mark so long as it pleased his sacred Majesty to keep it so. There were, however, some drawbacks connected with the royal condescension. Those were the days of absolutism, and the royal authority extended beyond granting the privilege to publish a newspaper. It dictated to the unfortunate proprietor how it should and especially how it should not be run. Even as late as the first half of the present century Danish newspapers were controlled by such rules as these: "No rumour may be published in the paper. Editors must especially refrain from presenting political events in a jesting, ridiculing or satirical manner, but these should be presented in a simple, historical style." Under these conditions Danish journalism was even less lively than it now is, an historical style of the most uncompromising kind was affected by the editors, and the press censor was treated with the respect he deserved. Since 1848 all this has been changed, although from our American point of view the Scandinavian press is still far from free.

At first the Berlingske Tidende, or, as it was at first called, Kiöbenhavnske Danske Post Tidender, was published twice a week, in 1836 three times a week, and since 1849 twice a day, with the exception of Sundays and holidays. In 1833 the paper received its present name, the complete translation of which is "The Berlingske Political and Advertisement News, Privileged to transmission by the Royal letter-posts." In 1838 the editorship of the Berlingske passed into the hands of the distinguished economist and philanthropist, M. I. Nathanson, who for twenty-one years did more than any one else before or since to give to the Berlingske its present character and colouring. Under his control the paper introduced the feuilleton and developed the scientific discussion of economic questions. Nathanson was a really great journalist. He possessed not only the second-rate journalistic instinct of knowing what the people of his time wanted, but also the

first-rate journalistic genius to distinguish what his readers did not care for, but could be educated into liking. Under his leadership the paper became a great Danish educator, always respecting the national spirit, but never stooping to flatter national weaknesses. Nathanson stands for the best type of the Danish national character, a combination of conservatism and enterprise, of French esprit with German good sense. By its opponents the Berlingske Tidende is often called Tante Berling, and its language is condemned as chancery style. It is true that the criminal news is printed in small type on the inside page, and that initials are used to designate the victims of justice. It is also true that the old restriction about rumours is still observed fifty years after it had ceased to be valid. There is a curious absence of society news and gossip, and even the doings of the royal family seldom receive notice in its columns. These omissions make the Berling quiet, of course, but to most readers they are not a fault. Of the Berlingske Tidende it can be literally said: "If you see it in the Berling it's so." After a regular reading of the paper for over ten years I cannot recall having noted a single misstatement in it. Its book reviews are invariably good, often written by leading Danish specialists, and its art and dramatic notes are of the same high order.

The editorials on foreign political events are an admirable feature of the Berling. They always appear on the first page and include from two to three columns. They consist either of résumés of leaders from the leading foreign papers or discussions of news received through the telegraphic bureaus. During the past two years, as a result of circumstances, special attention has been paid to American political affairs. Home politics, on the other hand, are never discussed editorially in the columns of the Berlingske. Articles by outsiders commenting on the political situation from a conservative standpoint are frequently published, and sometimes unsigned ar

ticles, possibly by the editors, appear; but the editorial department proper is entirely confined to foreign affairs. This arrangement is perhaps in part a survival of the old law forbidding any newspaper comment on the all-wise and humane Danish Government. The effect is to give to the Berlingske a certain nonpartisan appearance in striking contrast to its wellknown conservative views. It gives it in journalism the position of the king in public life, who is not supposed to be of any party, but to represent the country as a whole.

The leading radical paper in Copenhagen is Politiken, established in 1884. Its editor-in-chief is V. Hörup, a wellknown liberalist, and its literary editor is the dramatist and novelist Edvard Brandes. Politiken is the representative brilliant newspaper of Scandinavia. Its opponents, who include all the conservatives, will tell you that its brilliancy is often gained at the expense of truth and accuracy, and it must be confessed that its writers do not always examine into the facts of a rumour with the care used by the Berlingske Tidende. From the

purely literary standpoint Politiken is easily first. Its brilliancy is not the superficial cleverness of ordinary newspaper writers, but it reflects often the work of such men as Björnson, Georg Brandes, Drachmann and Schandorph. Politiken is frankly modern. It supports the extreme wing of the opposition, it is opposed not only to the state church but to the church itself, it favours the most advanced school of fiction, it is extremely personal in its treatment of news. Politiken is particularly fond of poking fun at its chief rival, the Berlingske Tidende. In a recent account of a criticism of a picture which had appeared in the Berlingske occurs this bon mot: "Berlingske's eyes can also be seen from different angles, but they usually appear closed." Writers for Politiken seem to take a pride in trying to come as near as possible to personal libel without incurring the risk of an actual suit. During the fierce political struggle between the Danish premier Estrup and the lower house, a writer in Politiken asked if he would expose himself to prosecution for libel if he called his pig Estrup.

