The Uncrowned King: The Sensational Rise of William Randolph Hearst (84 page)

BOOK: The Uncrowned King: The Sensational Rise of William Randolph Hearst
7.98Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
 
It was not a hard sell. Pulitzer had to be regretting his decision to snub Hearst’s prewar overtures. He had watched in horror through the summer as his advertising lineage shriveled, and his margins with it. When he tallied up the costs of the
World
’s extra correspondents and dispatch boats and the returns from his unsold papers, he found that his mighty money machine was operating at a loss for the first time since he had purchased it. Even as Cervera’s fleet lay burning off Santiago, Pulitzer was desperate for a truce with Hearst. He accepted the negotiated terms, instructing Seitz to “tell every night editor, city editor, managing editor & editorial writer, to let the
Journal
alone as long as they let us alone—and possibly even longer.”
32
Pulitzer would backslide from that position. He accused Hearst of violating Associated Press guidelines by running its copy in the
Evening Journal
(which was not party to the morning
Journal
’s AP franchise). He pressed the matter in the courts. When Hearst found himself being tailed through the streets of New York by process servers, he had Carvalho write his counterpart at the
World
that if Pulitzer didn’t back down, the
Journal
would terminate its good relations with his newspaper and “begin a personal assault on Mr. Pulitzer,” making it “as personal and as powerful” as possible. The sniping would continue for another year but, commercially, “good relations” were maintained.
33
 
Pulitzer did some serious cost-cutting of his own after the war and suffered another bout of respectability, leading to sweeping changes to
World
operations. Murder and crime stories were banished to inside pages. Limits were placed on the size and number of illustrations; those deemed unnewsworthy were banished entirely. The flagrant use of “extras” to plump sales was curbed. Front-page fonts came under review, especially in the evening edition. “Mr. Pulitzer endured the screaming typography until the end of the fighting,” recalled Seitz, “then he ordered the foreman to collect all large letters and melt them up. This he did, but they refused to stay dead.”
34
In keeping with the new emphasis on restraint, Pulitzer instructed his executives to re-educate newsroom employees on proper editorial practice. A notice was posted around the Pulitzer Building calling staff to a meeting at 11 a.m. on November 28. A series of managers stood to confess their journalistic sins and confess that the
World
had lost its way over the previous two years. As Bradford Merrill said, “In strenuous competition a man may do a thing for a newspaper which he would not do as an individual. It is Mr. Pulitzer’s desire that no man should ever do anything as a member of the staff of the
World
which he would not do or believe in doing as a man. The great mistakes which have been made [and] I have made a number of them myself—have been caused by an excess of zeal. Be just as clever as you can. Be more energetic and more entertaining than any other man if you can, but above all, be right.”
35
 
This forced ritual of penitence was typical of Pulitzer, but hair shirts were not the style at the
Journal
. For the most part, Hearst would defend his paper against charges of sensationalism in its Cuban coverage: “There is a good deal that is sensational about a war,” he told one interviewer, and the
Journal
wrote “to the temper of the people.”
36
He had nothing but praise for his newspaper staff, writing Brisbane: “All must be congratulated on this tremendous job . . . It must be remembered as we embark on a movement to upgrade social conditions that through efforts of exposure and exploitation public opinion will compel anything to be done that is right. The war with Spain was our war but the credit goes to the nation. Let us always remember the power of an informed public mind . . .”
37
 
All the same, Hearst joined the rest of Park Row in moderating his style and tone through the autumn of ’98. He brought the pitch of the
Journal
down at least an octave, using far fewer streamer headlines, and making massive front-page illustrations relatively rare. That was as close as Hearst came to acknowledging that his paper had lost its composure at the height of the conflict.
 
