culties
—difficulties
not proceeding from vice, but from family misfortunes.
Hunt - Fourth Estate - History of Newspapers and Liberty of Press - v2
It is very true, Sir, they have such a power, and they have exercised it very lately ; but we have no such power; they may punish a printer for print ing any part of the proceedings of their House, for twenty, thirty, or forty years back ; but then, gentle men are to consider that the House of Peers is a court of record, and, as such, its rights and privileges never die.
Whereas, this House never pretended to be a court of record ; our privileges expire at the end of every Parliament ; and the next House of Commons
is quite different from the last. As to the question whether we have a right to punish any printer, who
shall publish our proceedings, or any part of them, during our recess, which I take to be the only question at present, it may be worthy consideration ; for my own part, I am apt to think that we may ; because our privileges as a House of Parliament exist during the whole continuance of Parliament; and our not sitting never makes any violation of these privileges committed during a recess less liable to censure, the next time we meet as a House. However, sir, as it has been long the practice to print some account of our proceedings during our recess, I am against punishing any person for what is past, because very possibly they did not know they were doing amiss ; and if gentlemen think fit to enter into any resolution for the time to come, I dare say it will be sufficient to deter all offenders in that way. But that resolution, sir, cannot affect any person who shall print an
reporting. —onslow's motion. 255
account of your proceedings when this Parliament shall be dissolved. There is an honourable gentle man* near me, who knows that the history of a whole Parliament was once published in a sixpenny pamphlet, and their transactions set in no very favourable light, for the gentlemen who composed it. I never heard, sir, that any succeeding House of Commons took that amiss, nor that the honourable gentleman who was generally looked upon as the author of was ever called to account by either House of Parliament. Parliaments, sir, when they do amiss, will be talked of with the same freedom as any other set of men whatsoever. This Parliament, hope, will never de serve but, did, should be very sorry that any resolutions were entered into in order to prevent its being represented in the present or the next age, in its proper colours. am sure the honourable gentle
* "Meaning Sir Robert Walpole, who in the year 1713, wrote pamphlet entitled A Short History of the Last Parliament. ' "
" While the new elections were depending, was the opinion of Somers and the Whig Lords, that to state to the people, in strong and perspicuous manner, the proceedings of the late Parliament with
view to expose the measures of the Ministry, and to guide the electors in the choice of the new representatives, would be highly ad vantageous to their party. As no one seemed better calculated for this office than Walpole, he undertook pamphlet, at their desire, on the Thursday, and published on the Tuesday following, under the title of Short History of the Last Parliament, with the motto
Venalis Populus, venalis Curia Patrum. '
To this publication prefixed Dedication by Pulteney, then his coadjutor, composed in strain of irony and humour peculiarly his own, and in which, though addressed to an anonymous peer, easy to perceive that the Earl of Oxford was the object of allusion. " — Coxe's Memoirs Sir Rohert Walpole.
of
it ;
a
I
' is
'
if it
it a
a
I
I
it : is
it,
A
a
it
a
a
256 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
man who sits near me, will agree with me in this ; and whatever the other House may do, sir, I hope we never shall stretch our privilege, so as to cramp the freedom of writing on public affairs.
" But this consideration, sir, can never affect the resolutions which gentlemen propose to come to now. We have rather been too remiss in not putting a stop
to this scandalous practice that has been complained of. I always thought that these pamphlets contain ing our debates, were circulated by the Government's
encouragement, and at their expense ; for till the honourable gentleman who spoke last save one in the debate, mentioned the magazines in the manner he did, I have been still used to look on the publishing them as a ministerial project; for I imagined that it being found unpracticable to make the people buy and read The Gazetteer by itself, it was contrived so as that the writings of the other party, being printed in the same pamphlet, it might be some invitation to the public to look into The Gazetteer, and I dare say, sir, the great run which the magazines have had has been entirely owing to this stratagem. The good and the bad are printed together, and people are by that means drawn in to read both. But I think it is now high time, to put a stop to the effects they may have by coming to a resolution that may at least prevent anything being published, during the time of our sit ting as a House, which may be imposed upon the world as the language and words of gentlemen who perhaps never spoke them. "
You have with great justice," he said, "punished some
Sir Robert Walpole was the next speaker.
REPORTING —ONSLOW S MOTION. 257
persons, for forging the names of gentlemen upon the backs of letters ; but the abuse now complained of is, I conceive, a forgery of a worse kind ; for it tends to misrepresent the sense of Parliament, and impose upon the understanding of the whole nation. It is but a petty damage that can arise from a forged frank, when compared to the infinite mischiefs that may come from this practice. I have read some debates of this House, sir, in which I have been made to speak the very reverse of what I meant. I have read others of them wherein all the wit, the learning, and the argu
ment has been thrown into one side, and on the other nothing but what was low, mean, and ridiculous ; and yet when it comes to the question, the division has
the side which, upon the face of the debate, had reason and justice to support it. So that, sir, had I been a stranger to the proceedings and to the nature of the arguments themselves, I must have thought this to have been one of the most contemptible assemblies on the face of the earth. What notion
then, sir, can the public, who have no other means of being informed of the debates of this House, than what they have from these Papers, entertain of the wisdom and abilities of an assembly, who are repre sented therein to carry almost every point against the
strongest and the plainest argument and appearances. However, sir, as I believe gentlemen are by this time pretty sensible of the necessity of putting a stop to this practice, it will be quite unnecessary for me to argue a point wherein we are all agreed. But I can not help taking notice of one thing mentioned by the
hon. gentleman who spoke last, since I was the person VOL. II. R
gone against
258 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
to whom he was pleased to appeal. He mentioned that the history of a whole Parliament had been printed, and seemed to insinuate from this, that people might make very free with Parliaments. Really, sir, I will be so free as to own that I do know of such a pamphlet being printed ; nay, I believe I know a little of the author, and the publication. But at the same time I know, sir, that that was one of the worst Houses of Commons that ever this nation saw ; that they had a design to introduce the Pretender ; that they had approved of a scandalous peace, after the most glorious war that was ever carried on ; and had it not been for some very favourable circumstances that fell out, they would have set aside the present happy establishment in His Majesty's person and fa mily. I hope, sir, no gentleman will find fault with any reflections that could be thrown out against such
I
tleman will pretend to draw any parallels betwixt their
conduct and ours. But, sir, besides these consider ations, gentlemen are to reflect, that the Parliament which was described in that history, had been dissolved before the history itself was published. And not only so, sir, but there is a noble lord in the other House,* who can, if he pleases, inform gentlemen, that the author of that history was so apprehensive of the
a House of Commons ;
likewise, that no hope gen
consequence of printing that the press was carried to his house, and the copies printed off there.
" This, think, sir, will be sufficient to show, that the author did not think himself quite out of danger, even though the Parliament was dissolved. But
* Probably Lord Cobham.
I
I
it,
REPORTING — ONSLOW S MOTION. 259
am not at all for carrying things to such a length at present ; it may be sufficient, if we come to a resolu tion to prevent the publication of any part of our
proceedings during the recess, as well as the sitting of the Parliament. As to what the honourable gentleman said, with regard to the magazines being published and distributed by order, and at the expense of the Government, I do not know if he was serious or not. If he was serious, he must have a very contemptible opinion of the understanding of those gentlemen who have the honour to serve His Majesty, if he imagines that they would be so weak as to propagate papers, every page almost of which hath a direct tendency against their own interest. If any gentleman will take the trouble, which I own I very seldom do, to look into one of these magazines, he will find four pages wrote against the Government for one that is in its favour ; and generally the subject is of such a nature as would be severely punished under any other Govern ment than our own. If the hon. gentleman was not serious, I think a more proper time might have been chosen for showing his wit, than while we are con sidering of the means of putting a stop to a practice, which he himself, and every gentleman who spoke in this debate, allows so nearly to affect the dignity and privileges of this House. For my own part, sir, I am ex tremely indifferent what opinion some gentlemen may
form of the writers in favour of the Government : but, sir, I shall never have the worse opinion of them for that : there is nothing more easy than to raise a laugh ; it has been the common practice of all minorities when
they were driven out of every other argument. I r2
260 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
never shall be afraid, sir, to do what I think right, and for the service of His Majesty and my country, because I may be laughed at. But, really, sir, I will be so free as to say, that if the want of wit, learning, good manners, and truth, is a proper object of contempt and ridicule, the writers in the opposition seem to me to have a much better title to both than those for the Government. No Government, I will venture to say, ever punished so few libels, and no Government ever had provocation to punish so many. I could name a Government in this country, sir, under which those writings, which are now cried up, as founded upon the laws, and in the constitution, would have been punished as libels, even by gentlemen who are now the warmest advocates for the liberty of the press, and for suffering the authors of those daily libels that appear in print to pass with impunity. But I ask pardon for what I have said that may appear foreign
I was led to it
had been thrown out by the gentleman who spoke
to the present consideration ; by
what
before. "
With this the debate closed, and Mr. Speaker
Onslow " having drawn up the question," the House of Commons resolved unanimously : — " That it is an high indignity to, and a notorious breach of the privilege of, this House, for any News-writer, in letters or other papers (as minutes, or under any other denomination), or for any printer or publisher of any printed Newspaper of any denomination, to presume to insert in the said letters or papers, or to give therein any account of the debates, or other proceedings of this House, or any committee thereof, as well during the recess, as the
REPORTERS CAVE AND GUTHRIE. 261
sitting of Parliament ; and that this House will pro ceed with the utmost severity against such offenders. " After this all reports of Parliament were still further
disguised by being given in the Gentleman's Magazine, as Debates in the Senate of Great Lilliput, and even with this precaution, the publication was thought so hazardous that Cave did not dare issue them in his own name, but put that of his nephew, E. Cave, Junior, in the imprint.
In the London Magazine the speeches were
given, the speakers enjoying Roman appellations. Sir John Hawkins describes Cave's mode of obtaining his notes : " Taking with him a friend or two, he found means to procure for them and himself ad mission to the Gallery of the House of Commons, or to some concealed station in the other House ; and there they privately took down notes of the several speeches, and the general tendency and substance of the arguments. Thus furnished, Cave and his asso ciates would adjourn to a neighbouring tavern, and compare and adjust their notes; by means whereof, and the help of their memories, they became enabled to fix at least the substance of what they had so lately heard and remarked. The reducing this crude matter
into form, was the work of a future day and an abler hand. Guthrie, the historian, a writer for the book sellers, Cave retained for the purpose. "
The editor of the Parliamentary History,* after complaining of the carelessness with which Chandler had completed his collection of Debates, goes on to say that from the year 1735, when the Debates were
* Preface to Vol. IX. A. D. , 1733—1737.
262 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
no longer published in the Political State of Great Britain, the speeches were given by Guthrie in the Gentleman's, and by Gordon in the London Maga zine, both those reporters attending in the gallery, and receiving notes and assistance from different members. From November 19, 1740, to February, 1743, the debates in both Houses were compiled by
Dr. Johnson, and from such slender materials that great doubts of their authenticity have been entertained. Boswell says — " The debates in Parliament which were brought home and digested by Guthrie, whose memory was very quick and tenacious, were sent by Cave to Johnson for his revision; and after some time, when Guthrie had attained to greater variety of employment, and the speeches were more and more enriched by Johnson's genius, it was resolved that he should do the whole himself, from the scanty notes furnished by persons employed to attend in both Houses of Parliament. Sometimes, however, as he
himself told me, he had nothing more communicated to him than the names of the several speakers, and the part which they had taken in the debate. " Sir John Hawkins has, it is well known, thrown a doubt on the authenticity of Johnson's reports, but without giving any evidence in support of his assertion ; whilst the editor of the Parliamentary History, from which we quote, declares that the debates prepared by Johnson
are unusually authentic — a statement supported by
the doctor's version with a manuscript volume of debates in the House of Lords, in the hand writing of Dr. Seeker, Archbishop of Canterbury, who appears, from his own representation in the manu-
comparing
REPORTERS —DR. JOHNSON. 263
script, to have first taken down the notes of the debates in short-hand, and afterwards to have written them out fully.
