Page:Volume 3 1840.pdf/13

day: how do you account for that, James Troup? we will tell you. When it became generally known, through us, that you were the 'Goat's' master, and that his paper was yours, the larger number who had promised it their support immediately withdrew their subscriptions. . . . Apropos, have you tried your hand at doggrel verse or conundrums lately? We fear you burnt your fingers at that game. It was too bad of you to taunt the Mayor about his cupboard: for report says that there is little chance for anyone in your own establishment obtaining the size of Daniel Lambert: much less was it kind of you to twit your only friend (if we except the Rushlight) the little doctor, for the irritability of his temper; for, after all, he condescends to do more than any other person would do for you, - he is to be seen walking with you in public. The Mayor says ‘that a man who is disliked by the whole of his neighbours. both rich and poor, must be a bad man.'
We cordially agree in opinion with the gallant gentleman. How say you, James Troup? As a finale this week, the July Report on the Brighton Railway has come out rather awkwardly for you again. From that it appears you are neither a prophet nor a judge, James Troup."}} After the personal tirade of the "Dover Chronicle" upon the proprietor of the "Cinque Ports’ Chronicle," repeated ad libitum et ad nauseum, one need not be surprised that the 'Goat,' as the latter was nicknamed, turned upon its tormentor with a Rowland for his Oliver. There was this difference however, as before stated, that whereas the Dover journal was personal, the Hastings paper was general. It selected the election of Town Councillors on the 1st of November, 1840, for its diatribe, from which, in common fairness to the disputants I make the following extracts, omitting, however, a few of the most objectionable words or sentences, as was the case for the other side. It ran thus:-

In the West Ward the Radical leaders have been run very hard, and we hope the eyes of well, disposed burgesses, hitherto misled by these worthies, will be opened to the evils which attend those who abuse their best friends; for in no part of the borough are the industrious poor more kindly treated than they are here, and by the Conservative portion of Society. As a proof of the fact, there is not at present a single pauper in the workhouse belonging to the parish of St. Mary Magdalen, which is the most populous parish of the West Ward. Yet, in the face of this, three or four traders in politics — wolves in sheep's clothing — are constantly endeavouring to work upon the feelings of the labouring classes, to take part against every respectable inhabitant who considers it his duty to interfere in the management of public business. This state of things must be altered, and the contest just decided may operate as a warning for the future. In bygone times, when most of the public offices were held by respectable men, the industrious classes were, generally contented, and those who possessed the means felt pleasure in finding employment for their poorer neighbours or in contributing to their wants; but that pleasure is now much diminished when a set of Radical leaders urge them to commit acts of ingratitude and insolence. To such an extent has this conduct operated, that thousands of respectable families have left the country to expend their incomes on the Continent; and it is a well known fact that cases of the kind have occurred in this borough. We know that the disgust created in the West Ward by, the conduct of the parties concerned in the recent contest has greatly retarded improvements, the want of which has been the ruin of many industrious and well-disposed tradesmen. In expressing ourselves thus, be it understood that we are not opposed to reform; for we contend that, as Conservatives, we are true reformers of abuses, while the Radicals do not reform them unless they can profit by it. In the borough of Hastings more infamous jobs have been practised by pretended Reformers than by any other class. We cannot conclude our remarks without again appealing to the good, sense of our townsmen not to submit themselves to the direction of the Radical leaders of a mis-called Liberal Society, formed for the purchase and sale of the elective franchise - a society that under such leaders cannot be anything but a disgrace to the town. If, instead of meeting to consult how they can best annoy the respectable classes, the members would consider what improvements they could effect in widening the streets, removing obstructions, abolishing nuisances, and improving footpaths, they would be worthy of esteem; but who has ever heard of one act which reflects a shade of credit on this self-styled Liberal Society. We are not in the secret of how much is allowed by the deluded Mr. Hollond to expend at meetings, but we hope the members are not silly enough to waste both time and money in the support of a few spouting Radicals without some return for it in meal or malt These remarks must not be applied to all, because we know many well-meaning men who have been induced to join the Society merely because their neighbours have done so; but experience will satisfy them that no good can result from such a combination. If any tradesman, mechanic or labourer doubts our opinions, let him look upon his receipts during the last month, and trace the source whence they came. If he received his pay or his income from a Radical, that Radical, in nine cases out of ten, received it first, directly or indirectly, from a Conservative. How can the poor man pay his taxes until he has received the money from richer people? To appearance only the amount comes out of the poor man’s pocket; and here we blame the Conservatives for, not insisting upon paying the taxes in the first instance as a property tax, instead of distributing the amount among their tradesmen, to be paid by the latter as an apparent tax upon their industry. In expressing our opinion thus freely on Radical proceedings, we feel conscious of having done our duty to a town for whose benefit this journal is established.

