have been able to show that they had become the oldest business institutions in their towns.
In some other cases where publishers, starting with a salutatory that they were "here to stay," moved off within a few weeks or months, the papers themselves, conducted by others, lived on and have come through to the present.
The highly political newspapers of the early years were, in general, not of great value in promoting general culture. Educational institutions were not regarded as sources of news or matters of news interest until comparatively recent years. This statement has to be made cautiously. There are some references to this matter in the body of the book. School activities simply were not covered, as a rule, in the early papers, unless the school authorities themselves brought in the matter and asked its publication. This attitude is still met with occasionally among less enlightened publishers, such as one, not in Oregon, who not so long ago said he saw no reason to give the public library free space. Most publishers are on the other side of this particular fence. There has been, too, the attitude among some editors that only the sensational, the scandalous, or the athletic phases of the schools could possibly be the subject-matter of news. The schools, however, have grown in the good graces of the newspapers, which are increasingly willing and able to give intelligent coverage without leaning directly on school authorities or teachers actually to prepare the matter and bring it to the office.
Matters of general culture, such things as literary meetings, new books, etc., were not—judged by what was printed—highly regarded by the pioneer editors as a rule (with exceptions). In this respect it is doubtful if some of the publishers were up to the cultural level of their readers, for early Oregonians were distinctly literate and would not have insisted that politics crowd out other matters so decidedly.
Almost universally, the editors, from the beginning, have been hearty supporters of orderly enforcement of the law and have been active in the economic and physical development of their communities.
Freedom of the press from interference of censor has been upheld with fair success from the beginning. The little Spectator (1846) had trouble keeping its editors, who insisted on "being themselves" politically, in spite of the rules of the paper.
Not always has this freedom been used with the greatest wisdom and public spirit. The early papers, before and after libel-law severities, paid little heed to the protection of the other fellow's reputation. The legislatures of 1862 and 1878 tried their hands at restrain ing this sort of thing—the 1878 attempt made after defamation had resulted in bloodshed. Steady improvement is noted in this respect, however, not all of it due to more stringent laws.
The "personal journalism" of the early days had its bad points