The editor of the Parliamentary History stands up manfully for Johnson's reports, and quotes passages from the Birch MS. S. ,* to show that Cave had better assistance in his Parliamentary labours " than
has been generally supposed ; that he was indefatig able in getting them made as perfect as possible ; and that it is probable some of the speeches written by Johnson were corrected by the speakers themselves. f
We must not here pass unnoticed the anecdote given by Sir John Hawkins about Johnson's report of a speech by Pitt : — " Dr. Johnson, Mr. Wedderburn
Loughborough), Dr. Francis, the translator of Horace, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Chetwyn, and several other gentlemen dined with Foote. After dinner, an important debate towards the end of Sir Robert Wal- pole's administration being mentioned, Dr. Francis observed that Mr. Pitt's speech on that occasion was the best he had ever read. He had been employed, he added, during several years, in the study of Demos thenes, and had finished a translation of that cele brated author, with all the decorations of style and language within his capacity. Many of the company remembered the debate, and many passages were cited from the speech with the approbation and applause of all present. During the ardour of the conversation Johnson remained silent. When the warmth of
* Birch MS. S. in British Museum, No. 4,302.
t A corrected list of debates reported by Johnson will be found in the Preface to the Parliamentary History, Vol. XII.
(Lord
264 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
praise subsided, he opened with these words, ' That speech I wrote in a garret in Exeter Street. ' The company was struck with astonishment. After staring at each other for some time in silent amaze, Dr. Francis asked how that speech could be written by him. ' Sir,' said Johnson, ' I wrote it in Exeter Street. I never was in the gallery of the House of Commons but once. Cave had interest with the door-keepers. He and the persons under him got admittance. They brought away the subject of discussion, the names of the speakers, the side they took, and the order in which they rose, together with notes of the various
adduced in the course of the debate. The whole was afterwards communicated to me, and I com posed the speeches in the form they now have in Parliamentary Debates ; for the speeches of that period are all reprinted from Cave's Magazine. ' To this discovery Dr. Francis made answer : ' Then, sir, you have exceeded Demosthenes himself; for to say you have exceeded Francis's Demosthenes would be nothing. ' The rest of the company were lavish in their compliments to Johnson : one in particular praised his impartiality, observing that he had dealt out reason and eloquence with an equal hand to both parties. ' That is not quite true, sir,' said Johnson,
' I saved appearances well enough ; but I took care that the Whig dogs should not have the best of it. '"
Cave's name has been immortalized because he had the good fortune to get Johnson to write out his Parliamentary notes. Had this not occurred it is most likely that the reputation of giving early notices of the debates of his period, would have fallen to the
arguments
REPORTERS GORDON. 265
lot of his opponent of the London Magazine —Gor don, the translator of Tacitus; who, it is shown in the preface to the Parliamentary History,* not only an-
* The editor of the Parliamentary History says : — " It was observed, that from the year 1735, when the debates were no longer published in the Political State, the speeches were given in the Gentleman's Magazine by Guthrie the historian, and in the London Magazine by Gordon the translator of Tacitus ; both of whom attended in the gallery of the House, and received information from Members of Parliament. In justice to this last-mentioned publica tion, — a publication which by no means holds that rank amongst the
periodical collections of the times to which it is entitled, —the editor feels it his duty to point out one or two gross errors into which Sir John Hawkins, in his Life of Dr. Johnson, has led his readers. Speaking of the eagerness of the public to know what was going for ward in both Houses of Parliament, Sir John informs us, that Cave, the proprietor of the Gentleman's Magazine, ' had an interest with some of the Members of both Houses, arising from an employment he held in the Post-Offiee. Of this advantage he was too good a judge of his own interest not to avail himself. He therefore deter mined to gratify his readers with as much of this kind of intelligence as he could procure, and it was safe to communicate : his resolution was to frequent the two Houses whenever an important debate was
likely to come on, and from such expressions and particulars in the course thereof, as could be collected and retained in memory, to give the arguments on either side. This resolution he put into practice in July, 1736. The proprietors of the London Magazine also gave the debates, but from documents less authentic than Cave. '
" Now, it so happens, that Parliament was not sitting in July, 1736 ; and, by referring to the volumes themselves, it will be seen that the debates of the session, which opened on the 10th of Febru ary, 1737, as they stand in the Gentleman's Magazine of that year,
are copied verbatim, down to the very errors of the press, from the London Magazine ; from that very Magazine, the proprietors of which, as Sir John would have us believe, ' gave the debates from documents less authentic than those of Cave ! ' By turning over the pages of the present volume, it will be seen that most of the great debates are taken from that publication ; and its merits will more strikingly appear in the future progress of this work. "
266 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
Cave with some of the earlier debates, but was absolutely robbed of them by the Gentleman's Magazine, who copied the London, even to the errors of the press ! This, of course, was before Johnson had anything to do with the affair.
On the 30th of April, 1747, Edward Cave and Thomas Astley were ordered into the custody of the Usher of the Black Rod, for having printed, in the Gentleman's and the London Magazine, a report of the trial of Lord Lovatt, contrary to privilege. On Cave's examination, as to how he got particulars of the debates published in his Magazine, he admitted that he had taken notes, and that sometimes " he had speeches sent to him by very eminent persons," but denied that he " employed persons to make speeches for him. " On expressing contrition, he was discharged on paying the fees.
From 1743 to 1766, a space of twenty-three years, there appears to have been no one bold enough to attempt a regular report of the debates. In the latter year Almon commenced, as we have already mentioned, the publication of some brief reports —important at the time and in their consequences —but very defi cient as a record of the historical discussions of the time. * In 1774, however, Almon began to publish regular reports of both Houses in his Parliamentary
* This continuation contains no debating in the House of Lords, and is scanty and imperfect to a degree that can hardly be conceived, but of which some idea may be formed from the fact that all the debates and proceedings in Parliament during the important period between 1751, and the accession of George the Third in October,
1760, are comprised in less than three hundred loosely printed octavo pages. —Pref. Pari. Mist. , Vol. II.
*\ V
ticipated
REPORTERS —WOODFALL. 267
Register, and from that time to the present day our records of both chambers of the Legislature may be regarded as tolerably complete.
But though, after the famous struggle with public opinion, and the imprisonment of a Lord Mayor,* reporters were not systematically persecuted, no facili ties were offered them. Whoever took a debate had to sit in the strangers' gallery, and often to wait for hours on the stairs before admission was granted even then. When in the House no note-book dare be ex
hibited, and hence the only man able to report at all was one with a great memory. The most celebrated of these early reporters was William Woodfall.
Woodfall's mode of reporting was, of course, very different to that adopted at the present day, and when the difficulties he had to contend with are remembered, the results he secured are surprising. He used to get through an entire debate, making here and there a secret memorandum, and then when the House was up he went off to write out his report, which occupied him sometimes till nearly noon of the next day—the Paper containing the debate being published in the evening. His reputation, however, spread far and wide, and when strangers visited the House, their first inquiry
* Though generally so accurate, yet mistakes have sometimes been made in reports ; and now and then not without a slight suspicion of fun being intended at the expense of an honourable member. Mr. Wilberforce once explained to the House, that he was thus" made to speak in recommending the cultivation of the potato crop :— Potatoes
make men healthy, vigorous, and active ; but what is still more in their favour, they make men tall ; more especially was he led to say so, as being rather under the common size, and he must lament that his guardians had not fostered him under that genial vegetable ! "
268 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
often was, " Which is the Speaker, and which is Mr. Woodfall? " It is said he would sit for very many hours without any refreshment whatever, but
when hungry and faint with his long task, would draw a hard-boiled egg from his pocket, take off the shell in his hat, and stooping down make a meal on the indi gestible dainty in haste, lest the Sergeant-at-Arms should witness the infraction of the rules of the House against strangers. Woodfall is said to have been very dignified, and not very fond of the society of his
and a "gallery" tradition declares, that one day the well-known hard eggs were filched from his pockets by some rival, and unboiled ones put in their places, to the great discomfiture of the victim of the practical joke. Woodfall is described as the intimate of Garrick, Goldsmith, and all the other
actors and dramatists of repute in his day, and his critiques on the theatres were looked for with much interest, and were, doubtless, influential on the for tunes of the candidates for public support. His first reports were made for The London Packet, from which he transferred his services to The Morning Chronicle ; but, after some years, leaving the latter for The Diary, Perry opposed him by commencing the present suc cessful system of reporting, — a system supported not by one man of remarkable powers, but by a succession of skilful men, each taking notes for a fixed period and then writing them out for the press.
Perry was the first man who was able to print the debates of one night in a Paper of the next morning ; and he succeeded in doing this by a division of the labour of reporting. Whilst Woodfall was laboriously
fellow-reporters,
REPORTING — PERRY. 269
working out his report, assisted by notes from some of the speakers, for publication in the evening, Perry's version of the debate was being circulated and read all over the town. The result was clear. Woodfall's Paper failed, and Perry made a fortune.
Perry alludes to this very important innovation introduced by him, when he commenced his editor ship of The Gazetteer —this substitution of numbers for an individual in reporting. But the debates, long after that period, were not reported with the despatch now indispensable. The Houses used to sit late, on what used to be then called field-days ; and when they rose at a late hour in the morning, sometimes as late, indeed, as seven or eight o'clock, The Chronicle, which laid itself out in reporting, would not appear till two or three o'clock in the afternoon. It must not be supposed that these late sittings were frequent. It often happened that the reporter, whose turn it was to go first, would take the whole of the proceedings. But every now and then came a murderously heavy day, and the poor reporters who were obliged to be on the stairs of the entrance to the gallery of the House of Commons by twelve o'clock at noon, could not
leave the House till their turn came; for the gallery was not, after the House was locked, accessible till eleven o'clock; so that it was necessary for the reporters to wait many hours. When the speakers were second rate, they were disposed of very summarily ; but if it happened that Sheridan, or Wyndham, or Tierney, or Whitbread, were on their legs during the whole of a reporter's turn, the publication was necessarily delayed, for such men could not be slurred over. On the subject
270 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
of Parliamentary reporting, Perry used to say, that for the public the reports could not be too short, and for the members too long. In those days there were few speakers, but the style of speaking was highly finished, and the public would look for the account of a speech of Sheridan's, for instance, with great eager ness.
