The weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1878-1881, 1880-06-22


y to refer to the limited extent in which they
allow themselves to grumble or agrowl" at
: their newspapers. Their forbearance in this
: respect, when we consider the occasion they
have for display of opposite traits of temper,
is a. astonishing as it is commendable. This
f is understood by the gentlemen of the press ;
for no one better than the newspaper scribes
the iniquities, the sins of commission and
still worse of omission for whichthey would be
answerable if called to q rigorous account for
their transgressions. But the mantle Of char
lily Is kindly drawn over = great part of their
multitudinous sins aud they are allowed to
pass nearly, not quite, scot free of the punish
ments strict justice would declare rightfully
theirs. They do net, however, entirely es
cape, for occasionally the voice of criticism
makes itself heard ; although, unfortunately,
the censor generally overlooks the almost
numberless grounds Of just complaint to take
his stand on one affording but very insecure
footing. The matter complainedof is usually
tho "sameness," the " want of variety to be
found in the pages of our newspapers.
Those professional WRITER'S says the SUPER
line Mr.. Fitz Critic, turning up his delicate
nose in contempt, "thsy remind one of bullets
cast from the same mould. Compare their
articles with the bright letters we receive
from our friends and note the difference.
Where is the constructive Imagination, where
the light play OF fancy which renders so
charmingly delightful the sparkling letters
We occasionally receive from non-professional
writers? Day after day the newspaper arti-
Gle is YEARLY the same"
This il the Indictment made against the
professional scribe. Before replying to it
directly we would beseech the good critic (if
critics ever are good) to wait with patience
while we, having marked out his position, re-
tire to a convenient point of observation
thence to advance by slow approaches to the
stronghold to be invested. From writing.
either professional writing or that of cores
pondence, let us recsde to conversation,
Here, as our critic is we'll aware, the person
spsakin. is not the same, one day with ALL |
other, no matter whom his remarks NAV be
directed to. With one person an uninter-
F Coll OV IlAlillAlIlcu |
without trouble or effort. Subjects ready at
tired in appropriate words, suggest themselves
in luxurious profusion, and the dialogue, be
it the gossip of table talk or a learned disoui-
sition between sarants, is a sparkling pleasure
in place of labored effort. With another,
though, conversation, anything deserving the
name, is found to be i matter of sheer in-
possibility. Let the host try never so hard to
entertain his guest let him 60 cunning ever
so zealously after his best thoughts and
choicest sayings, the result is inevitable, dis
heartening failure. His best stories seem
suddenly Invested of point his imagination
has taken flight without notice, and after
roaming over one after another of his fields
OF information in ~fruitless search of even one
interesting topic OF discourse he at length be-
comes convinced that he is either the victim
OF an extraordinary access Of stupidity or
else that his guest is a fool. The conversa-
ton into which life could not possibly be in
fused then desenerates into a series of catego-
rical questions and nswers into remarks on
the weather or crops, and finally into long
wastes of yawn-interspersed silence. from
which each party is heartily glad to escape,
and no less pleased to bid adieu to the COM
psnion whose society he had found to be irk-
some. TO explain this extraordinary differ
ence, examples Of which are frequent IN
everyone's experience, we are told that in the
first place the speakers were en- rapport. that
a mysterious intellectual sympathy had es-
tablished itself between the persons whose
minds, relative to each other, bore positive
and negative relations, so that each operated
directly as a stiinulant and attraction TO
arouse and draw out the very best
OF what the other was capable.
In the second instance, though, we meet with
'uncohgeniality of disposition - or something
OF the sort, having the power Of bringing the
two minds into discord, instead of harmony,
and of reducing each below the level of its
normal power, when acting alone and free
from the malefic influence OF the other. This
is the explanation in non-scientitic language
Profound Neutrality-suspicious. have without doubt
a stock of very learned terms to be used in
explaining the influence exerted by one mind
over a"other; but for present purposes it is
sufficient merely to call to mind the existence
of such a phenomenon, and to remind the
reader that all are agreed as TO its origin, al
though 7chy it should so originate might be
difficult to prove.
Turn We now to writing. Who has not
noticed that in writing a letter the writer &C.
caslonally appears to be under the operation
of some influence which lifts him clear above
and beyond his every day self. While under
this mysterious spell he writes easily and
writes well. His ideas keep we'll in advance,
no matter how rapid the writing, his very best
thoughts seeming to run down to the pen
point and trace themselves as it were Oh the