writers

Apparently the Politiken divide all Danes into two classes, radicals and fools. Of the radicals, the most intelligent are the contributors to Politiken, then come its readers; the rest are not specially classified. The most hopelessly foolish of the other side are similarly associated with the Berlingske Tidende. In the eyes of Politiken, religious convictions are incompatible with ordinary intelligence, and a love for any but extremely naturalistic fiction is a sure sign of a depraved literary taste. Last summer Politiken appeared as the special champion of the labouring class in connection with the great lockout in the building trades. As the editor at that time was a representative decadent in art and life, there could, of course, be no doubt of the perfect sincerity of Politiken's social convictions. Politiken loves the people with an ardour that is truly affecting. It would apparently be willing to sacrifice any amount of mere personal prejudice in order to gain their hearts and their subscriptions. The yellowest of our own dailies is not more ready to voice the sentiments of das liebe Volk. All honour to the unselfish efforts of this noble band of social reformers.

But many persons who are bitterly opposed to the principles of Politiken read it regularly because of its amusing articles. In Copenhagen the power to amuse will cover a multitude of sins. At every café Politiken is sure to be in constant demand, and on street cars and railroad trains a large proportion of the passengers read the same sheet. It is suggestive of the low average newspaper circulation in Copenhagen that this most popular organ of the radical party can boast of no more than twenty thousand subscribers, and most of the Copenhagen dailies have a much smaller circulation.

The four conservative newspapers, Nationaltidende, Dagbladet, Aftenposten and Dagens Nyheder, are controlled by the same publisher, Ferslew, and on that account they are often referred to collectively as the Ferslew paper factory. In its day the Dagbladet pressed even the Berlingske close, and it occupies an honourable place in the history of Danish journalism. One of its earliest editors, Bille, later Danish Minister to Washington, belonged in the same class as Nathanson as a creative journalist. The chief function of Ferslew's journals is to furnish reading matter to conservatives who cannot afford to subscribe to the more expensive government organ.

Of the more recent Copenhagen papers may be mentioned Dannebrog, which was established nine years ago, and Samfundet, an apparent imitation of Dannebrog started a few months ago. Of a distinctly lower order is Köbenhavn, the low price of which, combined with its sensationalism, gives it a larger circulation than Politiken. The Socialists' organ in Copenhagen is Social-Demokraten, a low-priced paper with a large subscription list. Socialism shows a steady growth in Denmark, as is clearly shown by the success of this paper.

The leading conservative paper in Sweden is Stockholms Dagblad. In its general tone it suggests the Berlingske Tidende, and, like the Danish paper, it appears twice a day. One of its leading features is the Sunday morning issue, which contains many excellent articles on current art and literature. The opposite of Dagblad is Dagens Nyheder, which is not only radical in its political views, but also decidedly American in its treatment of news. Its col

wegian point of view at least its treatment of this important question is perfectly reasonable, and it has undoubtedly exerted an immense influence in keeping the two countries together. This Swedish provincial with the long name has always succeeded in attracting to its staff very able writers. The influence of the other provincial papers is strictly local, but the Gothenburg Journal is said to have a considerable circulation in the capital.

Room should be found for the one Swedish newspaper published by royal authority, the Post och Inrikes Tidning. This government organ contains only the lists of appointments to the civil service, but it is probably read by many persons with as profound interest as the most sensational sheet. Its subscription list is said to reach only one hundred, but if that be true there must be a large number of free copies. There is a similar publication in Norway.

And finally we have to consider the Christiania papers. The oldest of these is Morgenbladet, which is now in its eighty-second year. In many respects it resembles the Berlingske Tidende. For

many years Morgenbladet was a liberal organ, and by some its editorial colouring was regarded as rather red. But when,' about the middle of the century, the Norwegian liberals began to grow radical and appeared to threaten existing institutions, the liberal paper became more and more conservative, and it is now the representative of conservatism in Norway. As such it takes a decided stand against the spread of the new national language, which the extreme Norwegians are trying to substitute for the Dano-Norwegian. Dano-Norwegian. At present there is only one daily newspaper published in this extraordinary tongue, Den 17de Mai, and it is a very small sheet. Curiously enough, the largest single advertisement in one of the recent numbers is an announcement of the new edition of Björnstjerne Björnson's works, which may be regarded as standing for the very cause that the paper is opposing.

The principal radical papers in the normal tongue are Aftenbladet and Verdens Gang. Apart from their politics. they do not differ especially from the paper first mentioned.

Daniel Kilham Dodge.

