The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-10-21
TEE Rz1Anv. PHcss or ADvxsnsns-wH1cH


Is THE CnxArSs1 I'VE find that very extensive
ignorance prevails in the community in reference to
the relative prices of advertising in tho different
newspapers Of this city, and of the United States in
general. There is, in many quarters, total mis-
apprehension as to the value Of the work done, and
the cheapest and best mode Of obtaining the object
Of the advertiser 1t is imagined by many persons
that an advertisement is inserted in one journal
for less money than in another it u.s. therefore, "quite
a bargain" while the journal that charges the
higher price is set down as exorbitant in its de-
mands. II is never taken into consideration by
these Solons, whom the chambermsids could teach
little common sense, that advertising in some
journals may be dear at any price, no matter how
low, while in others the value given is so
great that an advertisement would be really
cheap at twice or thrice the amount charged. OBJ
ections are made from time to time to the bills of
the HERALD by those who labor under this delusion,
while those who understand the matter in its proper
light cheerfully pay the prices believing that they
have got more than the worth Of their money, AMI
that in journal in the world is advertisement
inserted SO eheaply as in the columns of the New
YORK HERALD In order once for all to remove mis-
apprehension, and to set the inexperienced right,
we select two cases in point. The first is an advor-
fourteen times in this journal, and for which s u
were charged. The account was as follows.
Advertising Proposals for Goal and Wood, May o. 1852
IA tmea OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES. SAL
The advertiser objected to the charge, on the
ground that the Courier inserted the for $lS;
but when he was made to understand that the cir
culation Of the HERALD is 10000, while that Of
the Courier is about 1000, and that, therefore, he
had received ten times the amount of value, he at
once paid the bill, and, we presume, was satisfied
that our charge by far the moderate of the
two for, if We had made out the bill according to
the ratio Of our circulation, compared with that
Of the Courier it would have been $50, instead Of
$42. The second case is that Of Mr.. r. j. Moses;
and the account Of the HERALD was presented as
follows
JUNE I, 1852
Advertising Bill for Partition, Franklin Cir
cult Court. in Chancery Mordecai Myers vs.. VIM.
Howand &c, &c.
80 lines times at 50 so per insertion. s2s 90
Mr.. Moses, it seems, was dissatisfied, and ad
dressed US the following communication, enclosing
the bill Of the Southern Press for the same adver-
tiseMent-
COLUMBUS, Ga Oct. IA 1852.
DEAR SRI find, in comparing your bill with thai of
been to the different offices here and they think that
your clerk must certainly have made enclose
your bill and that Of the Southern Press for examination
and correction Please your answer return the bill Of
Southern Press and let me know the amount Of yours
and viii send you check on sslters Co. Of your city
for that and years subscription to daily HERALD which
please forward to me. Yours truly,
X. j. MOSES, Solicitor. Columbus, Ga.
To JAMES GORDON BENNETT, ESQ., New York.
r. j. Moses, Esq,
To Southern Press, DR.
For eight insertions Of an advertisement entitled Bill
Of Partition in the Southern Press between the 10th
june 1882 and the eth August lS52and occupying four
squares, 50 %
Now, the circulation of the Southern Press was
somewhere about fifteen hundred, or at most two
thousand, and if the HERALD were paid IN the same
proportion, according to its circulation the amount
would be hundred and eighty dollars, instead of
twenty.eight-the number of sheets issued by us
being at least twenty times great as that Of the
Southern Press, when it had an ephcmeral exist.
ence. That journal is long since dead, and the
idea Of putting the value Of advertisement in its
columns, or in the columns of similar journals of
little Circulation, level with the value Of
an advertisement in the HERALD, with its forty
thousand daily impressions, and sirty thousand of
ts Sunday and weekly circulation, all over the
United States and the world, and read by probably
half million of persons daily, is simply ridicu-
QUE, and in mercantile and business point Of
view shows profound ignorance or certainly, great
want of consideration the part Of those who fall
into such mistake They might just as well 90 to
job printing Office, and ask its proprietor to print
10000 handbills at the price for which another
printer had dane 1900 or 1000 Of the same kind.
1t is thus plain that the thing will not stand the
test Of examination, and that, Of all journals in I'll
United States the HERALD is decidedly the cheapest
and beat mode Of communicating with the public
and it is fact that reflects creditably upon the
growing intelligence Of the age, that the majority
Of advertisers including the sensible Oh ambermaids
have found out this secret, and more and more are
beginning to find it out every day, to their in
ealeulable advantage.
MEANNEss OF THE PARTY PREss.-Among that
portion Of the New York press which deals in per
sonaity, in default Of argument, and not content
with assailing its opponents with the nobler wea
pons Of debate, Sleeps its shafts in the venom o.
private nalgnity, the Ercaing Post and Daily
Tfib1ae are unquestionably pre-eminent Whether
from unwillingness or inability, the Post and the
1rids.de seldom probe question of political econo.
my or statesmanship to the bottom-a superficial
notice Of the points at issue amply satisfies them,
and they straightway relapse into tie more congo
NAL department Of personal abuse.
We have beautiful illustration Of this feature in
the Post, in its recent controversy with Governor
Hunt. The facts are as follows;-In 1889, Mr..
Hunt was large stakeholder in tho North Ameri-
can Trust and Banking Company, and obtained
from them loan Of ss5, 900, for which he gave his
bond, with collateral security TO tho amount of
$4,000 Though the bond was emily due eleven
months afterwards, the company, being pressed for
money, disposed Of $4,000 worth of the collateral
securities, at heavy discount, while the bond had
yet seven months to run. At its maturity, Mr..
Hunt refused payment of the bond claiming that
the Stocks and other collateral securities disposed Of
by the company were set-of to the full amount.
Ths litigation which ensued turned on this point;
but Mr. Hunts attorney, rs every prudent legal ad
viser would have done in the like circumstances,
raised second minor issue, on plea of usury
The referee reported in favor Of Mr. Hunt on the
e. IL lLa4 &C h. al, Ia.