“Not at all inveterate--only justly indignant,” was the answer. “I am indignant, because I admire the newspaper press of Great Britain--I am proud of it--I glory in belonging to the country which possesses it; and therefore when I see journalism prostituted to the lowest and meanest purposes--when I behold such despicable abortions as the _Daily News_ and the _Express_ daring to show themselves in that sphere where respectability and talent alone existed until those threepenny things made their appearance,--I am angry--I am disgusted! Only see how the _News_ has been tinkered and hacked about with the idea of making it a property. First it was five-pence--then it was two-pence halfpenny--next it was three-pence;--and yet with all this derogatory experimentalising, the owners have failed to make it a property. What a miserable thing does it look, with its beggarly three columns of advertisements! The _Times_ has as many in a day as the _News_ has had altogether since its sickly existence began. The very Parliamentary Reporters engaged upon the _News_ are ashamed of their connexion with such a scurvy affair; and the doorkeeper of the Gallery of the House of Commons looks on them with kind commiseration, knowing how degrading it must be to their feelings to take their places in the seats allotted to the representatives of that three-penny hodgepodge. You never see the _News_ quoted from nor alluded to by its contemporaries. It is not recognised as a member of the newspaper press. It has tried all imaginable kinds of manœuvres to force itself into notoriety,--sometimes currying favour with the superior journals, and at others abusing them; but all to no purpose. Its contemporaries will _not_ notice it: they will not be bullied nor coaxed into such condescension. Why--would you believe that the very Editor is heartily ashamed of his post: but he knows that if he resigned it, he should be compelled to relapse into the lowest walks of penny-a-lining, whence he was dragged forth to conduct the _thing_.” “How is it possible that such a contemptible journal continues in existence?” asked Mr. Styles. “There! now you puzzle me indeed!” exclaimed the advertising agent. “The question you have put to me involves one of the greatest mysteries of London; and I am quite incapable of affording you the solution. Time will however show: for, in this case, time _must_ clear up all doubt and uncertainty regarding the matter. For the present, however, take my advice and refrain from advertising in a paper which is contemptible in circulation and influence--scurrilous[8] or hypocritical, according to circumstances, in its literary articles--and wishy-washy in the extreme in its leaders.” “Well, I am excessively obliged to you for this most useful warning,” observed Mr. Bubbleton Styles. “You have nothing to say against the _Weekly Dispatch_--the _Sunday Times_--_Bell’s Life in London_----”