https://historysoa.com/files/original/5/244/1890-10-15-The-Author-1-6.pdf 0532c77a3e78b18cb72c00ba4f961aa6 PDF Text Text �������������������������������������� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Author Subject The topic of the resource <em>The Author</em> Description An account of the resource A digitised run of the Society of Authors' monthly periodical, <em>The Author</em>, 1890<span>–</span>1914, made available together for the first time.<br /><br />Currently users can browse issues and <a href="https://historysoa.com/items/browse?search=&amp;advanced%5B0%5D%5Bjoiner%5D=and&amp;advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=51&amp;advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&amp;advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Index&amp;collection=&amp;type=&amp;tags=&amp;exhibit=&amp;date_search_term=&amp;submit_search=Search+For+Items&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CTitle">indices</a> (not available for all volumes). Full text search for all issues, and other additional search functionality, will be added in 2022. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1890–1914 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context The-Author-Issues Publication Date The date of an event (in YYYY, YYYY-MM or YYYY-MM-DD format) 1890-10-15 Volume 1 Issue 6 Pages Page range in volume 129–162 Ngram Date Version of the date in YYYYMMDD format for use by the Ngram plugin 18901015 Ngram Text Version of the text with no HTML formatting for use by the Ngram plugin Vol. I.—No. 6.] OCTOBER 15, 1890. [Price, Sixpence. The Author. THE ORGAN OF THE SOCIETY OF AUTHORS (INCORPORATED). CONDUCTED BY WALTER BESANT Published for iße Societê Be ALEXANDER P: WATT, 2, PATERNOSTER SQUÀRË; LONDON, E.C: 1890.  ## p. 128 (#164) ############################################ ii. ADVERTISEMENTS. Berton, Sept 1y* 1878 muu. Málie, Toad y los : Gentleman I have sout me of your Reus, to have a hana mended trough Meus. Hoche, leurs Ito of theicity Tome may like to know that I have made this heu constantly . formue han twenty years, i Trine the days of a book of man called "The Autrict of the Bruckbank tere "1857–8 mutć . last Friday without repair and 1. aliray with herfect Oale jachten I have written with in halfa 1. . dozen or onare volumes, a Jacce neember of Enraps la ause Mousands of letters. Tere bit ai to an ole und and I hate you will do the ben you can for it hough I hura in the mean hier bought anotion of pain mate'' corigazine marked.C. Too not know whether que cau hir This testimonial har I feel as if the pen when bar caned out to much of Buy thought and thought back To much si ranon forms in whuan was enlithed to this Carlisicut of himnaha Reconce . Sans Eurther Homes tunly Miera Honeell Hemmer ILLUSTRATED Price List will be sent, free and post paid, on application to MABIE, TodD & BARD, 93, Cheapside, LONDON,  ## p. 129 (#165) ############################################ (The Organ of the Incorporated Society of Authors. Monthly!) CONDUCTED BY WALTER BESANT. Vol. I.—No. 6.] OCTOBER 15, 1890. [Price Sixpence. C O N T PAGE News and Notes — 129 "The Methods of Publishing." By S. Squire Sprigge 138 "The Literary Handmaid of the Church." A Reply by the Author of the Pamphlet 139 American Literature in America 148 An Old Man s Rejoinder. By Walt Whitman 149 Leaflet No. IV. Authors' Quarrels 151 Examination in Vanity Fair 153 A Model Agreement 153 A Hard Case, No. V. Through a Literary Agent 154 E N T S. PAGE International Copyright « *55 "Sing a Song for Sixpence." By W. R. Colles »55 Correspondence 156 Queries 156 Dreams and the Imagination *57 "The Authors' Manual" 158 At Work »58 New Books and New Editions »59 Advertisements 160 NEWS AND NOTES. IT is very much to be regretted that the Inter- national Literary and Artistic Congress, which has been sitting from October 4th to October nth, should have been managed with so little consideration for its success. Nobody knew that it was going to be held; nobody knows, now, who invited the Congress to assemble in London. They have received the hospitality of the Lord Mayor, who has proved himself ever ready to welcome every kind of work and every good worker. But that is not enough. English authors have been conspicuous by their absence. How could they be expected to attend? They knew nothing about the Congress. The Society of Authors was not informed until a few days before the Congress met. Nor were they officially informed even then, but heard casually through the Mansion House. Two or three of the members, however, joined, at this last moment, the Reception Committee. But the Society was absolutely ignored by the managers of the Congress. As a natural result, not a single English author took part in the proceedings of the Congress. The proceedings will be briefly reported in the next number. —« At the Church Congress, which has just con- cluded, Archdeacon Farrar read a paper on the "Ethics of Commerce." He began by saying that he would purposely take only the most obvious and elementary side. This is well. Men require to have always kept before them the elementary side. The Decalogue is extremely elementary, yet it is found most useful to hang it up, written large, in every Church. "Human beings," he said, "do not constitute a mass of dead, impersonal force, to be treated only in accordance with the laws of supply and demand; every living soul has rights, indivisible, inalienable, eternal, which