Sheridan repaid the attention of the reporters to his brilliant harangues, by speaking in their favour, when their character and position was attacked by the benchers of Lincoln's Inn. Those irresponsible legal curiosities having passed a bye-law of their society, the object of which was to exclude from it all men who dared to write for the Newspapers, a petition was presented to the House of Commons, from a gentleman against whom this ridiculously illiberal rule operated. In the discussion to which the subject gave rise, Sheridan said: — "Much illiberal calumny had been cast upon those gentle men who were reporters, which it is time should
now be fully confuted. He had to state, then, that there were amongst those who reported the debates of that House, no less than twenty-three graduates of the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Dublin, and Edinburgh ; those gentlemen were all in their pro gress to honourable professions ; and there was no possible course better than that which they had adopted for the improvement of their minds, and the acquisition of political experience. They had adopted this course from an honest and honourable impulse ; and had to boast the association of many great names, who had risen from poverty to reputation. This had
REPORTING. —SHERIDAN. 271
been long the employment, and indeed, chief means of subsistence, of Dr. Johnson and Mr. Burke. Such
were the men at whose depression this legal bye-law aimed! Never was there a more illiberal and base attack on literary talent ; he could find no parallel to it in the History of England, except one indeed, in the reign of Henry the Fourth, which went to exclude lawyers from sitting in Parliament. At this, as might be expected, the body who now sought to proscribe others were mightily offended ; they branded the Parliament with the epithet of indoctum; and Lord Coke had even the hardihood to declare from the bench, that
a most unjust individual proscription; a violation of the best principles of our constitution. For (ex claimed Sheridan) it is the glory of English law, that it sanctions no proscriptions, nor does it acknowledge any office in the state, which the honourable ambitious industry, even of the most humble, may not obtain. " Mr. Stephen (father of the attache" of the Foreign Office) followed Sheridan in a very manly speech. He declared that he had been a member of Lincoln's Inn for thirty-five years, but that he had not the most remote connection with the framing of the
there never was a good law made therein ! impossible to imagine a single reason for the enact ment of the bye-law complained of. It was a sub version of the liberty and respectability of the press ;
obnoxious bye-laws alluded to ; he thought it a most illiberal and unjust proscription ; a scandal rather to its authors than its objects. " I will put a case," said Mr. Stephen ; " man
I will suppose a young
of education and talent contending with pecuniary diffi
It was
272 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
culties —difficulties not proceeding from vice, but from family misfortunes. I will suppose him honestly meeting his obstructions with honourable industry, and exercising his talents by reporting the debates of this House in order to attain a profession. Where, I ask, is the degradation of such an employment ? Who could be so meanly cruel as to deprive him of
it ? The case, sir, which I have now supposed, was thirty years ago—my own! " Sir John Austruther was also a member of Lincoln's Inn, but reprobated the bye-laws referred to ; and the benchers, over whelmed by the indignation their regulation had excited, expunged it from the books.
Several of the members of Perry's corps of parlia mentary reporters were men remarkable for talent and wit, and from that day to the present the " gallery" has held a number of distinguished men. Amongst the recent literary instances, the names of Hazlitt and Charles Dickens are often quoted. The latter is described by his old colleagues as having been as
excellent in this his first literary attempt, as he has since proved to be in the higher walks wherein he won his fame. He was for some years in the gallery; was very rapid ; and it was said of him, that he once wrote out from his notes the copy for a column and a half of The Morning Chronicle in an hour — a feat almost unexampled in its way.
At present the reporters are as quiet and punctual as any other class of professional men, but in the days
when every gentleman considered it a part of his duty, and a proof of his respectability, to drink one bottle of port, at least, after dinner daily — when people were
REPORTERS —MARK SUPPLE. 273
spoken of as two bottle men, and three bottle men, and capital fellows —the representatives of the press seem not to have been behind their countrymen in their devotion to Bacchus.
There was never a deficiency of wit and humour
and when it was the fashion to heighten these by full potations, it is not surprising that an occasional escapade would attract more than or
dinary notice. One bygone worthy, distinguished in this way, Mark Supple* it was, whose name has found a place in all the jest books for a feat which Peter Fin- nerty, another spirit of kindred quality, used to tell after the following fashion :—
"Mark Supple was big-boned and loud-voiced, and had as much wit and fun as an Irish porter could carry; often more than he himself could carry, or knew what to do with. He took his wine frequently at Bellamy's (a great place in those days for reporters as well as M. P. 's), and then went up into the gallery and reported like a gentleman and a man of
The members hardly knew their own speeches again, but they admired his free and bold manner of dressing them up. None of them ever went to the printing office of The Morning Chronicle to complain that the tall Irishman had given a lame, sneaking version of their sentiments, they pocketed the affront of their metamorphosis, and fathered speeches they had never made. Supple's way may be said to have been the hyperbole, a strong view of orientalism, with a dash of the bog-trotter. His manner seemed to please, and he presumed upon it. One evening as he sat at
amongst reporters,
genius.
VOL. II.
* Mark Supple died in 1807.
S
274 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
his post in the gallery, waiting the issues of things, and a hint to hang tropes and figures upon. A dead silence happened to prevail in the House. It was when Mr. Addington was speaker. The bold leader of the press gang was never much on serious business bent, and at this time he was particularly full of meat and wine. Delighted, therefore, with the pause, but thinking that something might as well be going for ward, he called out lustily, ' A song from Mr. Speaker. ' Imagine Addington's long, prim, upright figure ; his consternation and utter want of preparation for, or of a clue to repel, such an interruption of the rules and orders of Parliament. The House was in a roar— Pitt, it is said, could hardly keep his seat for laughing. When the bustle and confusion were abated, the Ser-
went into the gallery to take the audacious culprit into custody, and indignantly desired to know who it was ; but nobody would tell. Mark
sat like a tower on the hindermost bench of the gal
lery, imperturbable in his own gravity, and safe in the faith of the brotherhood of reporters, who alone were in the secret. At length as the mace-bearer was making fruitless inquiries, and getting impatient, Supple pointed to a fat quaker, who sat in the middle of the crowd, and nodded assent that he was the man.
The quaker was, to his great surprise, taken into im mediate custody; but after a short altercation, and some further explanation, he was released, and the hero of our story put in his place for an hour or two, but let off on an assurance of his contrition, and of showing less wit and more discretion for the future. "
geant-at-Arms
REPORTERS —PETER FINNERTY. 275
Peter Finnerty was the hero of several frays ; in
one of them Lord Castlereagh being his opponent. The Annual Register affords" us a notice of the affair in its record of law cases. On the 31st of January, 1811," says that authority, "judgment was prayed against the defendant, in the cause, ' The King v. Finnerty. ' Defendant had suffered judgment to go against him by default. The indictment was for a libel on Lord Castlereagh, one of His Majesty's princi pal Secretaries of State, which appeared in the Morning Chronicle of last year. The defendant had
the expedition to Walcheren, for the purpose of writing a narrative of its proceedings, when a general order was issued to Lord Chatham and Sir
accompanied
R. Strachan, to inquire of all the vessels which accom panied the expedition, whether a gentleman of the name of Finnerty were on board, and if found, to convey him to his Lordship or Sir Richard, with a view to his being sent home. He was accordingly conveyed to Sir R. Strachan, and sent home on board of a revenue cutter. The letter in The
Morning Chronicle, charged as the present libel, consisted of a narrative of these facts, and an attribution of the whole to Lord Castlereagh, and insinuated that this
measure was only one instance of a course of oppres sion which the defendant had received from the personal malice of his Lordship, and that his Lordship had been guilty of great villainy in and concerning the administration of Ireland.
"Mr. Finnerty, who appeared without counsel, put in a very long affidavit, in which he stated that the court having, in an application by him to postpone
276 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
the trial of his cause, on account of the absence of material witnesses, thrown out their opinion as to the calumnious nature of the libel, he had thought it most respectful to the court to suffer judgment to go against him by default, reserving to himself the testimony of such of his witnesses, whose regard to justice would induce them to make affidavits for him, and the present opportunity of justifying the whole imputed libel, which he did most unequivocally. The affi davit proceeded to state that he had, at the same time when he wrote the letter, no intention to libel any body ; and that he had, before its publication, con sulted an eminent barrister as to the libellous ten dency of who was of opinion that was not libellous that the defendant was no conspirator in Ireland that he was invited to accompany the expe dition by Sir Home Popham, for the sole purpose of narrating the proceedings of the expedition and the affidavit quoted letter from Sir Home to that effect
the deponent solemnly declared he had no other view in accompanying the expedition that he rejected the proposal of Lord Chatham and Sir Richard Strachan to publish nothing but what had undergone their revi sion that he had incurred considerable expenses in his voyage, and that the prejudices which had been excited against him the order for his quitting the expedition, had deprived him of £500, which he cal culated he should have gained by his intended publi cation that he had intended to bring an action against Lord Castlereagh for libel, but was advised against
by his counsel; that he did not accompany the ex pedition clandestinely that the main object of Lord
it
;
;
;a
by
;
a
:
;
it
;
it,
;
REPORTERS PETER FINNERTY. 277
Castlereagh was to harass the deponent ; and that a noble Lord, nearly connected with Lord Castlereagh, had been heard to declare in a public coffee-room, ' I wish some man would shoot that fellow (meaning the deponent) out of the way. ' The affidavit was then proceeding to enter into the circumstances of the trial of Mr. Orr, in Ireland, for administering a sedi tious oath, in which trial, the letter in The Morning Chronicle stated the verdict of guilty to have been obtained from the jury by promises, by threats, and by intoxicating them with liquor ; and was about to quote two affidavits made by as many of the jurors to this effect, when the court objected to their perusal, as irrelevant. Mr. Finnerty observed, that it was stated as a fact in the imputed libel, that these affidavits were made ; and he thought it proper to verify that statement. The affidavits were not long. Lord Ellenborough consented to hear them, long or short. The defendant's affidavit travelling still further from the record, however, as it proceeded, Lord Ellen- borough at last objected to trying the government of Ireland, under pretence of passing sentence upon the defendant, and refused to hear any more affidavits quoted upon the subject ofLord Castlereagh's conduct in Ireland. Mr. Finnerty said, that such a liberty had been granted in the case of Governor Picton; the
of Trinidad was fully investigated upon the trial of that man for torture ; the defendant's (Mr. Finnerty's) crime was merely that of reprobating a man who patronized torture. The letter in The Morning Chronicle made a general charge of cruelty against Lord Castlereagh ; and the defendant was
government
278 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
now proving particular instances of it. After some further conversation on this topic, in which Mr. Garrow attacked, and Mr. Finnerty justified his affi davit, the defendant was advised by the court to prepare a more temperate affidavit, and was then remanded to a future day. Being brought up again on Feb. 7th, he presented his affidavit to the court. It was read, and detailed in the first place, the reasons why the defendant was not in court before, when
judgment was prayed against him; it next proceeded to state why he had suffered judgment to go by default ; but now stated his belief of every circum stance with which he had charged Lord Castlereagh, and at this period offered the truth in justification. Lord Ellenborough said he had objected to this before, and had warned him to amend what he had done ; and hoped he was now come in a proper spirit to mitigate a crime of which he had confessed the com mission. It appeared, however, that such was by no means Mr. Finnerty's intention ; and, in a long con versation which ensued, he repeatedly presented affi davits to prove all the enormities practised under Lord Oastlereagh's government, and with his concurrence, and declared that nothing on earth should induce him to make any submission to his Lordship. The court as
repeatedly refused to admit them, and warned him that he was introducing irrelevant matter, and only aggra vating his offence. He was heard, however, in a long and spirited defence, which was replied to with great severity by the Attorney General ; who, after repre senting in the strongest terms the additional crimi nality the defendant had incurred by his justification,
V
REPORTERS —PETER FINNERTY. 279
trusted that if there was any kind of punishment in their Lordships' discretion more degrading than im prisonment, that too would be inflicted upon him. This hint for the pillory was not, however, attended to by the court, which, by Mr. Justice Grose, pro nounced the following sentence : — ' That the defen dant be committed to His Majesty's gaol for the city of Lincoln, for the space of eighteen calendar months,
and find security for his good behaviour for five years from that time, himself in £500, and two sureties in £250 each, and be further imprisoned till that security be procured. '"
The " veteran Journalist," to whom I have before expressed my obligations for some curious facts, says in a letter : — " An anecdote which now occurs to me will serve to give a good idea of poor Perry. Peter Finnerty was sincerely attached to Perry and The Chronicle, but he had great defects, and required to be well watched. Perry would have been glad to be rid of him, but he would no more have thought of dismissing an old servant without some very strong
cause indeed, than he would of cutting his own throat. I have heard him say, I would give any body £200 who would take Finnerty from The Chronicle. The libel on Lord Castlereagh, for which Finnerty was sent to Lincoln Castle, was inserted in The Chronicle on F. 's own responsibility, and against
the order of Perry, who, for a long time refused it admission, but was at length worried into publi cation. "
The present occupants of the reporters' gallery are a very honourable body of men. Amongst the
280 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
seniors, if not the seniors, are Mr. Dod, the author of the Peerage, and of the useful little blue-covered volume, the Parliamentary Companion, who has been in the gallery for The Times for between thirty and forty years; and Mr. Tyas, another veteran of more than thirty years' Parliamentary service on the same Paper. Tyas is said to have been the author of the sharp critiques on Lord Brougham's classical knowledge ; and is spoken of as the hero of another gallery tradition. The story runs that Tyas had been
luxuriating over a glass of wine, and the pages of Cicero, when the hour came, and he was due in the House. As he took his place Lord Brougham was speaking, and soon the pencil of Tyas was on his track. The legal orator went on, and the mind of the reporter unconsciously kept upon the double thread of Brougham and Cicero. The scholar in the gallery thought the scholar on the floor of the House, would remember a fine illustrative passage in the Roman orator. But he passed and concluded his harangue. Tyas went to work to write out his notes, and when the arguments required he put in nearly
page of Cicero. Brougham reprinted the speech, adopting, without remark, the whole of the interpo lated matter.