I have felt it necessary to slightly alter the phraseology of the above extract so as to put it into readable English, but I have in no way diverged from its meaning. I will leave it to my readers to pass judgment upon the writer as a political economist, by object being principally to show that political animosities were as rife fifty years ago as they are now, and that a cause was no more benefitted by personal abuse in 1840 than it would be likely to be in 1897.

After the Cinque Ports Chronicle had reviewed the Radical party of the borough in general, and of St. Mary Magdalen in particular, as a sort of off-set to the abuse of itself and its proprietor by the Dover Chronicle, the latter returned to its personality in the following strain :—

We find that the circulation of James Troup’s paper is completely done up at Rye. The Tories have refused any farther advance of cash, and the large number returned on Saturday last came from that town. Oh, dear! oh, dear! A change has also come over the land at Hastings. The few remaining subscribers are now supplied through the Post direct from London, where the whole of the thing is printed, while half a dozen are sent down to Surgeon Moor just to keep him in good temper. So much for a Hastings paper, as it is falsely styled. There is not a single provincial journal that comes into the borough but its press is nearer, and it is more a Hastings paper, than this spurious production. It is, from beginning to end, a gross imposition upon the public, and the latter are particularly cautioned of the fact that its unprincipled conductors are so regardless of the rules of common decency and rectitude, that it is their constant habit to have a placard posted everyday in the week, at the Arcade, as follows :— "Published this day," when the truth is notorious that the thing is printed in London on Tuesday, and reaches Hastings sometimes on Wednesday morning, at others on the evening of the same day, and very frequently not at all. It is also an absolute fact, that at times these sapient gentlemen, whether from design or ignorance we know not, forget even the day of the month on which it is said to be published; and all this to deceive the inhabitants and visitants, and to extract a few pence from their pockets.

I shall now be able to turn the tables upon the censorious scribe of the Dover Chronicle, not because I have any political sympathy with the nicknamed "Goat," but because I hold to the aphorism that "fair play is a jewel."