cannot be trampled and crushed into the mire as though political economy were some monstrous Juggernaut which must be dragged along in triumph . . . . As for the law of honesty . . . what are we to say ... of bargains made by skilled prey- ing on the ignorance or the necessities of others; . . . of betraying a confidence fraudulently gained by pretence of simplicity? . .' . I might expose the dishonourable customs which in many cases taint what should be, and often is, the eminently respectable trade of the publisher; I might speak of the sweating publishers who, without a blush, toss to the author perhaps a hundredth part of what, by bargains grossly inequitable, they have themselves obtained. . . . There are many reasons why the conscience of England should be awakened on this subject. In the words of a vol. 1. K  ## p. 130 (#166) ############################################ 130 THE AUTHOR. living historian, 'When men live only to make money, and the service of God is become a thing of words and ceremonies, and the Kingdom of Heaven is bought and sold, a fire bursts out in higher natures. Show me a people whose trade is dishonest, and I will show you a people whose trade is a sham.'" Dishonest trade may be the buying or selling of things adulterated, bad, not what they pretend to be; or it may be selling at such a price as to give an unjust profit to the seller, over and above what he has given to the producer. He then becomes a Sweater. Now there will be found on p. i 39, certain examples of profit made by the S.P.C.K., which do not, indeed, touch the hundredfold spoken of by the Archdeacon, but they are double, treble, ten- fold, and even twenty-fold! Other traders Sweat for their private gain. These traders sweat for the promotion of Christian Knowledge. Which is worse—the poor wretch who only degrades him- self, or he who traffics in the sacred name of religion? My answer to this "Memorandum" of the so- called Committee of Inquiry of the S.P.C.K. will be found on pp. 141-148. The Standard has recently published a long string of letters coricerning a so-called Society 6f Science, Letters, and Art. It is an interesting ex- posure of human folly and human cunning. This precious Society confers upon a member the privi- lege of calling himself a " Fellow," of wearing a gowrt and a hood, showing a diploma, and even wearing a badge, like an omnibus cad. As for any qualifi- cations necessary to secure these privileges, there appear to be none; and as for any joy to be got by wearing the badge of the Society, this writer cannot understand where it comes in. Certain school- masters, it is stated, find it to their advantage to call themselves F.S.Sc, and on prize-giving days to wear the hood, which appears to be a very splendid thing. The Society, however, holds examinations, Well, so does the College of Preceptors, so does the Society of Arts; there is no reason why one Society should not hold examinations as well as any other Society, if they can persuade people to believe in their certificates. It does not appear that this Society of Science, Letters, and Art, does anything else at all to justify its existence. It is slid to publish no balance sheet, and the evidence is overwhelming that it offers its membership for sale, although the President—they have got a Presi- dent, as well as a Secretary—parades the fact that a form of election is gone through. Oneneednot, how- ever, be too hard upon the S.Sc.L. and A. It does pretty much what all Societies do which permit their members to put letters after their names. How many antiquarians, geographers, geologists, as- tronomers, would belong to the Societies represent- ing and supporting these sciences if it were not for the letters which they allow their members to use. Schoolmasters, writers, lecturers, and people gener- ally anxious to make themselves known,always try to make up for the absence of a degree by the addi- tion of these letters. To be an F.R.G.S., F.R.H.S., F.R.C.S, F.R.A.S., F.R.S.L., seems to the outside world a proof of distinction. Why not, therefore, F.S.Sc.? It means nothing, nor do any of the letters, except the plain old-fashioned M.A., R'.A. (whether Royal Academy or Royal Artillery), R.E., LL.D., D.C.L. or F.R.S. The poor schoolmaster who cannot use one of these legitimate titles might as well call himself F.S.Sc. as F.R.G.S. And if it helps him in his business, he will, I suppose, con- tinue to do so. As for the hood, it seems to be believed that only a University can confer a hood. That is not so. All that a University can do is to confer a certain kind of hood; and, indeed, if a man chooses to make and to wear an Oxford hood when he does not possess an Oxford degree, what pains and penalties does he incur? 