be the style of humour desiderated, the Thunderer may take as a well-earned compliment the American sneer that “no joke appears in the London Times, save by accident.”  If another instance be wanted, take this:  Major Calef, of Boston, officiated as marshal at the funeral of his friend, Gen. Francis Walker.  In so doing he caught a cold, of which he died.  An evening paper hereupon published a cartoon showing Major Calef walking arm in arm with Death at General Walker’s funeral.

Americans are also apt to be proud of the number of their journals, and will tell you, with evident appreciation of the fact, that “nearly two thousand daily papers and fourteen thousand weeklies are published in the United States.”  Unfortunately the character of their local journals does not altogether warrant the inference as to American intelligence that you are expected to draw.  Many of them consist largely of paragraphs such as the following, copied verbatim from an issue of the Plattsburg Sentinel (September, 1888): 

     George Blanshard, of Champlain, an experienced prescription clerk
     and a graduate of the Albany School of Pharmacy, has accepted a
     position in Breed’s drug-store at Malone.

     Clerk Whitcomb, of the steamer “Maquam,” has finished his
     season’s work in the boat, and has resumed his studies at
     Burlington.

I admit that the interest of the readers of the Sentinel in the doings of their friends Mr. Blanshard and Mr. Whitcomb is, perhaps, saner and healthier than that of the British snob in the fact that “Prince and Princess Christian walked in the gardens of Windsor Castle and afterwards drove out for an airing.”  But that is the utmost that can be said for the propagation of such utter vapidities; and the man who pays his five cents for the privilege of reading them can scarcely be said to produce a certificate of intelligence in so doing.  If the exhibition of such intellectual feebleness were the worst charge that could be brought against the American newspaper, there would be little more to say; but, alas, “there are some among the so-called leading newspapers of which the influence is wholly pernicious because of the perverted intellectual ability with which they are conducted.” (Prof.  Chas. E. Norton, in the Forum, February, 1896.)

The levity with which many—­perhaps most—­American journals treat subjects of serious importance is another unpleasant feature.  They will talk of divorces as “matrimonial smash-ups,” or enumerate them under the caption “Divorce Mill.”  Murders and fatal accidents are recorded with the same jocosity.  Questions of international importance are handled as if the main purpose of the article was to show the writer’s power of humour.  Serious speeches and even sermons are reported in a vein of flippant jocularity.  The same trait often obtrudes into the review of books of the first importance.  The traditional “No case—­abuse the plaintiff’s attorney” is translated into “Can’t understand or appreciate this—­let’s make fun of it.”