It may not be needful to enquire into the accuracy of the statement that "the circulation of James Troup’s paper is completely done up at Rye," but as false statements or insinuations are not calculated in the long run to benefit those who make them, it may be appropriate even here to disprove some of the other assertions of Mr. Troup’s censorious rival. With respect to the circulation of Mr Troup’s paper, as a whole, the following notice to its readers appears in the issue for November 4th, 1840.— "The Weekly Dispatch has favoured us with a notice relative to our circulation. The impudent falsehood it contains can be proved by the Stamp returns, which will show the average circulation of the Cinque Ports’ Chronicle to be equal to three out of four of the journals published in this part of the country." Thus much for the circulation. Now, for its implied insignificance. it was described by the Dover Chronicle as "a poor emaciated thing," and as a "spurious production" than which "there is not a single provincial journal that comes into the borough but its press is nearer, and it is more a Hastings paper." This description was so obviously inaccurate — to say nothing of its slip-shod diction — that had I not had later proofs of the downright falsehoods to which partizan journals could resort, I could barely have thought it probable that an editor could permit such reckless statements to appear. A copy of each paper is now before me, the eight-paged Cinque Ports Chronicle being more than twice the size of the four-paged Dover Chronicle, and the former "poor emaciated thing" containing 48 columns of letter-press as against the 20 columns of its would-be greater rival. "The whole thing is printed in London" says the Radical scribe; yet, strange as it may appear, the despised Tory paper devotes more than seven columns to local news, whilst its rival has only 1¼ columns, including the abusive article from which I have quoted. The despicable Tory "Goat" has also local advertisements covering a space of 35 inches in depth, whilst the Radical "great gun! has but 10½ inches similarly occupied. Putting aside politics, and comparing the two sheets as newspapers, there cannot be the least doubt of the vast superiority of the Cinque Ports Chronicle. Besides its editorial articles on "The Established Church," "Turnpike Trusts," "Election of Councillors," &c., it has lengthy and well-written reports of the Union Workhouse, Quarter Sessions, Commissioner's meeting, Flimwell and Hastings Road, and New Road from Cripps’s Corner. Add to the foregoing, its Fashionable Intelligence and local paragraphs -- leaving out of consideration its map of Sussex, Kent and Surrey, its 2½ columns of district news and 27 or, more columns of general information — and then Mr. Troup’s paper, so called, presents itself, not only as a disproof of the justification of its contemporary’s revilings, but also as a newspaper far in advance of any that the borough has usually been given the credit of producing at that period. Verily, I begin to think that notwithstanding that Mr. Troup’s hand was against every man’s, and every men's against his, that hand had not lost its cunning even if it was not always guided by wisdom.

While writing upon the events of 1840, I ought not, perhaps, to impose on my readers a forward leap of five-and-twenty years; but, as I have shown how, for the sake of serving a party, a Liberal paper could slander a Conservative, it occurs to me to be only fair that I should also show how, for a similar purpose, the same sinister designs could be directed by a Conservative newspaper against a Liberal one. In 1865 the Hastings Observer — when it was not in such able hands as it now is — was continually parading its coarse abuse of those rivals by way of compensation.

One day it made, for itself, an unlucky attack on the St. Leonards Gazette in consequence of a good-humoured article which told against the party whose cause the Observer professedly espoused. Editorial effusions and "office" letters appeared in the latter journal on several occasions, written in bad taste and equally bad grammar, with a view to depreciate the character and influence of the Gazette and at the same time to magnify the importance of the Observer. The St. Leonards paper was described by its libeller as "our little contemporary," notwithstanding that its regular issues were half as large again as those of its "greater" rival and twice as large when a two-page supplement was occasionally added. It was also said of it that "The paper in question being so little known, it is more than probable that the majority of our readers—who are increasing daily—may have never heard of it." The Gazette was really, if its contemporary was to be believed, "a very small paper, with a very small circulation," and yet its proprietor had the temerity to challenge the then proprietor of the Observer to a proof or disproof of the allegation, with an offer to pay a certain sum of money to the Infirmary in the event of the bona fide sale of the Gazette not being more than double that of the Observer; and stipulating that the latter journal’s proprietor should pay a like sum if he came out worsted in the contract. Some interesting details of this news paper controversy may be forthcoming at the proper time, but for the present it may be sufficient to say that the challenge again and again given, was never accepted, and for the simple reason of the false, though inflated, position which that journal had assumed. The present enterprising proprietor and Managers of the Observer must be well aware of the insignificant influence of the Observer when it was taken over to be incorporated with the Herald, previously to the two titles being merged into one, I will only here add, that as the Conservative had to doff his cap to the Liberal in 1865, so had the Liberal to take off his battered armour to the Conservative in the tournament of 1840. This latter I shall afford a proof of in my next instalment, and shall thus do something to establish the dictum more than once put forward by the journal for which this History was first written, that accusation and repudiation can be alike performed by Whig and Tory and that an indiscreet excess of zeal on either side may do more harm than good to the party intended to be served.

