New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-04-17

law to society still forces the daily paper to adapt
itself or try to adapt itself. to the higher tastes
II. however this be said of the arstocracy. tbe
manning OF the word must be widened. and the COM
msndug class must include men of letters ana Oh
science as well as those whose claims to distinction
are hereditary.
Not the least curious of Mr.. Frseman's IDEAS Is
his notion that the weekly press in America IL SUI
perior TO che daily. He speaks OF the best American
weekly uapers, using tho plural. but mentions i"o
Nation only Mr.. Freemnn's stay IN the 'ni''u
States was not long one. and he presumably h"u
no time TO rectifv the impression lie may won
enough have acquired long ago. lie Is p'o'" Wy
unaware that the print he names mas ce'soN " ~
an independent paper. ana he clearly nas no' Va
read IT, or he would have discovered no" Lar ""'
fallen from the literary and critical em'no"'o ~
winch it attained IN better days but no d" GU
as he is prone to. a priOri. and having oon ~
himself that weekly pspurs ough' 10 DC o''''' -
daily napers firmly believes lhat theJ %i0
cause .he weekly is necessarily a'oFeSS'
smaller class oil readers than the dahy' al" '00"uS
its writer's haSea longer time 10 'nlnA wv y
thew WRITE the weekly journal must oe VI "
cr,s.. unless. adds Mr.. Freeman, 1T be OF lower
because deliberately aiming lower "no'"'' -
likely 10 attract ADLER writer's; whether IL CD" l'S
a., ht,er work whether the strongest meu Will
nrobablv care more Tor limited than Tor large
audience: whether among the conditions Oh WHICH
suc,e.s in Journalism depends the privilege Va
thinking over your article Tor week is quo :
whether weekly Journalists do spend their week III
thinking over their one article these anu o'nei
Questions Mr.. Freeman Omits tn consider
IL is not TO he inferred from anything MI. rIoo-
man has written of the American press that "o was
badly treated bv American papers when ho was
there lie is careful to say that ne was h"V amazon
by tue things friendly or unfriendy tney p'o''"'u
liant him hat amused Tins attitude OF superior
ity ON Mr. Frteman's part need irritate n"oouy' ~
is not now assumed for the first time nor WIN To-
ference to The American lor tor tha' 'h'''e' '1o
Eugllsul press. If anything unlrohdy "aS S''''
be considers that an Irish contributor Hu'' "'''
crept III unawlTes. He thor ght IL onu, ~ NV ~
hvo Ina, looks and mis- clothes described and crItl-
csud in print hit got used to II; anu IL QUO "'''''
disaprroy.d OF his trousers and second OF his ac-
cent a third made up iOG II by presenting h'ih w
the purlc AS " a man of might used to move cohu-
n.n,sp ,bouch this ROVER hr modestly disclalins.
The pages he deyotes 10 answering MS AA"''''"
nev.,aner critics are by 10 the last dFel'-
mo IN a volume of varied and general Interest
what hs suvs On the press IL not always sald WIN
LuowI,dge hut the passage about lntervewerS VIII
Ina fouud profitable for meditation ami might IL"
pood if framed and hung up. let us say IN ~ LOUIS
Mr. Freeman thinks interviewing purely Amer
lean CUSTOM but there are newspaper Offices Oh '"S
side of the Atlantic also where his remarks Il pray
erfuly considered, might have reforming e"ec,'
The British interview does not yet nonrish win
tn, rank luxuIance Of his American cousin
whether he ever will is matter of prophecy TeI-
hans it will strike Jr. Freeman as odd that 'no
greatest offender at present IL The 'tmfs. No'hlhg
more audacious can he quoted from any American
ionrnaI than some Of the performances OF It's faris
corresoondent lie. to be sure, is not an English
= q. W. s.