The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1905-07-20
the Council a compromise measure that
witt be satisfactory 10 both sides. III
7The Editor atld His Mission,

will be satisfactory To both sides.
-1=s----s-=...Es-=- - -. .4
The Editor and His Mission.
we publisli ln another coltinin nh edl
! torini from Tie milwaukee, Journal Ut
which 1t Is ciuimcd that the editor OF {
newspaper Is the representative Of tn Vi
i people us much SO rs IL he hud beef
elected to- the office d Of editor by ths
votes Of the people. seAi, ,s,
i Ing. Iii one scnso an editor Is the repre-
sentative of The people,, or should be
i but not as though iic had been elected ~
/ vote Ior the people. 1t would beAa sac
day FOR journalism II editors held theli
/ post BY popular vote, for there Woule
then DO no such thing ne nh indepcttdte.h
editor. lie would train with the Grove
and ..voicc tho sentiment OF the people,
and never express view that was no.
popular. Our Milwaukee, contemporary
does not mean, Of course, that an editor
should be that sort of Representative
OF the people;" OH the cont rary, 1t says
that 'tho editor mist make his appea
10 The best that Is III the people, and be
true is the hest that Is in himself Quite
50, but if he were elected, he would y. be
| d tlemneogl,e and give tho people tho doc
! trine they wanted, whether or not IN MS MS
opinion 1t WINS good for them.
| III another part Of tho article tho Sen
| tinel tlenounces the editor who holds
that 4 newspaper has rs much right,
morally, IL champion tho cause Of some
special nnd selfish interest for pay, as Il
lawyer has to plead the cause Of his
client for fee.
That proposition is SO base that It! IS
mot to be discussed In the company OF
decent newspaper men. But when m
editor "espouscs'' some cause of the peo-
Die which he knows to be wrong or III
advised, ana all because he may curry
favor with the people and sell his paper,
Is he not practically on all fours with the
editor who sells his opinion to al indt-
5yidual or n corporation? And II an edi-
Tor will sell his opinion to the people
for subscriptions, will he not also. sell 1t
TO an individual or corporation or a
political clique, If he can get his price,
and not be found out? For our part, we
have more respect for the editor who
boldly proclaims that his editorial col
umns arc for sale than for the editor
who poses for righteousness and Svaunts
himself as the great champion OF popu-
lar rights, and all for the sake OF selling
his wares. The one Is at least straight
forward In his business methods the other
is hypocrite for the price of his hypoc-3
risy.
Yet this important fact the judcois
editor must always keep well III mind: In
order TO have influence with tho people,
he must keep on terms with them, and
must feel and show a sincere interest
in their welfare He must get close to
the heart 'ofEthe people. and show genuine
sympathy with them in all just griev-
ances If he stands afar off and shows
that he is out of touch with them. he
may. preach. sound doctrine every day,
but the people will not heed. Indeed,
they will not hear. for they. will not read
his paper. That is the most difficult
task OF the honest editor to tell the :people
disagreeable truths; to advocate that
which is not popular. and yet to Induce
the people to read and respect his paper.
1t requires more tact and discretion than
It does to be President, Of the United
States. AZ 8
-----=---=-=
AS to the Safety Of Fast Trains.
The recent wreck Of the we'll known
twentieth Century flyer at Mentor, u.
raised the interesting question as to the
relative safety Of very fast trains. Thc
instructive and unthinking verdict of the
average man would probably be that the
speed Of the train: but the moro maturcd
opinion OF the American press is on the
whole opposed to this view. In regard TO
the Mentor wreck, the newspapers were
almost unanimous in believing that it
would have happened no less inevitably
to n slower train.
Taking the dcrailment of this train
as a text. the Scientific American, indeed,
has formulated tho proposition that fast
trains are actually safer than slow ones,
and has defended this opinion with
ability. technical skill. and plainly stated
reasons. In view Of the fact that this
argument Is more or less in keeping with
much other comment that the incident
has ected, 1t is we'll to note the counter
arguments that may be brought to con-
trovert It, The Engineering News. a
we'll known md ably edited journal, main
tans the opposite opinion. In recent
issue 1t insists that decision In favor
of the superior safety of a fast train Is
CONTRARY to common sense"i that risk
sis actually Increased with every Increase
of train speeds, and that when disaster
does occur. results are far more serious
/ to a flyer than to Il train running at or.
binary speed. The writer cites law Of
| ,,l,,, .Iaaf H., 90 tnutS