrous mistake; and as he was old enough to be my

grandfather, and extremely sensitive besides, I was completely exhausted

by my expenditure of tact in pointing out to him what I called his

“little inaccuracies.” One night he laid his proof sheet before me,

saying triumphantly, “You’ll not find any of the usual slips in that,

I’m thinking. I’ve managed to write one leader correct at last.”

I read the thing he had written. It referred to a letter which Mr. Bence

Jones had contributed to _The Times_ on the subject of the Irish Land

League Agitation. After commenting on this letter, he wound up by

saying that Mr. Bence Jones had proved himself to be as practical an

agriculturalist as he was an expert painter.

“Are you certain that Bence Jones is a painter?” I asked.

“As certain as I can be of anything,” was the reply. “I’ve seen his work

referred to dozens of times. I believe there’s a picture of his in

the Grosvenor Gallery this very year. I thought you knew all about

contemporary art,” he added, with a sneer.

“Art is long,” said I, searching for a Grosvenor Gallery catalogue,

which I knew I had thrown among my books. “Now, will you just turn up

the picture you say you saw noticed, and I’ll admit that you know more

than I do?”

I handed him the catalogue. He adjusted his spectacles, looked at the

index, gave a triumphant “Ha! I have you now,” and forthwith turned up

“The Golden Stair,” by E. _Burne_ Jones.

A Journalist's Note-Book · 第 4 / 21 章