This type of thing was not uncommon in western papers as well as eastern in those days.
The News, which was having its financial troubles in a field already occupied by the Oregonian, practically failed early in 1884 on the heels of the collapse of Henry Villard's railroad boom. John G. Egan and Henry E. Reed got out one number of the weekly to bridge the gap until finances could be recouped. A number of the staff members then, Mr. Reed relates, took hold of the paper as a cooperative concern and ran it as a daily and weekly for three months. Sale was made in June to Edward Thayer of Evansville, Ind., and L. N. Hamilton of Salt Lake. Mr Reed recalls that he received for his interest in the paper a total of $21 owing him for wages. Hamilton and Thayer changed the name to the Portland Daily News and within the year had the paper making some money. Harvey Scott in his history of Portland says James O'Meara, the old fire-eating secession advocate, was editor of the paper for a time in 1886. Reed's recollection, as a member of the staff, is that the paper in 1887 supported the proposed state constitutional amendment prohibiting the liquor traffic. This had a result usual in those days—shrinkage of circulation and advertising patronage almost to the vanishing point. Another reorganization was forced. John D. Wilcox, of an old pioneer family, acquired the paper in August, 1887, and continued publication until January, 1889, when final suspension came.
The News had cost its various owners about $200,000 more than they had been able to get back, almost duplicating the red-ink record of Holladay's Bulletin.
Throughout its career the News was engaged in wordy warfare with the Oregonian—as was the custom of the time. One of the big jousts was over the question of liquor regulation.
A group of Portland liquor-dealers took exception in 1883 to the Oregonian's stand for increased liquor licenses. The News was friendly to the saloon men. For a time the liquor interests under took a boycott of the Oregonian for its plain utterances.
The Oregonian's attitude on the liquor question through the years has been a middle ground, between prohibition and extra high license—the position which, in the judgment of the editors, insures the maximum of effectiveness in regulation.
The Oregonian noticed the hostility of the liquor-dealers in an editorial published March 12:
A certain class of liquor sellers, ignoring the mayor and common council, seem to suppose that the Oregonian enacted the new license ordinance. If this were true, it would be a high compliment to the power of this journal in the community.