1 once saw a reverend gentleman mount the reading desk in quite a splendid hood, of the Oxford colour, but ampler, fuller, more magnificent. I did not remember to have heard that he was an Oxford rrtan. He was not, in fact. He wore, I was told, the hood of St. Bees or of St. Augustine. Perhaps, after all, it was the hood of the Society of Science, Letters, and Art. Five guineas would have been cheap for such a hood. When a daily paper has exhausted all the sub- jects of the day, there remains, at the bottom of the basket, one—the novel of the period. The editor can always have a fling at the novelists. In every paper, once a year at least, and generally twice a year, there is the leader on modern fiction by a leader writer who never reads any modern fiction. His view, of course, is pessimistic. In the same way, when a man has attained a certain position —nd matter in what line—he considers himself qualified to address his fellow-creatures on the choice of books. This gives him also an opportunity of " slating" fiction of the day. Mr. Frederick Harrison, I learn from the fol- lowing extract, has been lecturing us on the Choice of Books, and has naturally seized the occasion to fling mud at the novelists. Let him speak— "But assuredly black night will quickly cover the vast bulk of modern fiction—work as perishable as the generations whose idleness it has amused. It belongs not to the great  ## p. 131 (#167) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. creations of the world. Beside them it is flat and poor. Such facts in human nature as it reveals are trivial and special in themselves, and for the most part abnormal and unwhole- some. I stand beside the ceaseless flow of this miscellaneous torrent as one stands watching the turbid rush of the Thames at London Bridge, wondering whence it all comes, whither it all goes, what can be done with it, and what may be its ultimate function in the order of Providence. To a reader who would nourish his laste on the boundless harvests of the poetry of mankind, this sewage outfall of to-day offers as little in creative as in moral value. Lurid and irregular streaks ol imagination, extravagance of plot and incident, petty and mean subjects of study, forced and unnatural situa- tions, moroid pathology of crime, duM copying of the dullest comm mplace, melodramatic hurly-burly, form the certain evidence of an art that is exhausted, produced by men and women to whom it is become a mere trade, in an age wherein change and excitement have corrupted the power of pure enjoyment." ♦ Let us add a few words of question and of ■ comment. Mr. Harrison not only watches the ceaseless flow of this miscellaneous torrent, but he carefully examines the bulk of the books which form the torrent. He reads masses of modern fiction. He must, else how can he speak with so much authority and precision on the subject? Unless, that is, he has evolved from his own brain the " lurid and irregular streaks of imagination " and nil the rest of it. Most of us do not read all the fiction, and therefore we must accept his judgment ho far. He complains, however, that he does not know whence it conies or whither it goes. Let us tell him. Three-fourths of the "torrent" consists of feeble, harmless, and imitative stories, the production of which is paid for by the writers in the vain hope of getting money out of them. Very few copies arc printed, still fewer are bought; they would be absolutely unheard of if the reviewers did not notice them; they die as soon as they are born. As regards the remaining fourth part, I suppose I may be allowed an opinion as a humble follower of the art, and I maintain that as regards that fourth part, the art of fiction never stood on a higher level than it stands to-day. It is not only ridiculously false—it is ridiculously foolish—to speak of the works that are now produced every year as a " sewage outfall." There is no Thackeray now living, but there are writers of fiction among us who would adorn any age. I say that the names of Black, Blackmore, Rider Haggard, Hardy, Howells, James, Litton, Meredith, Murray, Norris, Oliphant, Payn, Steven- son—which I write down not as exhaustive but as occurring to me at the moment—are names of writers who have advanced and are advancing the Art of Fiction. If anyone will take the trouble to read the novels of fifty years ago—it has been my lot to read a good many—he must acknowledge VOL. 1. that the art is far better understood now than then, that the style is infinitely better, that the work is more dramatic, cleaner, and clearer, better finished—in a word, that the modern work far surpasses the older work. Yet there is among us no living Thackeray, Dickens, Scott, or Fielding. ♦ This adviser on the Choice of Books further informs us gloomily that the Art is exhausted; that it is followed by men and women as a trade, and that the age has lost the power of pure enjoyment. Now let us consider this statement—so wide and so sweeping. First, how can an Art ever be ex- hausted? It is the first quality, the chief quality, of all Art, that it is as inexhaustible as the whole range of human emotion; nay, that for every new gener- ation Art shall be young, strong, and immortal. It is only when one is old, when there is no longer anything to hope, that Art appears decrepit or exhausted. The Art of Fiction can no more be exhausted than the Art of Painting. As to the trade of it, novelists have always, like painters, followed their art as a trade. If Mr. Harrison means that modern novelists turn out their work with no care or thought of Art, why—there is nothing to reply but a flat denial. I suppose that Dickens and Thackeray scorned to sell their books or to turn them out as a trade! What futile rubbish is this! 4 Lastly the age . . the age . . Alas! when was there ever an age which was not corrupt, ruined, hopeless? The present time is more especially lost and hopeless on account of the fin de sifrle. Let me protest against this fin de stick cry. It means that because the century is coming to an end, art, thought, invention, science—everything is senile too, in sympathy with the dying century. Let us