Members have sometimes complained of the way in which their harangues are reported but the truth is, that the speakers owe great debt of gratitude to those who place their speeches before the public. The words as they are uttered, and the same as they are printed, are often curious improvement one upon the other. All the stutterings, the hesitations.
a
a
;
a
it
it,
REPORTERS THEIR TALENT. 281
the repetitions, are omitted ; the arguments, the important illustrations, and the facts alone being
When The New Times was started, a part of their plan was to report the Parliamentary debates verbatim. This was commenced, but it is said that within a week the proprietors were threatened
with actions for damages for burlesquing the speeches of the honourable M. P. 's. The printing of their harangues as they were spoken was unendurable, and verbatim reports were abandoned. * Mr. Angus B. Reach, an experienced reporter —perhaps better popu larly known as the author of innumerable light literary sketches of men and manners —threw off, some time ago, a slight outline of the reporters at their posts, which may help to complete this part of the subject :—
The little door opened, and we stood in the Reporter's Gal lery—the back of the Speaker's ugly gothic chair below us— the senators, with their hats on, sitting, standing, walking, lolling lazy on either side —the clerk's table with the mace and the shiningly bound volumes of the statutes at large in the midst, and the bright bude light shining over all.
The hon. member for Fortywinks was on his legs, al though his luminous remarks could only be heard amid the buzz of about 150 distinct conversations going on around. But the hon. member had got his speech off by heart, and was speaking to his constituents through the reporters' gallery. Hapless man ! The Times reclined gracefully back and amused
* Mr. Sadler, Mr. Trant, and some other members, dissatisfied with the meagre reports of their speeches in the daily Papers, engaged Mr. Hodge to report them in full. On reading the speeches so reported they were found such sheer nonsense, that the practice was incontinently abandoned. — Times, July 8, 1830.
preserved.
282 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
himself by sharpening his pencils. The Chronicle was talking to The Herald about Alboni. The Morning Post was drawing carricaturcs in its note book, and The Morning Advertiser was musing on what it would have for supper. So the hon. mem ber talked, and no one heeded him.
After him came another, an Irish orator, standing up in the midst of a whirlpool of his blazing and dazzling metaphors and and similes, like a juggler casting round his head a halo of brass balls. But no nimble pencil followed the burning phrases of the patriot.
" What are they about ? " we whispered to our conductor in dismay ; " there is eloquence running to waste. "
" They are waiting," replied our Mentor, " they are waiting until he makes a point ; Papers have no room for flourishes. Imagine the consequence, were every word spoken in the House of Commons set down in cold blooded type exactly as it is uttered. What a huge conglomeration of truisms, absurdities, bad taste, wretched jokes, and worse grammar ! Depend upon
sir, literally-reported debates would infallibly disgust the nation with representative government.
" Then you pick and choose," we interrupted.
" Yes we are the winnowers in this great granary of words. Men there are who, when they speak, drop from their lips ripest wholesomest grain, but from the mouths of most come flying empty torrents of mere hunks and chaff. It ours to wait, and watch, and sift out the scattered globules of fact or argu ment, and enshrine them in printer's ink. "
" But you do not," we said, " arrogate the right of sitting in judgment on the soundness of an argument, or the authen ticity of fact. "
" Clearly not," said the Reporter, " we record all arguments —good, bad, or indifferent we set down all facts—certain or dubious. But ours to separate the arguments and the facts from the words—the mere empty verbiage in which they are oftentimes all but smothered. How many inaccuracies do we not patch up. How many inelegancies do we not lick into graceful form. How many unfinished sentences do we not fill
is
;
a
it, ;
is
REPORTING O'CONNELL.
283
up and round off. How many slovenly speeches do not appear shortened one hundred, and improved two hundred per cent. , by passing through the alembic of this little gallery. "
Now and then a speaker, who thinks himself neglected, ventures to complain, but generally proves
rather the reporter's case than his own. Newspapers, and all engaged upon them, are too anxious to get anything new for their Journal to neglect one word that the world would care to hear, or one fact the world would like to know. In July, 1833, O'Connell stood up in the House and attacked the reporters for what he chose to regard as a neglect of his merits, and did not hesitate to impute dishonourable motives to those whom he accused, knowing they could not there answer him. He moved to bring the representatives of The Times and Chronicle to the bar for not report ing his speech in full. A Mr. O'Dwyer, who had him self, it was said, been employed on The Times, seconded the motion. * Many members were ready to vindicate the fairness of the Newspaper reports, and amongst them Sir Robert Peel,t who gave his testi
* There was a joke current on O'Dwyer's return to Parliament, which described his qualifications for Newspaper employment, and concluded with — " and so, not being clever enough for The Times, they made him an M. P. "
t Sir Robert Peel has on other occasions evinced his esteem for the Parliamentary reporters. When he opened his picture gallery in 1837, and invited the literary celebrities of the day, he paid the " gal lery" a compliment which was thus recorded by the London corre spondent of a local Paper (himself a reporter, and therefore cognizant of the fact) :—" There are in Monday's Papers long critiques on Sir R. Peel's collection of pictures at Whitehall Gardens, opened for the first time to inspection of any but very special friends indeed on the Saturday previous. Sir Robert's gallery was one of the most exclusive in
284 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
mony to the fact, that the reports were given with great fairness and impartiality, and added, amid loud cheers : —" During fifteen out of those twenty years he had held office, and during the whole of that time he had never received any communication from any person connected with the press respecting the manner in which his speeches had been reported. He had never during that time received any solicitation for any
favour or patronage from any reporter ; and he be lieved he might say that no application had been made
to any ofhis colleagues while he was in officefor any such patronage or favour from any reporter, in con sequence of his having reported their speeches fully.
(Hear, hear. ) Ifhe could bear his testimony to the independence of the reporters, founded as it was on the experience of fifteen years in office, he thought that he might challenge those who had succeeded him to say whether they could not bear the same evidence. " These sentiments were greeted by loud cries of " Hear, hear. "
England ; but for some reason or other, known only to himself, he suddenly resolved to relax his rigid interdiction against nearly all the applicants, and availed himself of the re-arrangement of the col lection to invite a vast number of fashionable, political, artistical, and other people to look at his pictorial treasures on Saturday. The even ing previous he went up to the Reporters' Gallery, in the Commons, and personally gave to those present, with every mark of courtesy and cordiality, some two dozen tickets, regretting that the vast number of invitations he had issued precluded his being more liberal to the Fourth Estate, with several of whom he shook hands ; and next day, during the exhibition of the pictures, was, at his special request, introduced to Mr. Tyas, one of the most distinguished veterans ofthe press, for many years connected with The Times, and at present the writer of the
Parliamentary summary of that Paper. "
THE REPORTERS AND O CONNELL. 285
The reporters took a course which staggered O'Con-
nell. His attack had an effect the very reverse of what
he anticipated. They penned a letter, in which they
that a member of the House had most falsely accused them of dishonourable motives, and had done so not out of doors, where they could meet him with an instant denial and proof of falsity, but had done so under the shelter of the privileges of the House ; declaring, in conclusion, that they could not report one line of what he said until the unjust imputation had been withdrawn. In Parliament the affair was pressed to a division, when 0 Conn ell's followers mustered at the vote, but only numbered 48; whilst 159 members
voted against him, and the order for the attendance of the offending persons was discharged. O'Connell was
glad after this to be more just, and so escaped what to him would have been semi- annihilation —his expulsion from Newspaper notice.
Anxious as he was to be reported in England, there were occasions when O'Connell preferred that what he said should not be printed in this country. Of this an amusing anecdote has been given. O'Connell was on a visit to Ireland, and indulging in long speeches of a most " combustible character," when the Govern ment thought fit to send over some short-hand writers
to take down the harangues. "The first appearance of the Government reporters was at a meeting at Kanturk. " The gentlemen were Englishmen," says the story, and belonging to Mr. Gurney's reporting staff. They came on the platform, and introduced themselves to Mr. O'Connell. He shook them by the hands, and said to those around him, ' Nothing
complained
286 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
can be done here until these gentlemen are afforded
every requisite
accommodation. ' This was at once
provided, and having assured Mr. O'Connell that
they were 'perfectly ready/ and well provided for,
he came forward to address the people, and com menced his speech, to the great dismay of the English men, in the Irish language. Having explained to the assembly who they were, and how he humbugged them, he continued in the same language to address to the meeting everything he wished to convey to them ; the people laughing all the while at the English reporters, while they joined very good humouredly in the laugh raised against them. "
More recently (June, 1849) Mr. John O'Connell tried his hand at clearing the gallery, because, in his own opinion, his speeches were not given at sufficient length. This was bad enough from the O'Connell ; but that his son John should take such a step was too absurd. Ridicule instead of indignation was excited, and the general feeling was well conveyed by a writer in The Spectator, who said: — "The House had better lose no time in placing the matter on a more simple and decorous footing, or it will be forced. If driven to no doubt, the leading Journals could return their own members to report for them from the body of the House meanwhile, they have their honorary member in the person of Mr. Trelawney, who furnished intelligent accounts of what passed during the exclusion of the reporters, and will pro bably do so as often as may be required. "
Even now the theory of Parliament is, that the debates take place with closed doors to speak
;
it
:
it,
REPORTING THE " CLOSED DOORS. " 287
of reports in Newspapers, except to complain of them as a breach of privilege, is irregular, and the mere mention of the fact that there are strangers in the House is enough, as a matter of course, to clear the reporters' gallery. Should this farce continue ? Should that which is of vital importance to our liberty be held on such terms ?