 
 
IN THE SPRING OF 1899, Hearst began showing up at Democratic fundraisers in New York. In an undated letter to Phoebe, he talked of running for governor of the state (likely in 1900). She agreed to bankroll him. “I went home full of gratitude for your great generosity and kindness in letting me go into this political contest,” he wrote Phoebe. “I got hold of Brisbane and talked to him for hours about politics and the paper. Brisbane is sure the nomination will do the paper an
immense
amount of good. He says just think how it would help the
World
if Pulitzer were nominated and elected Governor of the state of New York. Would there be any doubt in our minds as to how that would dignify the
World
and raise it in public esteem, especially if he gave a good administration. The
World
would be the mouthpiece of the Democracy and we would feel that the
Journal
was unutterably insignificant and would doubtless see another political field. That is a fair way to look at it.”
38
 
While that letter suggests Hearst’s political activities were supporting his journalism, it was soon apparent that his papers were directly serving his ambitions for office. Hearst was pestered by the Democratic National Committee to launch a daily in Chicago. Weak in the Midwest, Bryan’s people desperately wanted Hearst on their side against Chicago’s largely Republican press corps. They baited him with the presidency of the National Association of Democratic Clubs, an organization dedicated to publishing and distributing campaign literature. Hearst was intrigued, but Phoebe was appalled at the prospect of another newspaper in the family. She wrote Orrin Peck from Paris in May 1899:
I have been feeling greatly depressed and did not feel like writing. Will is
insisting
upon buying a paper in
Chicago
. Says he will come over to see me if I do not go home
very
soon. It is
impossible
for me to throw away more money in
any
way, for the simple reason that he has already absorbed almost
all
. In a few months there will
actually
be
no
money, and we must then sell anything that can be sold to keep on. It is
madness
. I never know when or how Wm will break out into some
additional
expensive scheme. I cannot tell you how distressed I feel about the heavy monthly loss on the
Journal.
And then to contemplate starting another nightmare is a hopeless situation. I have written and telegraphed that
no
argument can induce me to commit such a folly as that of starting another newspaper.
39
 
 
 
Never mind the underline on the word “no,” Phoebe did contribute to the Chicago venture. Her affairs were nowhere near as desperate as she claimed. Rather, her gold and copper mines were throwing off stupendous returns. She did insist that the
Journal
reduce its losses before Chicago got underway, and further letters from Will indicate that she was keeping close tabs on his operations. Will told her that Brisbane would be installed as publisher of the morning and evening editions, with Sam Chamberlain editing the former and Richard Farrelly the latter. He had given Brisbane “full authority to make changes we discussed which would result in saving five thousand a month more than Clark’s figures. We believe we can bring the loss down to twenty five thousand a month including the Evening, which will be $300,000 for the next year at the present rate of advertising. I believe the advertising can be increased $300,000 so that for the year of 1899 I will show you a profit on the
Journal.
” He advised Phoebe to keep his letter: “I think this will be one time that my financial predictions will come true.”
40
Whether or not he met his target is unclear, but the
Journal
was soon operating in the black.
 
Late in 1899, Hearst made a long trip to Europe and Egypt with Millicent, her sister, and her parents. The journey restored his spirits and improved his health. He visited some archeological digs Phoebe was funding in the Nile region. “I am going to write a book about the conquest of Egypt by Mrs. P.A. Hearst,” he wrote her. “In Cairo, the dragomen sailors and waiters besieged me with recommendations from Mrs. P.A. Hearst, on the boat I am entertained with tales of the generosity of Mrs. P.A. Hearst, and here at Luxor I am overwhelmed with antiquity dealers (guaranteed) who were the particular favorites of Mrs. P.A. Hearst. The wide swath you cut through Egypt is still distinctly visible. Seriously you must have had a great time and everybody speaks of you with so much admiration and affection that I am very proud to be my Mother’s son.”
41
 
On his return to the United States, Hearst told the Democrats he would indeed launch a Chicago daily, but only after he had laid down a marker with Bryan himself. “The undertaking is big and the prospect of another period of work and strain is not pleasant to contemplate,” he wired the candidate. “I would like to know how important you consider such a paper, what real benefit to the party it would be. . . . These things being determined I suppose the satisfaction of being of some value would lead me to disregard all other considerations.”
42
 
