270 EDITOR. 



which Mr Johnstone had invested the 1000 originally 

 advanced him by the subscribers for the purpose of start- 

 ing the Paper, had so far deteriorated, that its value, at 

 the time I entered on the proprietorship, was estimated, 

 on the principle usually adopted in such cases, at some- 



of these eleven only one the Witness has succeeded. The attempts 

 to establish the others have all ended in disappointment, and have en- 

 tailed on the proprietors losses in each instance of from a thousand to 

 fifteen hundred pounds. But how much greater would the losses have 

 been had the parties been taken bound to maintain their papers, what- 

 ever the amount of loss sustained ! Some of them could not continue to 

 be published at a defalcation of less than from eight to ten pounds per 

 week. Now, the Herald may possibly turn out such a speculation as 

 the one Edinburgh paper that during the last twenty-five years has 

 succeeded, but it is as possible it may turn out such a speculation as the 

 ten that have not : and what Mr Fairly and myself ask, is simply not 

 to be bound to keep it afloat perforce, should it prove unable to float 

 itself. We promise to give it a fair trial ; but should it refuse to live 

 on its own means, as an honest paper ought, it must just be permitted 

 to die. 



' " In the third place, we are not sure that Mr Somers's name should 

 have been included in the Minute. He is yet in a considerable de- 

 gree an untried man. He may turn out to be all we wish him, or he 

 may turn out something else. Suppose a great majority of the sub- 

 scribers were by-and-by to be dissatisfied with his mode of conducting 

 the sub-editorial department of the Witness, or the editorial depart- 

 ment of the Herald! Or suppose we were to find him too much a 

 Radical, and impracticable to boot ! His name in the Minute, in these 

 circumstances, might possibly be found a rock a-head. There could 

 be little danger of our breaking with him so long as we found the 

 arrangement a good and beneficial one, though his name were not in 

 the Minute ; and the introducing it there may have merely the effect 

 of embarrassing, should the arrangement prove not good or beneficial." 



' Such were some of the objections which were held reasonable, and 

 yet suffered to weigh nothing. The Minute on which Mr Wood found- 

 ed his document was said, as I have stated, to be that of the Witness 

 Committee ; and the Committee have now an opportunity of knowing 

 whether it was in reality such. The members are, Dr Cunningham, Dr 

 Candlish, Mr Begg, Mr Dunlop, Mr Blackadder, and Mr Wood. I may 

 mention, that none of the meetings on this business were attended by 

 Dr Cunningham ; and Mr Dunlop I saw but at one meeting, and that 

 for only a very few minutes. I may further mention, that the names 

 of both these gentlemen were added to those of the Committee, as re- 

 appointed on this occasion, at the express request of Mr Fairly and 

 myself, Dr Cunningham at Mr Fairly's, and Mr Dunlop at mine.' 



