Editorial policy (?) and the potential impact upon an issue’s collectibility…

April 11, 2009 by  
Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post

The following are a few thoughts by Morris Brill (guest contributor) concerning slight differences in the printing of the Declaration of Independence within the London Chronicle (dated August 17, 1776) vs. the printing within the Gentleman’s Magazine (dated August, 1776):

Recently on Ebay two different sellers offered a printing of the Declaration of Independence in the Gentleman’s Magazine.  I also noted your offering of the Declaration within the London Chronicle.

I (Morris) noted, while reading the text of Gentleman’s Magazine, as photographed on Ebay, a particular sentence in which two words were missing and substituted with a line, i.e. ___________

editorial_license1The sentence is as follows:

“A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

In the Gentleman’s Magazine the words ” prince” and “tyrant” are deleted.

I find it interesting that although the Gentleman’s Magazine and the the London Chronicle are both British that one paper printed the words prince and tyrant, yet the other did not.

To me, the deletion of the two words certainly diminishes the historic value of the printing as it appeared in the Gentleman’s Magazine, although I would not pass up the opportunity to own this paper. Perhaps it has to do with an opposing editorial policy, or the political persuasion of the two publishers.

Morris

Note:  If anyone is aware of the formal policy which led to the deletion of certain words within the Gentleman’s Magazine, please share your insight with the rare newspaper community.

If you liked this post, you may also enjoy...

Filed under: Common Questions, Guest Posts, The Hobby
Tagged: , , , , ,

Comments

Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!