" It is almost impossible," says a writer we have before quoted, " to overrate the value of this regular
of proceedings in Parliament, carried, as it has been in our own time, to nearly as great copi
/ousness and accuracy as is possibly attainable.
is quite different from the last. As to the question whether we have a right to punish any printer, who
shall publish our proceedings, or any part of them, during our recess, which I take to be the only question at present, it may be worthy consideration ; for my own part, I am apt to think that we may ; because our privileges as a House of Parliament exist during the whole continuance of Parliament; and our not sitting never makes any violation of these privileges committed during a recess less liable to censure, the next time we meet as a House. However, sir, as it has been long the practice to print some account of our proceedings during our recess, I am against punishing any person for what is past, because very possibly they did not know they were doing amiss ; and if gentlemen think fit to enter into any resolution for the time to come, I dare say it will be sufficient to deter all offenders in that way. But that resolution, sir, cannot affect any person who shall print an
reporting. —onslow's motion. 255
account of your proceedings when this Parliament shall be dissolved. There is an honourable gentle man* near me, who knows that the history of a whole Parliament was once published in a sixpenny pamphlet, and their transactions set in no very favourable light, for the gentlemen who composed it. I never heard, sir, that any succeeding House of Commons took that amiss, nor that the honourable gentleman who was generally looked upon as the author of was ever called to account by either House of Parliament. Parliaments, sir, when they do amiss, will be talked of with the same freedom as any other set of men whatsoever. This Parliament, hope, will never de serve but, did, should be very sorry that any resolutions were entered into in order to prevent its being represented in the present or the next age, in its proper colours. am sure the honourable gentle
* "Meaning Sir Robert Walpole, who in the year 1713, wrote pamphlet entitled A Short History of the Last Parliament. ' "
" While the new elections were depending, was the opinion of Somers and the Whig Lords, that to state to the people, in strong and perspicuous manner, the proceedings of the late Parliament with
view to expose the measures of the Ministry, and to guide the electors in the choice of the new representatives, would be highly ad vantageous to their party. As no one seemed better calculated for this office than Walpole, he undertook pamphlet, at their desire, on the Thursday, and published on the Tuesday following, under the title of Short History of the Last Parliament, with the motto
Venalis Populus, venalis Curia Patrum. '
To this publication prefixed Dedication by Pulteney, then his coadjutor, composed in strain of irony and humour peculiarly his own, and in which, though addressed to an anonymous peer, easy to perceive that the Earl of Oxford was the object of allusion. " — Coxe's Memoirs Sir Rohert Walpole.
of
it ;
a
I
' is
'
if it
it a
a
I
I
it : is
it,
A
a
it
a
a
256 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
man who sits near me, will agree with me in this ; and whatever the other House may do, sir, I hope we never shall stretch our privilege, so as to cramp the freedom of writing on public affairs.
" But this consideration, sir, can never affect the resolutions which gentlemen propose to come to now. We have rather been too remiss in not putting a stop
to this scandalous practice that has been complained of. I always thought that these pamphlets contain ing our debates, were circulated by the Government's
encouragement, and at their expense ; for till the honourable gentleman who spoke last save one in the debate, mentioned the magazines in the manner he did, I have been still used to look on the publishing them as a ministerial project; for I imagined that it being found unpracticable to make the people buy and read The Gazetteer by itself, it was contrived so as that the writings of the other party, being printed in the same pamphlet, it might be some invitation to the public to look into The Gazetteer, and I dare say, sir, the great run which the magazines have had has been entirely owing to this stratagem. The good and the bad are printed together, and people are by that means drawn in to read both. But I think it is now high time, to put a stop to the effects they may have by coming to a resolution that may at least prevent anything being published, during the time of our sit ting as a House, which may be imposed upon the world as the language and words of gentlemen who perhaps never spoke them. "
You have with great justice," he said, "punished some
Sir Robert Walpole was the next speaker.
REPORTING —ONSLOW S MOTION. 257
persons, for forging the names of gentlemen upon the backs of letters ; but the abuse now complained of is, I conceive, a forgery of a worse kind ; for it tends to misrepresent the sense of Parliament, and impose upon the understanding of the whole nation. It is but a petty damage that can arise from a forged frank, when compared to the infinite mischiefs that may come from this practice. I have read some debates of this House, sir, in which I have been made to speak the very reverse of what I meant. I have read others of them wherein all the wit, the learning, and the argu
ment has been thrown into one side, and on the other nothing but what was low, mean, and ridiculous ; and yet when it comes to the question, the division has
the side which, upon the face of the debate, had reason and justice to support it. So that, sir, had I been a stranger to the proceedings and to the nature of the arguments themselves, I must have thought this to have been one of the most contemptible assemblies on the face of the earth. What notion
then, sir, can the public, who have no other means of being informed of the debates of this House, than what they have from these Papers, entertain of the wisdom and abilities of an assembly, who are repre sented therein to carry almost every point against the
strongest and the plainest argument and appearances. However, sir, as I believe gentlemen are by this time pretty sensible of the necessity of putting a stop to this practice, it will be quite unnecessary for me to argue a point wherein we are all agreed. But I can not help taking notice of one thing mentioned by the
hon. gentleman who spoke last, since I was the person VOL. II. R
gone against
258 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
to whom he was pleased to appeal. He mentioned that the history of a whole Parliament had been printed, and seemed to insinuate from this, that people might make very free with Parliaments. Really, sir, I will be so free as to own that I do know of such a pamphlet being printed ; nay, I believe I know a little of the author, and the publication. But at the same time I know, sir, that that was one of the worst Houses of Commons that ever this nation saw ; that they had a design to introduce the Pretender ; that they had approved of a scandalous peace, after the most glorious war that was ever carried on ; and had it not been for some very favourable circumstances that fell out, they would have set aside the present happy establishment in His Majesty's person and fa mily. I hope, sir, no gentleman will find fault with any reflections that could be thrown out against such
I
tleman will pretend to draw any parallels betwixt their
conduct and ours. But, sir, besides these consider ations, gentlemen are to reflect, that the Parliament which was described in that history, had been dissolved before the history itself was published. And not only so, sir, but there is a noble lord in the other House,* who can, if he pleases, inform gentlemen, that the author of that history was so apprehensive of the
a House of Commons ;
likewise, that no hope gen
consequence of printing that the press was carried to his house, and the copies printed off there.
" This, think, sir, will be sufficient to show, that the author did not think himself quite out of danger, even though the Parliament was dissolved. But
* Probably Lord Cobham.
I
I
it,
REPORTING — ONSLOW S MOTION. 259
am not at all for carrying things to such a length at present ; it may be sufficient, if we come to a resolu tion to prevent the publication of any part of our
proceedings during the recess, as well as the sitting of the Parliament. As to what the honourable gentleman said, with regard to the magazines being published and distributed by order, and at the expense of the Government, I do not know if he was serious or not. If he was serious, he must have a very contemptible opinion of the understanding of those gentlemen who have the honour to serve His Majesty, if he imagines that they would be so weak as to propagate papers, every page almost of which hath a direct tendency against their own interest. If any gentleman will take the trouble, which I own I very seldom do, to look into one of these magazines, he will find four pages wrote against the Government for one that is in its favour ; and generally the subject is of such a nature as would be severely punished under any other Govern ment than our own. If the hon. gentleman was not serious, I think a more proper time might have been chosen for showing his wit, than while we are con sidering of the means of putting a stop to a practice, which he himself, and every gentleman who spoke in this debate, allows so nearly to affect the dignity and privileges of this House. For my own part, sir, I am ex tremely indifferent what opinion some gentlemen may
form of the writers in favour of the Government : but, sir, I shall never have the worse opinion of them for that : there is nothing more easy than to raise a laugh ; it has been the common practice of all minorities when
they were driven out of every other argument. I r2
260 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
never shall be afraid, sir, to do what I think right, and for the service of His Majesty and my country, because I may be laughed at. But, really, sir, I will be so free as to say, that if the want of wit, learning, good manners, and truth, is a proper object of contempt and ridicule, the writers in the opposition seem to me to have a much better title to both than those for the Government. No Government, I will venture to say, ever punished so few libels, and no Government ever had provocation to punish so many. I could name a Government in this country, sir, under which those writings, which are now cried up, as founded upon the laws, and in the constitution, would have been punished as libels, even by gentlemen who are now the warmest advocates for the liberty of the press, and for suffering the authors of those daily libels that appear in print to pass with impunity. But I ask pardon for what I have said that may appear foreign
I was led to it
had been thrown out by the gentleman who spoke
to the present consideration ; by
what
before. "
With this the debate closed, and Mr. Speaker
Onslow " having drawn up the question," the House of Commons resolved unanimously : — " That it is an high indignity to, and a notorious breach of the privilege of, this House, for any News-writer, in letters or other papers (as minutes, or under any other denomination), or for any printer or publisher of any printed Newspaper of any denomination, to presume to insert in the said letters or papers, or to give therein any account of the debates, or other proceedings of this House, or any committee thereof, as well during the recess, as the
REPORTERS CAVE AND GUTHRIE. 261
sitting of Parliament ; and that this House will pro ceed with the utmost severity against such offenders. " After this all reports of Parliament were still further
disguised by being given in the Gentleman's Magazine, as Debates in the Senate of Great Lilliput, and even with this precaution, the publication was thought so hazardous that Cave did not dare issue them in his own name, but put that of his nephew, E. Cave, Junior, in the imprint.
In the London Magazine the speeches were
given, the speakers enjoying Roman appellations. Sir John Hawkins describes Cave's mode of obtaining his notes : " Taking with him a friend or two, he found means to procure for them and himself ad mission to the Gallery of the House of Commons, or to some concealed station in the other House ; and there they privately took down notes of the several speeches, and the general tendency and substance of the arguments. Thus furnished, Cave and his asso ciates would adjourn to a neighbouring tavern, and compare and adjust their notes; by means whereof, and the help of their memories, they became enabled to fix at least the substance of what they had so lately heard and remarked. The reducing this crude matter
into form, was the work of a future day and an abler hand. Guthrie, the historian, a writer for the book sellers, Cave retained for the purpose. "
The editor of the Parliamentary History,* after complaining of the carelessness with which Chandler had completed his collection of Debates, goes on to say that from the year 1735, when the Debates were
* Preface to Vol. IX. A. D. , 1733—1737.
262 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
no longer published in the Political State of Great Britain, the speeches were given by Guthrie in the Gentleman's, and by Gordon in the London Maga zine, both those reporters attending in the gallery, and receiving notes and assistance from different members. From November 19, 1740, to February, 1743, the debates in both Houses were compiled by
Dr. Johnson, and from such slender materials that great doubts of their authenticity have been entertained. Boswell says — " The debates in Parliament which were brought home and digested by Guthrie, whose memory was very quick and tenacious, were sent by Cave to Johnson for his revision; and after some time, when Guthrie had attained to greater variety of employment, and the speeches were more and more enriched by Johnson's genius, it was resolved that he should do the whole himself, from the scanty notes furnished by persons employed to attend in both Houses of Parliament. Sometimes, however, as he
himself told me, he had nothing more communicated to him than the names of the several speakers, and the part which they had taken in the debate. " Sir John Hawkins has, it is well known, thrown a doubt on the authenticity of Johnson's reports, but without giving any evidence in support of his assertion ; whilst the editor of the Parliamentary History, from which we quote, declares that the debates prepared by Johnson
are unusually authentic — a statement supported by
the doctor's version with a manuscript volume of debates in the House of Lords, in the hand writing of Dr. Seeker, Archbishop of Canterbury, who appears, from his own representation in the manu-
comparing
REPORTERS —DR. JOHNSON. 263
script, to have first taken down the notes of the debates in short-hand, and afterwards to have written them out fully.
