The Sun.
London, England, 1869-08-05 00:00:00

LONDON, THURSDAY, AUGUS7 5, 1869.

There is something exquisitely charming in the
amenities of life which are intermittently thrust upon
the recognition and acceptance of anyone upon whom
have been devolved the responsibilities of journalism.
A preception of this has even been brought home oc-
casionally to the Editor of a monthly magazine.
The realisation of the fact is a matter, however, not
by any means of exceptional, but, on the contrary,
of very frequent recurrence to the Editor of a weekly,
but most of all to the Editor of a Daily Newspaper.
Among all the varied interests which have to be
cared for simultaneously and unceasingly by the re-
sponsible editor of a public journal published
every twenty-four hours, that is upon every week
dayall through the revolving year—in the midst of the
incessant labours, the labours " never ending, still
beginning" of the journalist at the head or centre of
every such complex organization—the gerant or re-
dacteur en chef, as he is called upon the other side of
the Channel—there is the uncertainty, every now and
then, in spite of the utmost possible vigilance, with a
view to the prevention of aey casualty whatever of
the kind, that, an error of fact, or that an unin-
tended exaggeration, or that a wholly unwitting
misapprehension may mar the accuracy of some
announcement. Every journalist, every day of
his life, it may be very safely asserted, is liable to the
hazard of something of this description. Casualties
of the kind are precisely what he is perpetually
guarding against. Habit renders it, at last, the in-
stinctof his nature to guard against them, always and
to the very uttermost. It is, consequently, but very
rarely indeed that there arises any occasion whatever
for the revision of some casual, and certainly entirely
unintentional, inaccuracy such as those of which we
have but just now indicated the character. As a rule,
again, it may be quite as confidently asserted, that in
English journalism inaccuracies or exaggerations of
any kind have only to be pointed out to be upon
the instant acknowledged. Nevertheless, in spite of
every determination to act not only with courtesy,
but, even we will say, with the.most delicate conside-
ration in the interests of those among the general
public, who bring themselves into communication
with him upon these occasions, the journalist, it
sometimes happens, will find himself entirely baffled
in his endeavour to act scrupulously, as we have said,
not only with courtesy, but with consideration. An
instanceof this kind has but very recently fallen within
our own experience. And, fresh from a glance at the
"Literary Flies" commented upon in the present
number of the Britannia, we cannot but particulaiise
the incident we are here referring to as another and
the latest contribution to the curiosities of journalism.
A Correspondent, alluding in our journal of the
20th ultimo, to the then immediately anticipated visit
to Manchester of the Prince and Princess of WALES,
referred to " a leading Manchester man of enormous
wealth" as having made the most sumptuous prepara-
tions for the reception, as his guests, of their Royal
Highnesses. No name whatever was mentioned.
It was sim,ily said that " a leading Manchester man
of enormous wealth" had been makingsuch-and-such
preparations for the reception of the Heir Apparent
to the Crown. His mansion, it was said, had been
re-decorated and re-f urnished for the occasion, and—it
was added--among other costly devices which hal
been adventured upon for the beautification of one
portion of the house to the very uttermost—that pic-
torial treasures of very considerable value were to
have been displayed there upon the occasion, in
accordance with an arrangement with an
eminent firm of Picture Dealers, well known
for their t tste and munificence, not in Lon-
don and Manchester alone, but far and wide
throughout the United Kingdom. No individual
whatever, we repeat, had been named by our corre-
spondent. The announcement was perfectly harm-
less in itself, but was one that proved, after its appear-
ance, to bare been based upon a misapprehension.
The Messrs. AGNEW and SONS, of Manchester,
addressed to us, in regard to it, a courteous letter,
in which they intimated that, so far as the para-
graph related to themselves, it was founded upon
a misconception. That letter *was at once pub-
lished in our columns with an editorial foot-note,
in which we expressed our earnest regret that,
upon the particular matter referred to, there
should have been one moment's misapprehension.
Meanwhile a person of whose existence previously we
had no knowledge whatever, whose very name when
it came before us in his own handwriting was wholly
unknown to us-=at once fitting the cap upon his own
head—insisted upon it that he was the individual re-
' ferred to in the paragraph, at the same time insisting
upon it that the paragraph was incorrect through-
out ! No name had been mentioned, but he was the
individual referred to—he being, of course, the only
" leading Manchester man," and the only man of
" enormous .wealth" in all Manchester. No name
was to be mentioned, but the paragraph—wholly
incorrect as it was stated to be—was to be reprinted
—a rather Irish suggestion—for the purpose of being
withdrawn! A preposterous notion in itself, and one
only in keeping with the writer's modest assumption
to himself of the character—as alone his—of
" a leading Manchester man of enormous wealth."
Not satisfied with his suggestion of the exceed-
ingly Irish reparation just now described, the
person demanding this absurdity at our hands,
responds to our assurance that he was, individu-
ally, never in our minds—we knowing nothing
whatever, indeed, previously, as we have said,
of the very fact of his existence, throws out a
threatening reference to the whole thing as libellous,
and—.after the publication of the Messrs. AGNEW'S
letter in our own columns, with our 01,V11 earnestly
expressed regret thereupon—closes his communica-
tions with ourselves by transmitting to us a let-
ter, couched in terms of the grossest and of the
most unjustifiable impertinence. It would almost
appear, in fact, as though the only course open to us,
now, would be to publish name and address in
full of one 50 Singularly anxious to fit this cap—this