The student of English who is at all familiar with the history of the language during the last two centuries naturally would look for archaic forms of expression in the United States. But many do not recognise that survivals in American educated speech are more strikingly illustrated in Virginia and Massachusetts than in other sections of the Union. In cosmopolitan centres, such as New York and Philadelphia, and throughout the great central West, individual peculiarities appear, and here and there affect isolated communities; but, as a rule, dialectal peculiarities have been rubbed out, and both educated and folk-speech conform to a national standard. It is true that this standard, established by convention, is crude and imperfect, and that many inelegances are painfully apparent; but, at all events, expression has the advan

tage of being uniform, and has blended into a vernacular without marked differentiation between the literary and folkspeech.

The reverse is true in Virginia and, to a less notable extent, in Massachusetts. Richmond and Boston-long the recognised centres of culture of the two antagonistic civilisations on the Western Continent-are each characterised by somewhat radical departures from accepted canons where English is spoken. In other words, each is the repository and exponent of curious anomalies and of seventeenth and eighteenth-century fads-survivals which mark educated speech.

But more especially it must be admitted that a virile dialect exists in Virginia; that it distinguishes the F. F. V.'s (first families of Virginia); that it con

stitutes a test, and is a recognised shibboleth of culture, and that the Virginians view with compassionate regard any educated person who after a brief residence among them does not conform thereto. This dialect is of a twofold nature; and as it represents two distinct epochs in English literary history, separated by more than a century in time, to avoid confusion, its dual character will be treated separately.

I. What is the Virginia dialect? This, perhaps, may best be illustrated from a personal experience. Having been educated in Virginia, twenty years later, in the city of Richmond, I called upon a fellow university man, who subsequently had achieved distinction in letters. Not finding him in the office, and seeing the not unusual name of Carter on the door, in the free, conventional style of a Kentuckian I asked the occupant of the room if he were Mr. Carter. Imagine the surprise when in a patronising tone and with a look of mingled pity and scorn there came the reproving answer, "My name, sir, is Kearter," with a special stress upon an imaginary "e." Restraining a rising indignation, I next ventured to ask how I might find the residence of Mr. - -? I was directed to take a certain kear, and at a designated street to transfer to another kear, and at Street to leave the kears for the residence -again with a very noticeable and special emphasis on the sound of “e” in another word, where a somewhat liberal culture informed me that no such sound existed at all. In two minutes I had my directions; but, as seen, not until my backwoods rusticity had been rebuked and my provincialism duly impressed upon me by the first Virginian I had met, the rebuke being administered with an inimitable grace and the indescribable charm inherent in a courtly civilisation.

But the initial reproof conveyed in Kearter and so accentuated in kear was a mere incident of a sojourn in the Virginian capital. In social calls, at the door the servant receives your kyard. Inside the hospitable home you often meet veritable gearnitures of art; that charming wreath of flowers on the centre table is a gearland; hidden away among the leaves of anthology, perhaps (for Virginians never parade their armorial bearings, nor anything English, except

their speech), that lion rampant looking at you from the field is a rampant-geardant; that handsome volume at hand is by Thomas Kearlyle; those mendicant Friars looking at you so soulfully from the wall are Kearmelites, of the Order of Mt. Kearmal; the undraped portion of that figure underneath is in kearnation; on the wall opposite is Keardinal Richelieu; in the corner is a keartoon; on the mantelpiece those handsome keandlesticks remind us that, although the candle is archaic for illuminating purposes, keandle is a survival in Virginia dialect; and suddenly you become aware that the very tapestries under your feet are kearpets, their usual designation having long ago been ostracised from educated speech.

The south window view commands the gearden, where the geardener seems industrially wrestling with gearlic. The lady of the house receives you in a tasteful gearb-in fact, any article of wearing apparel in Virginia is a gearment; its rich colouring is kearmine; and it is said (but tell it not in Gath) that even the hose of a Virginia lady scorns other support than a gearter.

In this musical idiom forgetful debtors are sometimes politely reminded of their carelessness in matters of contract by a judicial process known as gearnishment, such euphemism in speech being an index of the general refinement and delicacy in manners; the base of charcoal, known elsewhere as common carbon, is liquefied into kearbon; the sore afflictions which God sent upon poor Job are softened into kearbuncles, as it were, to lessen the unpleasant memory to modern ears; all fleshly lusts are kearnal; a dead animal, however offensive to the olfactories, Virginians try to make less malodorous under the euphonic nomenclature of kearcass, while the very offal in the streets is dignified by the aristocratic name of gearbage, and is kearted off.

But why continue illustration in this graphic dialect, where every sound in which the hard "c" and "g" followed by the cavalier "a" must be toned into harmonious symphony to the musical and liquid utterance of Virginians, where the lading of a ship is a keargo; where anxiety is kearking care; where a statement is gearbled, a throat-wash a