St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1875-03-26
Ecr. Dr.. GHHric

I'VE must read" >lit DR.. Jnhn>olI.
IN one of his contentious conversations
with Sir Joshua and Others. "What the
world reads at the moment" And
he added, after some other remarks.
at mISi ne considered that we have
now more knowledge =, ncr;rlly diit'u>-
ed. All ON ladies read now. which is
Il great extension. lie did not stop to
criticiSc the worth ut what ali the ladies
were reading. lie took for granted
that the step from reading nothing. to
reading something was il great intel
lectual advance. And he waS quite
right. We. however. i've under some
what different literary conditions from
those which prevailed iii Dr. .I"hmS0H'S
day. There Is Il much greater amount
of trash written now than WAS written
then, and consequently there l. Il much
greater number OF iradCl> of trash. not
only among women hat aiuuug men al
So, than there was then. The ladies
have made IL great advance since the
day when Or. johnson said the, all
read. He might have obs. rived how
i'll these days the burden of rcadin.-
"what the world reads at the mumrut'
has become almost greater than We can
bear. Under the pressure OF SENSATION
Ill novels and special correspondence.
he might have become PERHAPS less
willing To acknowledge the necessity of
conforming to the world in this matter.
Some men are apt to fancy that read
ing trash is peculiarly IL woman'S weak
ness. at is perfectly true they say.
THAT many of us read little enough of
any kind but what we do read is unt
,.h al, -, ~
sisters read" And this hvpothcsiS
seems To have lately received some SIP
port from the writings and speeches of
divers stIong-minded ladies. who in
pursuit ot i more or less worthy object.
have paraded before the public the hol-
lowneSS and trir"lity of Engli>hwn-
mems lives. But the hypothesis is not
altogether detrnSihle. 1t is true per
haps that women read moIe of the trash
of fiction than men do. But if does
not at all follow that. because a man
does not read trashy novels. therefore
what he does read is worth Ieadiuu.
On the contrary. there is probably quite
as much unworthy reading among men
who read ut all is among women. Tn.
trash upon which men waste their time
Is not 50 much the trash OF novels as
the trash of newspapers. 1t is true
perhaps that an excessive devotion 10
newspapers does not produce such pal
pahlN evil effects aS are produced by
undue devotion to novels. But the
evil done is nevertheless real and con-
siderable. Excessive newspaper read
ing stimulates not morbid >elf-cou-
seriousness, or fills the mind with all
sorts of absurd fancicS about friends
and enemies. about the tyranny of So
ciety, the rights and wrongs of lovers.
and the poetry of an unreasonable %,
unlawful attachment: bmt il Is never
theless sure destroyer of the mental
health. Its effect is tn weaken tbe
judgement and the ScmSe of mental dis
elimination, to discourage intellectual
initiative, and generally to deaden the
mental powers by substituting =
habit of mechanical for habit of in.
telligent reading. The confirmed new,
reader-the man who reads throuob. NJ
least the Times before going to bust
ness III the morning, who after busines.
hours gets through large portions %
one or two other morning papers. onl,
varying or simplifying his studies. ac
cording to the day of the week OF tn,