The New York herald., 1871-02-20
Daily Journalism Not n gcience.

The Leader is a very sprighty paper and
would be good deal better if its wretchedly
bad puns and conundrums were expunged.
devoted to the spice trade department of jour
nalism it partakes still of those characteristics
which sparkled in its columns in the days of
John Clancy and Miles O'Reilly. But we can
not agree with much that it has to say, espe-
cially with its views concerning journalism
as a science. We believe that it is i'm
possible to reduce daily journalism to a
science. Journalism, properly understood and
wisely developed, is the reflection of events
which are created almost hour by hour of
| thoughts and opinions that change and take
| shape in the mould of these events. Based
| following rather than leading the philosophy
Of daily life as we hear and read of it in all
quarters of the Earth, journalism must catch
the current as it passes. 1t must be instan-
taneous, quick almost as the electric fash
itself. The capacity to accomplish this may
be skill, method, enterprise, discipline, genius,
II you will, but it does not belong to the sober
ranks of ofscience. The secret Of power in journal
ism, after all, lies most in the impersonality of
| the journalist. If the managers Of news
papers would only sti6s the ambition to unite
their individuality with their professional sue
cesses, whatever they may be, they would be
pursuing their grand mission clothed with q
tenfold influence. Egotism has so taken hold
of our editorial system in this country that
the majesty of the press is often reduced to
the infnitesimal proportions Of the writer,
which is great pity, because the newspaper
press is mighty engine, working with a
mystical and sometimes latent force through
! all the channels Of civilization.
! In craftsmanship as in journalism imper-
sonality is essential to success, The wise
statesman, whether he be ruler of nation
| or ruler of men, always preserves himself
from the whole responsibility Of his public
action. He shares the odium with his advisers
if any odium there be, and they generally have
to bear the heaviest portion Of it. If a great
evil should befall apeople, the consequence Of
bad government, as in the case of Napoleon
and unfortunate France to-day, sagacious
ruler would act as Napoleon did. He would
so divide the responsibility that he could retort
to the condemnation Of public opinion-in the
words of Macbeth to Banquo-''Thou canst moi
say did it." This was the policy Of Napo
leon. He left the responsibility SO divided
between his Cabinet and his generals, his good
and his evil counsellors, his faithful and his
faithless Ministers, that Bonapartism is
shielded and sheltered by the doubt as to
where individual responsibility can be credited
with this sanguinary war and the downfall Of
great chivalric nation. We might quote
instances in our own country to illustrate this
idea. Without intending at all to descend from
the sublime to the ridiculous very abruptly we
might cite the case of Andy johnson and
his ''my policy" policy. Ii he had shared
his councils with his Cabinet, instead ofthrust-
ing his individuality upon the country, the
/ Cabinet might have been turned out and And ,
johnson might have stayed in. To cite an
instance still nearer home of the sagacity
which prompts the statesmanlike mind to seek
Sweeny, who, everybody knows, is the con-
trolling mind in the government of the city.
But who sees Mr.. Sweeny on the surface OF
| public life? His friends, who have taste for
fourishing around at balls and dinners and
target excursions making speeches at ward
associations, donating princely sums to the
poor, and such like practices, are the recog-
nized representatives of our city government
before the people, while the calm and thought
| full head of the New York Bismarck directs
the whole machine from quiet and unseen
] places. Hence we fear that should a political