firm a footing had the latter paper obtained in the town. But Messrs.
Feeney and Jaffray had put their hands to the plough; they pegged away
with the _Birmingham Daily Post_ till it did make an impression, and the
proprietors being able and experienced in the matter of newspaper
business management, they stood very firm when they did begin to feel
their feet. They drove the town--not from pillar to post, but from
_Daily Press_ to _Daily Post_. They established their position, and that
position they have gone on improving unto this day.

As for the unfortunate _Daily Press_, it fell into a very serious
decline, and finally expired somewhat suddenly in November, 1858. Its
successful rival remarked in a not over sympathetic paragraph that "it
went out like the snuff of a candle leaving behind it something of the
flavour of that domestic nuisance." I remember poor George Dawson, who
had lost a good deal of money through the failure of the _Birmingham
Daily Press_, thought the _Post's_ spiteful little obituary notice the
unkindest cut of all. For victors to crow over the vanquished in such
language he thought was worse than ungenerous, it was mean.

I will not now pause to say anything in detail concerning the
_Birmingham Daily Gazette_, started in 1862, the _Daily Mail_ in 1870,
the _Globe_ in 1879, the _Echo_ in 1883, the _Times_ in 1885, and the
_Argus_ in 1891. I must, however, just note that the most important new
journalistic venture in recent years was the production of the
_Birmingham Morning News_, which was started in 1871. This daily morning
paper was established on lines which should have led to a permanent
success. There was plenty of capital at its back.

Mr. George Dawson--whose name it was thought would be a tower of
strength--took an active part in its editorial work. It had an excellent