The editor of the Parliamentary History stands up manfully for Johnson's reports, and quotes passages from the Birch MS. S. ,* to show that Cave had better assistance in his Parliamentary labours " than
has been generally supposed ; that he was indefatig able in getting them made as perfect as possible ; and that it is probable some of the speeches written by Johnson were corrected by the speakers themselves. f
We must not here pass unnoticed the anecdote given by Sir John Hawkins about Johnson's report of a speech by Pitt : — " Dr. Johnson, Mr. Wedderburn
Loughborough), Dr. Francis, the translator of Horace, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Chetwyn, and several other gentlemen dined with Foote. After dinner, an important debate towards the end of Sir Robert Wal- pole's administration being mentioned, Dr. Francis observed that Mr. Pitt's speech on that occasion was the best he had ever read. He had been employed, he added, during several years, in the study of Demos thenes, and had finished a translation of that cele brated author, with all the decorations of style and language within his capacity. Many of the company remembered the debate, and many passages were cited from the speech with the approbation and applause of all present. During the ardour of the conversation Johnson remained silent. When the warmth of
* Birch MS. S. in British Museum, No. 4,302.
t A corrected list of debates reported by Johnson will be found in the Preface to the Parliamentary History, Vol. XII.
(Lord
264 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
praise subsided, he opened with these words, ' That speech I wrote in a garret in Exeter Street. ' The company was struck with astonishment. After staring at each other for some time in silent amaze, Dr. Francis asked how that speech could be written by him. ' Sir,' said Johnson, ' I wrote it in Exeter Street. I never was in the gallery of the House of Commons but once. Cave had interest with the door-keepers. He and the persons under him got admittance. They brought away the subject of discussion, the names of the speakers, the side they took, and the order in which they rose, together with notes of the various
adduced in the course of the debate. The whole was afterwards communicated to me, and I com posed the speeches in the form they now have in Parliamentary Debates ; for the speeches of that period are all reprinted from Cave's Magazine. ' To this discovery Dr. Francis made answer : ' Then, sir, you have exceeded Demosthenes himself; for to say you have exceeded Francis's Demosthenes would be nothing. ' The rest of the company were lavish in their compliments to Johnson : one in particular praised his impartiality, observing that he had dealt out reason and eloquence with an equal hand to both parties. ' That is not quite true, sir,' said Johnson,
' I saved appearances well enough ; but I took care that the Whig dogs should not have the best of it. '"
Cave's name has been immortalized because he had the good fortune to get Johnson to write out his Parliamentary notes. Had this not occurred it is most likely that the reputation of giving early notices of the debates of his period, would have fallen to the
arguments
REPORTERS GORDON. 265
lot of his opponent of the London Magazine —Gor don, the translator of Tacitus; who, it is shown in the preface to the Parliamentary History,* not only an-
* The editor of the Parliamentary History says : — " It was observed, that from the year 1735, when the debates were no longer published in the Political State, the speeches were given in the Gentleman's Magazine by Guthrie the historian, and in the London Magazine by Gordon the translator of Tacitus ; both of whom attended in the gallery of the House, and received information from Members of Parliament. In justice to this last-mentioned publica tion, — a publication which by no means holds that rank amongst the
periodical collections of the times to which it is entitled, —the editor feels it his duty to point out one or two gross errors into which Sir John Hawkins, in his Life of Dr. Johnson, has led his readers. Speaking of the eagerness of the public to know what was going for ward in both Houses of Parliament, Sir John informs us, that Cave, the proprietor of the Gentleman's Magazine, ' had an interest with some of the Members of both Houses, arising from an employment he held in the Post-Offiee. Of this advantage he was too good a judge of his own interest not to avail himself. He therefore deter mined to gratify his readers with as much of this kind of intelligence as he could procure, and it was safe to communicate : his resolution was to frequent the two Houses whenever an important debate was
likely to come on, and from such expressions and particulars in the course thereof, as could be collected and retained in memory, to give the arguments on either side. This resolution he put into practice in July, 1736. The proprietors of the London Magazine also gave the debates, but from documents less authentic than Cave. '
" Now, it so happens, that Parliament was not sitting in July, 1736 ; and, by referring to the volumes themselves, it will be seen that the debates of the session, which opened on the 10th of Febru ary, 1737, as they stand in the Gentleman's Magazine of that year,
are copied verbatim, down to the very errors of the press, from the London Magazine ; from that very Magazine, the proprietors of which, as Sir John would have us believe, ' gave the debates from documents less authentic than those of Cave ! ' By turning over the pages of the present volume, it will be seen that most of the great debates are taken from that publication ; and its merits will more strikingly appear in the future progress of this work. "
266 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
Cave with some of the earlier debates, but was absolutely robbed of them by the Gentleman's Magazine, who copied the London, even to the errors of the press ! This, of course, was before Johnson had anything to do with the affair.
On the 30th of April, 1747, Edward Cave and Thomas Astley were ordered into the custody of the Usher of the Black Rod, for having printed, in the Gentleman's and the London Magazine, a report of the trial of Lord Lovatt, contrary to privilege. On Cave's examination, as to how he got particulars of the debates published in his Magazine, he admitted that he had taken notes, and that sometimes " he had speeches sent to him by very eminent persons," but denied that he " employed persons to make speeches for him. " On expressing contrition, he was discharged on paying the fees.
From 1743 to 1766, a space of twenty-three years, there appears to have been no one bold enough to attempt a regular report of the debates. In the latter year Almon commenced, as we have already mentioned, the publication of some brief reports —important at the time and in their consequences —but very defi cient as a record of the historical discussions of the time. * In 1774, however, Almon began to publish regular reports of both Houses in his Parliamentary
* This continuation contains no debating in the House of Lords, and is scanty and imperfect to a degree that can hardly be conceived, but of which some idea may be formed from the fact that all the debates and proceedings in Parliament during the important period between 1751, and the accession of George the Third in October,
1760, are comprised in less than three hundred loosely printed octavo pages. —Pref. Pari. Mist. , Vol. II.
*\ V
ticipated
REPORTERS —WOODFALL. 267
Register, and from that time to the present day our records of both chambers of the Legislature may be regarded as tolerably complete.
But though, after the famous struggle with public opinion, and the imprisonment of a Lord Mayor,* reporters were not systematically persecuted, no facili ties were offered them. Whoever took a debate had to sit in the strangers' gallery, and often to wait for hours on the stairs before admission was granted even then. When in the House no note-book dare be ex
hibited, and hence the only man able to report at all was one with a great memory. The most celebrated of these early reporters was William Woodfall.
Woodfall's mode of reporting was, of course, very different to that adopted at the present day, and when the difficulties he had to contend with are remembered, the results he secured are surprising. He used to get through an entire debate, making here and there a secret memorandum, and then when the House was up he went off to write out his report, which occupied him sometimes till nearly noon of the next day—the Paper containing the debate being published in the evening. His reputation, however, spread far and wide, and when strangers visited the House, their first inquiry
* Though generally so accurate, yet mistakes have sometimes been made in reports ; and now and then not without a slight suspicion of fun being intended at the expense of an honourable member. Mr. Wilberforce once explained to the House, that he was thus" made to speak in recommending the cultivation of the potato crop :— Potatoes
make men healthy, vigorous, and active ; but what is still more in their favour, they make men tall ; more especially was he led to say so, as being rather under the common size, and he must lament that his guardians had not fostered him under that genial vegetable ! "
268 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
often was, " Which is the Speaker, and which is Mr. Woodfall? " It is said he would sit for very many hours without any refreshment whatever, but
when hungry and faint with his long task, would draw a hard-boiled egg from his pocket, take off the shell in his hat, and stooping down make a meal on the indi gestible dainty in haste, lest the Sergeant-at-Arms should witness the infraction of the rules of the House against strangers. Woodfall is said to have been very dignified, and not very fond of the society of his
and a "gallery" tradition declares, that one day the well-known hard eggs were filched from his pockets by some rival, and unboiled ones put in their places, to the great discomfiture of the victim of the practical joke. Woodfall is described as the intimate of Garrick, Goldsmith, and all the other
actors and dramatists of repute in his day, and his critiques on the theatres were looked for with much interest, and were, doubtless, influential on the for tunes of the candidates for public support. His first reports were made for The London Packet, from which he transferred his services to The Morning Chronicle ; but, after some years, leaving the latter for The Diary, Perry opposed him by commencing the present suc cessful system of reporting, — a system supported not by one man of remarkable powers, but by a succession of skilful men, each taking notes for a fixed period and then writing them out for the press.
Perry was the first man who was able to print the debates of one night in a Paper of the next morning ; and he succeeded in doing this by a division of the labour of reporting. Whilst Woodfall was laboriously
fellow-reporters,
REPORTING — PERRY. 269
working out his report, assisted by notes from some of the speakers, for publication in the evening, Perry's version of the debate was being circulated and read all over the town. The result was clear. Woodfall's Paper failed, and Perry made a fortune.
Perry alludes to this very important innovation introduced by him, when he commenced his editor ship of The Gazetteer —this substitution of numbers for an individual in reporting. But the debates, long after that period, were not reported with the despatch now indispensable. The Houses used to sit late, on what used to be then called field-days ; and when they rose at a late hour in the morning, sometimes as late, indeed, as seven or eight o'clock, The Chronicle, which laid itself out in reporting, would not appear till two or three o'clock in the afternoon. It must not be supposed that these late sittings were frequent. It often happened that the reporter, whose turn it was to go first, would take the whole of the proceedings. But every now and then came a murderously heavy day, and the poor reporters who were obliged to be on the stairs of the entrance to the gallery of the House of Commons by twelve o'clock at noon, could not
leave the House till their turn came; for the gallery was not, after the House was locked, accessible till eleven o'clock; so that it was necessary for the reporters to wait many hours. When the speakers were second rate, they were disposed of very summarily ; but if it happened that Sheridan, or Wyndham, or Tierney, or Whitbread, were on their legs during the whole of a reporter's turn, the publication was necessarily delayed, for such men could not be slurred over. On the subject
270 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
of Parliamentary reporting, Perry used to say, that for the public the reports could not be too short, and for the members too long. In those days there were few speakers, but the style of speaking was highly finished, and the public would look for the account of a speech of Sheridan's, for instance, with great eager ness.