The Dover Chronicle — whose second title I ought before this to have stated, was the Hastings and St. Leonards Advertiser — had another sledge-hammer article for the doomed head of its personal antagonist ere it found out the necessity for recantation through the looming of legal action. The following is an extract:—

Our Hastings Reporter begs to assure Mr. James Troup that he is thoroughly acquainted with the move the latter has now upon the board, Mr Troup dares not enter the controversial lists, but would fain assassinate in the dark, Next week "James Troup" may assuredly reckon on Visitation the Second. In the meantime, we would notice that the Trustees of the Charities meet on Monday next; and we call their attention to the fact that, "James Troup" has opened a door-way from his meadow to the Magdalen Charity. This move is only the prelude to another of far greater importance. This said Magdalen land will be to let next year; "James Troup," it is said, intends to give a higher price for it than any one else: hence the cause of the opening of the door in question. Let him have the ground without an especial covenant to the contrary, and he will secure a right of entry upon the Charity land at the expiration of the lease, The Trustees ought to cause the door to be forthwith blocked up. With such men as James Troup "no trust no mistrust," is our motto. We confide fully in the wisdom of Charity Trustees, They will do their duty, we know; and we will take care and do ours, and no mistake.

The foregoing insinuation appeared in the issue for August 8th, and on October 4th, of the same year, the following editorial apology was given:-

James Troup. Esq.
—In several numbers of our paper, particularly in that of the Ast of August last, prominent articles have appeared affecting the reputation and character of James Troup, Esq., of Warrior square, and which were inserted on the authority of our reporter, ou whom we placed more reliance than it appears we ought to have done; since which we have had occasion to inquire into the grounds for the several statements and imputations therein contained and find that they were fabricated from malicious motives and personal pique, and are totally devoid of truth. We, therefore, think it due to our character as a public Editor to take this earliest opportunity of apologizing to Mr. Troup for having allowed our columns to be polluted by such scandalous attacks affecting his personal character — a description of attack which it is ever our wish to avoid in the conduct of our paper.

Perhaps readers of the foregoing extracts will be able to draw their own conclusions as to the political animus which permitted so much laxity of editorial discretion in the supervision of a journal that could publish in its columns so much that was not only scurrilous, but also libellous, even though it were upon "the authority of our reporter."

For the credit of journalism in general it is well to know that the Brighton Guardian treated the obtrusiveness of Mr. Troup in quite a different style. In a paragraph it said:-

We have received a letter from Mr. Paine, our Hastings reporter, in reply to some very rude remarks made upon him by a choleric and changeable gentleman; but we think we shall consult the dignity of the Press by suppressing it and leaving the abuse to go for what it may be worth! The gentleman's censure or praise is, we believe, duly appreciated at Hastings.

Excepting the excitement over the trial of Harman and Planta, and the discourtesy between opposition journals, both of which matters I have amply dealt with, the political feeling of 1840 was not very strongly manifested. Even the election of Town Ceuncillors and that of the Mayor were comparatively quiet events. There was no contention for the East Ward representation, three of the outgoing Councillors (Duke, Emary and Yates) being re-elected, and Mr. Foster’s place being taken by Mr. J. Hart. In the West Ward there was a little more vivacity, Mr. Deudney and Mr. Troup only being returned in the Conservative interest by 96 votes, and Mr. Putland, on the Liberal side by 72, whilst the losing candidates - Mr Southall polled 69 and Mr. Troup 1 only.

On the 9th of November, Mr. Alderman Smith, on retiring from the mayoralty, remarked that during his official year he had been the recipient of friendly sentiments, and had not observed any political feeling in the Council’s proceedings. The outgoing Mayor was then proposed for re-election by Mr. Harvey and seconded by Mr. Emary, two gentlemen who were generally opposed to each other in imperial politics. Mr. North was, however, proposed by Mr.J.Thwaites and seconded by Mr. Yates, the proposer contending that it was contrary to their practice to elect a Mayor a second time in the same person. The election fell upon Alderman Smith by a majority of 12 to 6; and he was therefore the first gentleman elected by the corporate body as it then existed to fill the civic chair two vears in succession.