perhaps still remains, in spite of " honors " conferred on repre sentatives of the press ,though apparently its direction is changing;
a recent writer on “ Journalism for University Men ” says that “ the aristocracy of this branch of journalism (short hand report ing]are the reporters in the Gallery of the Houses of Parliament,'142 thus tacitly acknowledging that a university man may join the ranks at least of parliamentary reporters without losing social te
caste.
The historian must see possible limitations on the results of the parliamentary reporter's work in the early legislation against his presence in Parliament, in the obstructions put in his way after he had gained an entrance, in the long exclusion from Parliament of the representatives of the provincial press and in the present exclusion of representatives of the foreign press and of women reporters, in the somewhat contemptuous attitude towards
them of “ the Brahmins of the green benches.” But what of the reporter himself, — how far has he been able to overcome limita
tions of condition and rise superior to opposition, supercilious disregard ,43 difficulty of hearing or seeing the speaker, rapid or indistinct delivery , poor light, bad air , crowded quarters, lack of all the accommodations to -day held to be indispensable for him ?
All of these difficulties the reporter may overcome, but he always has to reckon with the speakers . Few have altogether
ignored them as did Dr. Johnson . But they have found stum bling-blocks in their after-thoughts, as did Vizetelly in editing an edition of Macaulay 's speeches taken “ verbatim from ‘Hansard '
which in those days was commonly accepted in the House of Commons as an unimpeachable authority.” “ In an edition,” says Vizetelly , “ which Mr. Macaulay himself subsequently prepared of his speeches, which he professed to have merely revised while materially altering them to suit his more recent opinions, he took monplace men ,” but charitably explained it on the ground that newspapers did not lay so much stress as formerly on the fulness of their reports of par
liamentary debates. — “ Parliamentary Reporting,” Contemporary Review , June, 1877, 30 : 165 - 167 .
42 F. S. A . Lowndes, Contemporary Review , December , 1901, 80 : 814 -822. 43 When speeches reported have unexpectedly aroused animosity against the speaker, he is prone to ignore the reporter and to take refuge in the statement that " he has been incorrectly reported .” This is one of the great
est trials of a parliamentary re
