TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE " TIMES " AS A NATIONAL INSTITUTION.
AN interesting article by Mr. Garvin in the Observer of last Sunday alluded to the intention expressed by Lord Northcliffe to make arrangements in his will that the Times should become a permanent national institution.
In the summer of 1908, Lord Northcliffe several times talked to me on the subject and asked me to give him my views. He seemed to think it would be very difficult to carry out any such plan. I pointed out to him, however, that he might quite easily make a trust, though, if he did so, he must be careful to avoid the petrifaction which so easily falls upon endowed bodies. After our conversation I grew warm with the subject and threw my proposals into the form of a letter. This I think it may be of interest to print at the present moment :— " Confidential. Monday, August 10th, 1908.
" MY DEAR NORTHCLIFFE,—I have been thinking very carefully over the points on which you wanted my advice, that is, in regard to the best way of establishing the Times by your will as a national institution. Clearly, the main point to be aimed at is the vesting of the Times in a body of independent trustees, who shall from time to time appoint the editor and manager, and who shall generally control the paper in accordance with your desire that the Times shall remain an impartial, judicial and national organ of public opinion. I will begin my suggestions with the trustees, who shall hold in trust the proprietary shares which carry the control of the paper. I suggest that these trustees should be : " The Lord Chancellor (or if for any reason he cannot act some person of high legal position and standing named by him, as, for example, the Lord Chief Justice or the Master of the Rolls).
" The Speaker of the House of Commons.
" The Archbishop of Canterbury.
" The Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford.
" The Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge. " The Editor of the Times and the manager of the Times for the time being. " Such a body would represent all the elements of the national life with which the Times is specially concerned. The selection of Oxford and Cambridge alone among the universities may seem unfair, but the Times has always been specially representative of those two universities. It would be the duty of the trustees to appoint an editor and a manager whenever those posts were vacant, and to appoint for ten years, of course with possibility or, indeed, expectation of renewal. After his appointment the editor should be irremovable, except on the ground that he was for physical and mental reasons incapable of fitly conduct- ing the paper. In fact, his tenure should be very much that of an English judge. The editor should have complete power and responsibility over everything written in the paper, and should be at liberty to oppose any policy or movement which he considered contrary to the interests of the nation. His conduct of the paper, however, would have to be consonant with the general aims and objects laid down by you in your will. These, I take it, would be something like the following :- " The essential object of the Times should be publicity in regard to all that concerns the national and imperial life and interests, so long as publicity can be obtained without injury to good morals. In order to obtain such publicity care must be taken to give the views of those opposed to the policy of the Times, as well as the views of those in agreement with the Times. In other words, the speeches, writings and letters of those from whom the editor of the Times differed would be as fully reported and printed as those with whom he was in agreement. The general aim of the paper should be to secure what may be termed j ' judicial journalism.' Speaking generally, the editor would put public affairs of all kinds before his countrymen, as a wise and impartial judge lays a case before the jury. While putting both sides to the jury a judge, however, can rightly make it clear which view he considers the true one. In the same way a judge, though he puts both sides impartially, does not hesitate to denounce strongly and sternly that which he thinks of evil report, or, again, to give proper praise and commendation to what he thinks is right. The Times, in a word, though judicial, need not in the least be flabby or invertebrate. It would hear both sides, but would say fearlessly what it thought to be best. So much for policy. " In addition, it might be laid down that in its pursuit of a wise publicity the Times must take special care as to the adequate reporting of Parliamentary proceedings, and also of all legal proceedings, and further, that it must pay special attention to foreign affairs, its object being to let the country understand the development of political affairs throughout Europe and the rest of the world. " The financial question is a little hard to settle. In the first place no doubt the profits should go to accumulate a large reserve fund in case there might be a period when the paper had to be carried on at a loss. Assuming, however—as I suppose one may assume—that there would generally be a considerable profit, I think the best plan would be, first, to have a moderate and reasonable profit- sharing scheme for the staff, and after that to use the i profits in the way the Royal Literary Fund is used, except that the fund in question would be distributed amongst members of the journalistic profession rather than on literary men in general. The trustees might appoint a committee of three persons who would make grants from the fund, after the manner in which grants and pensions are paid out of the Civil List.
" I hope you will not think these ideas very crude. At any rate, I send them to you for what they are worth. The question has interested me very much. We hope to come over at tea time next Sunday, and I daresay by that time you will have found a great many holes in my proposal and many practical points which I have overlooked. —Yours very sincerely, (Signed) J. ST. LOE STRACHEY."
Presumably we shall very soon know whether Lord Northcliffe did, in fact, carry out his proposal. He never told me whether he had or had not acted on my advice, though he seemed to think my scheme was a workable one. I do remember, however, that he expressed special agreement with what I had termed " judicial journalism." In fact, he told me that he had had a great many copies made of this part of my letter, or of a separate Memorandum on Judicial Journalism, I forget which, and had sent one to each member of the staff of the Times, telling him that my description of what should be the spirit inspiring the Times was what he wanted carried out.
Whether he succeeded in endowing the Times with the spirit of " judicial journalism " is not a matter which I desire to canvass here. My present object is to confirm Mr. Garvin's statement as to matters which certainly at one time occupied Lord Northeliffe's thoughts a great deal. People will be surprised perhaps to know that he seemed to agree very readily with my proposal as to the position which the editor of the Times should occupy while he was editor—i.e., that he should be secure from any external interference. Probably the apparent divergence between theory and practice in this matter was due to his regarding himself as the de facto editor of all the papers which he owned and controlled. J. ST. LOE STRACHEY.
Previous page
