Payment for Advertising

March 15

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

South-Carolina Gazette and Country Journal (March 15, 1774).

“All Persons whatever, who may be inclinable to favour him with their Advertisements, may rely on its answering their End.”

The “NEW ADVERTISEMENTS” in the March 15, 1774, edition of the South-Carolina Gazette and Country Journalbegan with a notice from the printer, Charles Crouch.  Like his counterparts throughout the colonies, Crouch occasionally issued a call for “all Persons who are in Arrear for this GAZETTE, or otherways indebted to him, to make immediate Payment.”  Recognizing that many of his subscribers lived outside Charleston, he requested that “his Country Customers … will cheerfully comply” by directing “their Friends or Factors in Town to pay off their Accounts.”  In particular, he pointedly suggested that “those who have not yet paid him any Thing” would tend to what they owed.  When they ran notices for similar purposes, some printers asserted that certain customers had not made payments for years, taking advantage of credit extended to them.

How did Crouch and other printers manage to stay in business under such circumstances.  Many, but not all, required advertisers to pay in advance, figuring that advertising generated enough revenue to offset shortfalls from subscriptions.  That was the case for Crouch and the South-Carolina Gazette and Country Journal.  He instructed advertisers “send the CASH” when they submitted copy to the printing office.  After all, “he is at great Expence in carrying on his Business.” Accordingly, Crouch was “determined in future to receive none without,” suggesting that perhaps he had accepted advertisements without “the CASH” in the past.  The printer made an exception for those he “owes Money, or has an open Account,” presumably counting new advertisements against his own debts.

In hopes of attracting new advertisers, Crouch commented on the effectiveness of inserting notices in his newspaper.  Advertisers could “rely on its answering their End” or serving their purpose, whether disseminating information or enticing customers or whatever other reason they had for advertising.  He competed against two other newspapers published in Charleston, the South-Carolina Gazette and the South-Carolina and American General Gazette.  Prospective advertisers should choose the South-Carolina Gazette and Country Journal, Crouch stated, because “the Circulation of it is very extensive.”  In other words, the newspaper reached many readers.  In addition, Crouch bragged that he was “regular in publishing his Paper on the Day it is dated,” taking a swipe at other competitors who sometimes delayed printing and distributing their weekly newspapers.  Advertisers could depend on their notices in the South-Carolina Gazette and Country Journal reaching readers in a timely manner.  At the same time, he tended to settling accounts with existing customers, Crouch sought additional customers who had reason to advertise.

August 8

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , ,

Who was the subject of an advertisement in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Pennsylvania Chronicle (August 8, 1772).

“My wife, HANNAH FREDERICK, did … elope from my bed and board.”

In the eighteenth century, aggrieved husbands often took to the pages of newspapers to warn others not to extend credit to misbehaving wives who “eloped” from them.  Readers regularly encountered “runaway wife” advertisements in newspapers published throughout the colonies.  Those notices continued to appear during the era of the American Revolution and, as Mary Beth Sievens demonstrates, well into the nineteenth century.[1]

Although most notices followed a pattern, each provided details specific to a particular household.  Wives usually “eloped” from their husbands on their own, but in an advertisement in the August 8, 1772, edition of the Pennsylvania Chronicle one husband reported that his wife, Hannah Frederick, “did … elope from my bed and board … with a certain Abraham Hudson.”  The husband believed that the two of them traveled “from Fish-Kills, in Duchess County, in New-York government … to Elizabeth-Town” in New Jersey “and from thence to Philadelphia.”  To aid readers in identifying his wife, the advertiser reported that her “maiden name was Hannah Coleman” and she “served her time,” likely as an indentured servant, “with John Taylor, at Tinicum-Island.”  He concluded with a formulaic statement cutting his wife off from his credit: “these are therefore to forewarn all persons from trusting her on my account, as I shall pay no debts of her contracting after the date hereof.”

Printers published such advertisements without offering commentary of their own, but, in this instance, William Goddard did insert a clarification.  “In the copy of the foregoing Advertisement, which was sent to the Printer,” he explained, “the Advertiser’s name was omitted.”  As a result, the husband’s name appeared as “———- FREDERICK.”  That being the case, how did Goddard handle payment for the advertisement?  Some printers required advertisers to pay in advance, even though they extended credit to subscribers.  After all, advertising comprised a lucrative revenue stream.  Occasional notices in eighteenth-century newspapers, however, make clear that some printers did allow credit for advertisements as well as subscriptions.  This husband may have submitted payment, but not his name, to the printing office … or Goddard may have taken a chance that he would settle up in a timely manner.  Even if that was the case, the printer’s trust only went so far.  The advertisement ran just twice (August 8 and 15), though most newspapers initially published advertisements for three or four weeks for a set fee before charging a lower fee for each insertion.  Goddard may have been carefully managing how much credit he extended to “———- FREDERICK” even as that husband attempted to exert control over his credit when it became clear his wife was beyond his influence.

**********

[1] Mary Beth Sievens, “Female Consumerism and Household Authority in Early National New England,” Early American Studies:  An Interdisciplinary Journal 4, no. 2 (Fall 2006):  353-371.