No doubt the Star will reply to this criticism :
' It is all very well for the Spectator to talk about virtue. It does not publish betting odds, and has no "Captain Coe" to fascinate its readers.' That is true, but we may point out that when we thought the needs of the hour demanded a policy of War Prohibition wo did not wait for a Government Bill to stcy liquor advertisements. We did not even use the plea that if we did not print them other people would. But then the Spectator is not owned by the thrice- virtuous persons who own the Daily News, which owns the Star. The Cadburiau table of comparative virtue in the sphere of public morals appears to be—Most virtuous (the Daily News shareholders at home), fairly virtuous (the Daily News as an organ of public opinion), virtuous if other people are compelled to be so, but not unless (the Star). That is strange, but what is stranger still is that no one in the goody-goody world seems to be in the least worried by this situation. The unworldly and super-good Quaker proprietors of the Daily News are regarded by all the " once' guid " as hors concours in the matter of morals and social purity.
Previous page