Sheridan repaid the attention of the reporters to his brilliant harangues, by speaking in their favour, when their character and position was attacked by the benchers of Lincoln's Inn. Those irresponsible legal curiosities having passed a bye-law of their society, the object of which was to exclude from it all men who dared to write for the Newspapers, a petition was presented to the House of Commons, from a gentleman against whom this ridiculously illiberal rule operated. In the discussion to which the subject gave rise, Sheridan said: — "Much illiberal calumny had been cast upon those gentle men who were reporters, which it is time should
now be fully confuted. He had to state, then, that there were amongst those who reported the debates of that House, no less than twenty-three graduates of the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Dublin, and Edinburgh ; those gentlemen were all in their pro gress to honourable professions ; and there was no possible course better than that which they had adopted for the improvement of their minds, and the acquisition of political experience. They had adopted this course from an honest and honourable impulse ; and had to boast the association of many great names, who had risen from poverty to reputation. This had
REPORTING. —SHERIDAN. 271
been long the employment, and indeed, chief means of subsistence, of Dr. Johnson and Mr. Burke. Such
were the men at whose depression this legal bye-law aimed! Never was there a more illiberal and base attack on literary talent ; he could find no parallel to it in the History of England, except one indeed, in the reign of Henry the Fourth, which went to exclude lawyers from sitting in Parliament. At this, as might be expected, the body who now sought to proscribe others were mightily offended ; they branded the Parliament with the epithet of indoctum; and Lord Coke had even the hardihood to declare from the bench, that
a most unjust individual proscription; a violation of the best principles of our constitution. For (ex claimed Sheridan) it is the glory of English law, that it sanctions no proscriptions, nor does it acknowledge any office in the state, which the honourable ambitious industry, even of the most humble, may not obtain. " Mr. Stephen (father of the attache" of the Foreign Office) followed Sheridan in a very manly speech. He declared that he had been a member of Lincoln's Inn for thirty-five years, but that he had not the most remote connection with the framing of the
there never was a good law made therein ! impossible to imagine a single reason for the enact ment of the bye-law complained of. It was a sub version of the liberty and respectability of the press ;
obnoxious bye-laws alluded to ; he thought it a most illiberal and unjust proscription ; a scandal rather to its authors than its objects. " I will put a case," said Mr. Stephen ; " man
I will suppose a young
of education and talent contending with pecuniary diffi
It was
272 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
culties —difficulties not proceeding from vice, but from family misfortunes. I will suppose him honestly meeting his obstructions with honourable industry, and exercising his talents by reporting the debates of this House in order to attain a profession. Where, I ask, is the degradation of such an employment ? Who could be so meanly cruel as to deprive him of
it ? The case, sir, which I have now supposed, was thirty years ago—my own! " Sir John Austruther was also a member of Lincoln's Inn, but reprobated the bye-laws referred to ; and the benchers, over whelmed by the indignation their regulation had excited, expunged it from the books.
Several of the members of Perry's corps of parlia mentary reporters were men remarkable for talent and wit, and from that day to the present the " gallery" has held a number of distinguished men. Amongst the recent literary instances, the names of Hazlitt and Charles Dickens are often quoted. The latter is described by his old colleagues as having been as
excellent in this his first literary attempt, as he has since proved to be in the higher walks wherein he won his fame. He was for some years in the gallery; was very rapid ; and it was said of him, that he once wrote out from his notes the copy for a column and a half of The Morning Chronicle in an hour — a feat almost unexampled in its way.
At present the reporters are as quiet and punctual as any other class of professional men, but in the days
when every gentleman considered it a part of his duty, and a proof of his respectability, to drink one bottle of port, at least, after dinner daily — when people were
REPORTERS —MARK SUPPLE. 273
spoken of as two bottle men, and three bottle men, and capital fellows —the representatives of the press seem not to have been behind their countrymen in their devotion to Bacchus.
There was never a deficiency of wit and humour
and when it was the fashion to heighten these by full potations, it is not surprising that an occasional escapade would attract more than or
dinary notice. One bygone worthy, distinguished in this way, Mark Supple* it was, whose name has found a place in all the jest books for a feat which Peter Fin- nerty, another spirit of kindred quality, used to tell after the following fashion :—
"Mark Supple was big-boned and loud-voiced, and had as much wit and fun as an Irish porter could carry; often more than he himself could carry, or knew what to do with. He took his wine frequently at Bellamy's (a great place in those days for reporters as well as M. P. 's), and then went up into the gallery and reported like a gentleman and a man of
The members hardly knew their own speeches again, but they admired his free and bold manner of dressing them up. None of them ever went to the printing office of The Morning Chronicle to complain that the tall Irishman had given a lame, sneaking version of their sentiments, they pocketed the affront of their metamorphosis, and fathered speeches they had never made. Supple's way may be said to have been the hyperbole, a strong view of orientalism, with a dash of the bog-trotter. His manner seemed to please, and he presumed upon it. One evening as he sat at
amongst reporters,
genius.
VOL. II.
* Mark Supple died in 1807.
S
274 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
his post in the gallery, waiting the issues of things, and a hint to hang tropes and figures upon. A dead silence happened to prevail in the House. It was when Mr. Addington was speaker. The bold leader of the press gang was never much on serious business bent, and at this time he was particularly full of meat and wine. Delighted, therefore, with the pause, but thinking that something might as well be going for ward, he called out lustily, ' A song from Mr. Speaker. ' Imagine Addington's long, prim, upright figure ; his consternation and utter want of preparation for, or of a clue to repel, such an interruption of the rules and orders of Parliament. The House was in a roar— Pitt, it is said, could hardly keep his seat for laughing. When the bustle and confusion were abated, the Ser-
went into the gallery to take the audacious culprit into custody, and indignantly desired to know who it was ; but nobody would tell. Mark
sat like a tower on the hindermost bench of the gal
lery, imperturbable in his own gravity, and safe in the faith of the brotherhood of reporters, who alone were in the secret. At length as the mace-bearer was making fruitless inquiries, and getting impatient, Supple pointed to a fat quaker, who sat in the middle of the crowd, and nodded assent that he was the man.
The quaker was, to his great surprise, taken into im mediate custody; but after a short altercation, and some further explanation, he was released, and the hero of our story put in his place for an hour or two, but let off on an assurance of his contrition, and of showing less wit and more discretion for the future. "
geant-at-Arms
REPORTERS —PETER FINNERTY. 275
Peter Finnerty was the hero of several frays ; in
one of them Lord Castlereagh being his opponent. The Annual Register affords" us a notice of the affair in its record of law cases. On the 31st of January, 1811," says that authority, "judgment was prayed against the defendant, in the cause, ' The King v. Finnerty. ' Defendant had suffered judgment to go against him by default. The indictment was for a libel on Lord Castlereagh, one of His Majesty's princi pal Secretaries of State, which appeared in the Morning Chronicle of last year. The defendant had
the expedition to Walcheren, for the purpose of writing a narrative of its proceedings, when a general order was issued to Lord Chatham and Sir
accompanied
R. Strachan, to inquire of all the vessels which accom panied the expedition, whether a gentleman of the name of Finnerty were on board, and if found, to convey him to his Lordship or Sir Richard, with a view to his being sent home. He was accordingly conveyed to Sir R. Strachan, and sent home on board of a revenue cutter. The letter in The
Morning Chronicle, charged as the present libel, consisted of a narrative of these facts, and an attribution of the whole to Lord Castlereagh, and insinuated that this
measure was only one instance of a course of oppres sion which the defendant had received from the personal malice of his Lordship, and that his Lordship had been guilty of great villainy in and concerning the administration of Ireland.
"Mr. Finnerty, who appeared without counsel, put in a very long affidavit, in which he stated that the court having, in an application by him to postpone
276 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
the trial of his cause, on account of the absence of material witnesses, thrown out their opinion as to the calumnious nature of the libel, he had thought it most respectful to the court to suffer judgment to go against him by default, reserving to himself the testimony of such of his witnesses, whose regard to justice would induce them to make affidavits for him, and the present opportunity of justifying the whole imputed libel, which he did most unequivocally. The affi davit proceeded to state that he had, at the same time when he wrote the letter, no intention to libel any body ; and that he had, before its publication, con sulted an eminent barrister as to the libellous ten dency of who was of opinion that was not libellous that the defendant was no conspirator in Ireland that he was invited to accompany the expe dition by Sir Home Popham, for the sole purpose of narrating the proceedings of the expedition and the affidavit quoted letter from Sir Home to that effect
the deponent solemnly declared he had no other view in accompanying the expedition that he rejected the proposal of Lord Chatham and Sir Richard Strachan to publish nothing but what had undergone their revi sion that he had incurred considerable expenses in his voyage, and that the prejudices which had been excited against him the order for his quitting the expedition, had deprived him of £500, which he cal culated he should have gained by his intended publi cation that he had intended to bring an action against Lord Castlereagh for libel, but was advised against
by his counsel; that he did not accompany the ex pedition clandestinely that the main object of Lord
it
;
;
;a
by
;
a
:
;
it
;
it,
;
REPORTERS PETER FINNERTY. 277
Castlereagh was to harass the deponent ; and that a noble Lord, nearly connected with Lord Castlereagh, had been heard to declare in a public coffee-room, ' I wish some man would shoot that fellow (meaning the deponent) out of the way. ' The affidavit was then proceeding to enter into the circumstances of the trial of Mr. Orr, in Ireland, for administering a sedi tious oath, in which trial, the letter in The Morning Chronicle stated the verdict of guilty to have been obtained from the jury by promises, by threats, and by intoxicating them with liquor ; and was about to quote two affidavits made by as many of the jurors to this effect, when the court objected to their perusal, as irrelevant. Mr. Finnerty observed, that it was stated as a fact in the imputed libel, that these affidavits were made ; and he thought it proper to verify that statement. The affidavits were not long. Lord Ellenborough consented to hear them, long or short. The defendant's affidavit travelling still further from the record, however, as it proceeded, Lord Ellen- borough at last objected to trying the government of Ireland, under pretence of passing sentence upon the defendant, and refused to hear any more affidavits quoted upon the subject ofLord Castlereagh's conduct in Ireland. Mr. Finnerty said, that such a liberty had been granted in the case of Governor Picton; the
of Trinidad was fully investigated upon the trial of that man for torture ; the defendant's (Mr. Finnerty's) crime was merely that of reprobating a man who patronized torture. The letter in The Morning Chronicle made a general charge of cruelty against Lord Castlereagh ; and the defendant was
government
278 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
now proving particular instances of it. After some further conversation on this topic, in which Mr. Garrow attacked, and Mr. Finnerty justified his affi davit, the defendant was advised by the court to prepare a more temperate affidavit, and was then remanded to a future day. Being brought up again on Feb. 7th, he presented his affidavit to the court. It was read, and detailed in the first place, the reasons why the defendant was not in court before, when
judgment was prayed against him; it next proceeded to state why he had suffered judgment to go by default ; but now stated his belief of every circum stance with which he had charged Lord Castlereagh, and at this period offered the truth in justification. Lord Ellenborough said he had objected to this before, and had warned him to amend what he had done ; and hoped he was now come in a proper spirit to mitigate a crime of which he had confessed the com mission. It appeared, however, that such was by no means Mr. Finnerty's intention ; and, in a long con versation which ensued, he repeatedly presented affi davits to prove all the enormities practised under Lord Oastlereagh's government, and with his concurrence, and declared that nothing on earth should induce him to make any submission to his Lordship. The court as
repeatedly refused to admit them, and warned him that he was introducing irrelevant matter, and only aggra vating his offence. He was heard, however, in a long and spirited defence, which was replied to with great severity by the Attorney General ; who, after repre senting in the strongest terms the additional crimi nality the defendant had incurred by his justification,
V
REPORTERS —PETER FINNERTY. 279
trusted that if there was any kind of punishment in their Lordships' discretion more degrading than im prisonment, that too would be inflicted upon him. This hint for the pillory was not, however, attended to by the court, which, by Mr. Justice Grose, pro nounced the following sentence : — ' That the defen dant be committed to His Majesty's gaol for the city of Lincoln, for the space of eighteen calendar months,
and find security for his good behaviour for five years from that time, himself in £500, and two sureties in £250 each, and be further imprisoned till that security be procured. '"
The " veteran Journalist," to whom I have before expressed my obligations for some curious facts, says in a letter : — " An anecdote which now occurs to me will serve to give a good idea of poor Perry. Peter Finnerty was sincerely attached to Perry and The Chronicle, but he had great defects, and required to be well watched. Perry would have been glad to be rid of him, but he would no more have thought of dismissing an old servant without some very strong
cause indeed, than he would of cutting his own throat. I have heard him say, I would give any body £200 who would take Finnerty from The Chronicle. The libel on Lord Castlereagh, for which Finnerty was sent to Lincoln Castle, was inserted in The Chronicle on F. 's own responsibility, and against
the order of Perry, who, for a long time refused it admission, but was at length worried into publi cation. "
The present occupants of the reporters' gallery are a very honourable body of men. Amongst the
280 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
seniors, if not the seniors, are Mr. Dod, the author of the Peerage, and of the useful little blue-covered volume, the Parliamentary Companion, who has been in the gallery for The Times for between thirty and forty years; and Mr. Tyas, another veteran of more than thirty years' Parliamentary service on the same Paper. Tyas is said to have been the author of the sharp critiques on Lord Brougham's classical knowledge ; and is spoken of as the hero of another gallery tradition. The story runs that Tyas had been
luxuriating over a glass of wine, and the pages of Cicero, when the hour came, and he was due in the House. As he took his place Lord Brougham was speaking, and soon the pencil of Tyas was on his track. The legal orator went on, and the mind of the reporter unconsciously kept upon the double thread of Brougham and Cicero. The scholar in the gallery thought the scholar on the floor of the House, would remember a fine illustrative passage in the Roman orator. But he passed and concluded his harangue. Tyas went to work to write out his notes, and when the arguments required he put in nearly
page of Cicero. Brougham reprinted the speech, adopting, without remark, the whole of the interpo lated matter.