Bryan’s response must have been satisfactory. S.S. Carvalho launched the
Chicago American
in a miraculous six weeks. Its first edition was on the press July 2, timed for the national holiday and the height of the electoral season. Bryan would lose, again, in 1900. Hearst would not run for governor of New York that year, but he did win election to Congress in 1902. He soon after established two new papers in Los Angeles and Boston, fulfilling the prophecy he had made to George Pancoast as they ferried across San Francisco Bay in 1889, circling cities on a railway map—“a paper there, and there, and there.”
 
 
 
AS HEARST WAS RAMPING UP his political career, the U.S. military was bogging down on the other side of the Pacific. After Dewey’s triumph in Manila Bay and the Spanish capitulation at Santiago, McKinley had decided that America had a duty to uplift and Christianize the Filipinos and nurse them to independence. The Paris peace conference held to settle the Spanish-American War became what historian David Trask describes as a “territorial grab of significant proportions, something neither planned nor even anticipated before the brief conflict with Spain over Cuba.”
43
The Filipino freedom fighters who had been struggling for their independence from Madrid long before Dewey sailed onto the scene saw little difference between American and Spanish occupation and soon resumed their war of independence against their supposed deliverers. In no time, a large U.S. expeditionary force was hunting rebels in the hills and jungles of the Philippines and, inevitably, the American army adopted many of the counter-insurgent tactics that Spain had applied in Cuba, including reconcentration of the civilian population and savage treatment of captured rebels. All of this would have a grave effect on history’s judgment of Hearst’s work at the
Journal
.
 
The Philippine war triggered a reconsideration of 1898’s harsh judgments against Spain and its colonial methods—Congress went so far as to recognize Weyler as a misunderstood soldier who had bravely met the requirements of a nasty situation in the Caribbean. As more time passed, McKinley’s Far Eastern adventure came to be understood, not incorrectly, as an act of “brutal aggression” and “adolescent irresponsibility” on behalf of a young country; the president had succumbed to a “national egoism” entirely divorced from the national interest.
44
Less reasonably, historians cast the whole Spanish-American experience, start to finish, as a grievous error. Cuba lost standing as a discreet event and was viewed as a symptom of the same malignancies that produced the Philippine fiasco. The suffering of the Cuban people was downplayed, and America’s humanitarian concerns were dismissed as a cover for less worthy imperialist motives. The original advocates of Cuban intervention, like Hearst, were scorned as the jingoes or cynical profiteers who had dragged an innocent America into a wholly unnecessary imperial disaster.
 
It is true that Hearst, McKinley, and almost everyone else who supported the Cuban intervention of 1898 gave insufficient attention to the practical outcomes of war with Spain, including the possibility that America might wind up holding far-flung territories. Unforeseen consequences are the constant plague of humanitarian initiatives in foreign policy, and the best argument against them. All the same, Cuba did not make the Philippines inevitable: McKinley, on settling with Spain, could have chosen not to acquire and fight for the archipelago.
45
As Mark Twain wrote in 1901, Cuba and the Philippines were separate wars undertaken with different motives. McKinley had seen in Cuba an “oppressed and friendless little nation” that was willing to fight to be free, and he put the strength of seventy million sympathizers and the resources of the United States behind it, making America proud. In the Philippines, America played a European-style imperial game with utterly different consequences: “We have stabbed an ally in the back . . . we have robbed a trusting friend of his land and his liberty . . . we have debauched America’s honor and blackened her face before the world.”
46
Hearst supported the Phillipines acquisition as yet another humanitarian mission, and wound up apologizing for U.S. agression.
47

Other books

Redhanded by Michael Cadnum
Border Fire by Amanda Scott
The Marry-Me Wish by Alison Roberts
The Reluctant Assassin by Eoin Colfer
Valentine Murder by Leslie Meier
My Fallen Angel by Pamela Britton