Members have sometimes complained of the way in which their harangues are reported but the truth is, that the speakers owe great debt of gratitude to those who place their speeches before the public. The words as they are uttered, and the same as they are printed, are often curious improvement one upon the other. All the stutterings, the hesitations.
a
a
;
a
it
it,
REPORTERS THEIR TALENT. 281
the repetitions, are omitted ; the arguments, the important illustrations, and the facts alone being
When The New Times was started, a part of their plan was to report the Parliamentary debates verbatim. This was commenced, but it is said that within a week the proprietors were threatened
with actions for damages for burlesquing the speeches of the honourable M. P. 's. The printing of their harangues as they were spoken was unendurable, and verbatim reports were abandoned. * Mr. Angus B. Reach, an experienced reporter —perhaps better popu larly known as the author of innumerable light literary sketches of men and manners —threw off, some time ago, a slight outline of the reporters at their posts, which may help to complete this part of the subject :—
The little door opened, and we stood in the Reporter's Gal lery—the back of the Speaker's ugly gothic chair below us— the senators, with their hats on, sitting, standing, walking, lolling lazy on either side —the clerk's table with the mace and the shiningly bound volumes of the statutes at large in the midst, and the bright bude light shining over all.
The hon. member for Fortywinks was on his legs, al though his luminous remarks could only be heard amid the buzz of about 150 distinct conversations going on around. But the hon. member had got his speech off by heart, and was speaking to his constituents through the reporters' gallery. Hapless man ! The Times reclined gracefully back and amused
* Mr. Sadler, Mr. Trant, and some other members, dissatisfied with the meagre reports of their speeches in the daily Papers, engaged Mr. Hodge to report them in full. On reading the speeches so reported they were found such sheer nonsense, that the practice was incontinently abandoned. — Times, July 8, 1830.
preserved.
282 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
himself by sharpening his pencils. The Chronicle was talking to The Herald about Alboni. The Morning Post was drawing carricaturcs in its note book, and The Morning Advertiser was musing on what it would have for supper. So the hon. mem ber talked, and no one heeded him.
After him came another, an Irish orator, standing up in the midst of a whirlpool of his blazing and dazzling metaphors and and similes, like a juggler casting round his head a halo of brass balls. But no nimble pencil followed the burning phrases of the patriot.
" What are they about ? " we whispered to our conductor in dismay ; " there is eloquence running to waste. "
" They are waiting," replied our Mentor, " they are waiting until he makes a point ; Papers have no room for flourishes. Imagine the consequence, were every word spoken in the House of Commons set down in cold blooded type exactly as it is uttered. What a huge conglomeration of truisms, absurdities, bad taste, wretched jokes, and worse grammar ! Depend upon
sir, literally-reported debates would infallibly disgust the nation with representative government.
" Then you pick and choose," we interrupted.
" Yes we are the winnowers in this great granary of words. Men there are who, when they speak, drop from their lips ripest wholesomest grain, but from the mouths of most come flying empty torrents of mere hunks and chaff. It ours to wait, and watch, and sift out the scattered globules of fact or argu ment, and enshrine them in printer's ink. "
" But you do not," we said, " arrogate the right of sitting in judgment on the soundness of an argument, or the authen ticity of fact. "
" Clearly not," said the Reporter, " we record all arguments —good, bad, or indifferent we set down all facts—certain or dubious. But ours to separate the arguments and the facts from the words—the mere empty verbiage in which they are oftentimes all but smothered. How many inaccuracies do we not patch up. How many inelegancies do we not lick into graceful form. How many unfinished sentences do we not fill
is
;
a
it, ;
is
REPORTING O'CONNELL.
283
up and round off. How many slovenly speeches do not appear shortened one hundred, and improved two hundred per cent. , by passing through the alembic of this little gallery. "
Now and then a speaker, who thinks himself neglected, ventures to complain, but generally proves
rather the reporter's case than his own. Newspapers, and all engaged upon them, are too anxious to get anything new for their Journal to neglect one word that the world would care to hear, or one fact the world would like to know. In July, 1833, O'Connell stood up in the House and attacked the reporters for what he chose to regard as a neglect of his merits, and did not hesitate to impute dishonourable motives to those whom he accused, knowing they could not there answer him. He moved to bring the representatives of The Times and Chronicle to the bar for not report ing his speech in full. A Mr. O'Dwyer, who had him self, it was said, been employed on The Times, seconded the motion. * Many members were ready to vindicate the fairness of the Newspaper reports, and amongst them Sir Robert Peel,t who gave his testi
* There was a joke current on O'Dwyer's return to Parliament, which described his qualifications for Newspaper employment, and concluded with — " and so, not being clever enough for The Times, they made him an M. P. "
t Sir Robert Peel has on other occasions evinced his esteem for the Parliamentary reporters. When he opened his picture gallery in 1837, and invited the literary celebrities of the day, he paid the " gal lery" a compliment which was thus recorded by the London corre spondent of a local Paper (himself a reporter, and therefore cognizant of the fact) :—" There are in Monday's Papers long critiques on Sir R. Peel's collection of pictures at Whitehall Gardens, opened for the first time to inspection of any but very special friends indeed on the Saturday previous. Sir Robert's gallery was one of the most exclusive in
284 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
mony to the fact, that the reports were given with great fairness and impartiality, and added, amid loud cheers : —" During fifteen out of those twenty years he had held office, and during the whole of that time he had never received any communication from any person connected with the press respecting the manner in which his speeches had been reported. He had never during that time received any solicitation for any
favour or patronage from any reporter ; and he be lieved he might say that no application had been made
to any ofhis colleagues while he was in officefor any such patronage or favour from any reporter, in con sequence of his having reported their speeches fully.
(Hear, hear. ) Ifhe could bear his testimony to the independence of the reporters, founded as it was on the experience of fifteen years in office, he thought that he might challenge those who had succeeded him to say whether they could not bear the same evidence. " These sentiments were greeted by loud cries of " Hear, hear. "
England ; but for some reason or other, known only to himself, he suddenly resolved to relax his rigid interdiction against nearly all the applicants, and availed himself of the re-arrangement of the col lection to invite a vast number of fashionable, political, artistical, and other people to look at his pictorial treasures on Saturday. The even ing previous he went up to the Reporters' Gallery, in the Commons, and personally gave to those present, with every mark of courtesy and cordiality, some two dozen tickets, regretting that the vast number of invitations he had issued precluded his being more liberal to the Fourth Estate, with several of whom he shook hands ; and next day, during the exhibition of the pictures, was, at his special request, introduced to Mr. Tyas, one of the most distinguished veterans ofthe press, for many years connected with The Times, and at present the writer of the
Parliamentary summary of that Paper. "
THE REPORTERS AND O CONNELL. 285
The reporters took a course which staggered O'Con-
nell. His attack had an effect the very reverse of what
he anticipated. They penned a letter, in which they
that a member of the House had most falsely accused them of dishonourable motives, and had done so not out of doors, where they could meet him with an instant denial and proof of falsity, but had done so under the shelter of the privileges of the House ; declaring, in conclusion, that they could not report one line of what he said until the unjust imputation had been withdrawn. In Parliament the affair was pressed to a division, when 0 Conn ell's followers mustered at the vote, but only numbered 48; whilst 159 members
voted against him, and the order for the attendance of the offending persons was discharged. O'Connell was
glad after this to be more just, and so escaped what to him would have been semi- annihilation —his expulsion from Newspaper notice.
Anxious as he was to be reported in England, there were occasions when O'Connell preferred that what he said should not be printed in this country. Of this an amusing anecdote has been given. O'Connell was on a visit to Ireland, and indulging in long speeches of a most " combustible character," when the Govern ment thought fit to send over some short-hand writers
to take down the harangues. "The first appearance of the Government reporters was at a meeting at Kanturk. " The gentlemen were Englishmen," says the story, and belonging to Mr. Gurney's reporting staff. They came on the platform, and introduced themselves to Mr. O'Connell. He shook them by the hands, and said to those around him, ' Nothing
complained
286 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
can be done here until these gentlemen are afforded
every requisite
accommodation. ' This was at once
provided, and having assured Mr. O'Connell that
they were 'perfectly ready/ and well provided for,
he came forward to address the people, and com menced his speech, to the great dismay of the English men, in the Irish language. Having explained to the assembly who they were, and how he humbugged them, he continued in the same language to address to the meeting everything he wished to convey to them ; the people laughing all the while at the English reporters, while they joined very good humouredly in the laugh raised against them. "
More recently (June, 1849) Mr. John O'Connell tried his hand at clearing the gallery, because, in his own opinion, his speeches were not given at sufficient length. This was bad enough from the O'Connell ; but that his son John should take such a step was too absurd. Ridicule instead of indignation was excited, and the general feeling was well conveyed by a writer in The Spectator, who said: — "The House had better lose no time in placing the matter on a more simple and decorous footing, or it will be forced. If driven to no doubt, the leading Journals could return their own members to report for them from the body of the House meanwhile, they have their honorary member in the person of Mr. Trelawney, who furnished intelligent accounts of what passed during the exclusion of the reporters, and will pro bably do so as often as may be required. "
Even now the theory of Parliament is, that the debates take place with closed doors to speak
;
it
:
it,
REPORTING THE " CLOSED DOORS. " 287
of reports in Newspapers, except to complain of them as a breach of privilege, is irregular, and the mere mention of the fact that there are strangers in the House is enough, as a matter of course, to clear the reporters' gallery. Should this farce continue ? Should that which is of vital importance to our liberty be held on such terms ?
" It is almost impossible," says a writer we have before quoted, " to overrate the value of this regular
of proceedings in Parliament, carried, as it has been in our own time, to nearly as great copi
/ousness and accuracy as is possibly attainable.