consider again. For literary purposes there are only four centuries to think of. First, the sixteenth. Where is the fin de sikle in the last decade of that century? Shakespeare wrote fifteen of his plays in that decade; Ben Jonson began; Kit Marlow ran his brief course; Raleigh, Peele, Greene, Spenser, Lyly, Drayton, Harrington, Stow, Cervantes, Tasso, Montaigne, Du Bartas, Malherbe, all adorn this last decade. Where is the fin de si'ede here? Let us pass on to the years 1690-1700. What do we find? Any weariness, any decay, any senility? Not so—Dryden, Wycherly, Congreve, Steele, Dennis, Price, Swift, Burnet, Defoe, Bentley, Tom Brown and Ned Ward (a savoury pair), Garth, k 2  ## p. 132 (#168) ############################################ 132 THE AUTHOR. Philips, Rovve, Buxton, John Locke, Tillotson, Jeremy Taylor, Colley Gibber, Tom D'Urfey, Boileau, Racine, Calderon, Bossuet, Fenelon, La Fontaine, Fontenelle—all adorned the last years of the seventeenth century. Pass on to the years 1790-1800. Was there here any decay, any senility? Burns, Wordsworth, Crabbe, Bloomfield, Coleridge, Southey, Scott, Cooper, Priestley, Paley, Cumberland, Dibdin, Sheridan, Ferguson, Monk Lewis, Mary Godwin, William Godwin, White of Selborne, Ritson, Thomas Percy, Gifford, Erasmus Darwin, Anne Seward, Dugald Stewart, Jeremy Bentham, Hannah More, Frances Burney, John Aikin, Letitia Burbauld, Roscoe, Sir Joshua Rey- nolds, Porson, Edmund Burke, Boswell, Campbell, Rogers, Mrs. Inchbald, Malone, D'Israeli, Sir James Mackintosh, Charles Lamb, Landor, Schiller, Goethe, and a whole crowd of French writers wrote; why, so far from being a time of decay the last decade of each century has proved a period of great intellectual vigour—a time of youth and spring, as every time should be. Let us have done with the fin de sikle rubbish. There is no more connection between Art or Science and the age of the century, than there is between the news of this hour's post and the clouds in the sky. Last month I asked a foolish question. It was foolish because the wise man should not, speaking generally, ask a question to which there is no answer. In this case, perhaps, one was justified; one put, wisely, a foolish question. I asked why religious societies allow themselves to do things which indi viduals with any self-respect would not dare to do. I now ask another foolish question. Why is it that men professionally connected with religion are generally so extremely irreligious? There is no answer to this question. But I will illustrate it by a case in point. There is a certain religious publisher —from whose clutches may the Lord preserve us! —who found a lady with a MS.—they areas plenti- ful as blackberries. This MS., however, was a saleable MS. He consented to publish it, and 10 give her half the profits. Further, he agreed that a fresh arrangement was to be made for a second edition. The man, however, was too foxy to set down this in writing. He allowed the lady to make a note of the agreement, and forgot to send it to her in writing. Two or three years after- wards the author discovered that there had been a new edition published without reference to her- self and without sending her any accounts. She wrote and got no reply. The religious person took no notice of her letter. She wrote again and got at last a letter and a statement of accounts. It was as follows :— Cost of production ... By Sales Deficiency £ s. d. in 16 6 £ s. d. 80 II 9 31 4 9 in 16 6 The letter deplored the heavy loss of the firm on the book, said nothingabout breaking the agreement, and offered the lady ten guineas to finish up the business. She accepted the offer, and the book is now running triumphantly in its seventh or eighth edition. It may be argued, of course, that she need not have taken the offer, considering the nature of the account rendered. I think she was right to get anything she could. I have had an estimate made of the cost of the book. It comes out as follows :- Pubjishers' bill. £ s. d. £ s. d. Cost of production 67 3 4 ... 111 16 6 Supposing the other items of engraving and advertising to be correct, we reduce the cost of production from £\\i i6y. 6d. to £67 3.C 4*/., a difference of £42 11s. ?>d.! And yet they talk of the heavy loss to the firm. Mr. Radclyffe Cooke's letter in our last number has very naturally called forth a reply from the reader concerned. He says, "May I be permitted to say that while I certainly claim no infallibility, I think Mr. Cooke has a little mistaken the gist of my 'opinion.' I said that if certain alterations were made I thought the book, especially if got up in an attractive style, 'would be accepted, and would obtain a sale. I am glad that it has obtained a success greater than I looked for." Mr. Radclyffe Cooke himself writes :— "The Editorial Comment does not meet my point, which is, that if you invite authors whose MSS. have been rejected by publishers' readers to submit them for an independent opinion to one of the readers of the Society, that opinion cannot be independent if the readers of the Society and the readers of the publishers are identically the same persons."  ## p. 133 (#169) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. 06 What is an independent opinion? A. B. receives a MS. from a publisher. He is asked to give an opinion on the MS., especially as to its commercial value. He does so. He does not give a long critical opinion for the author, but merely a note for the publisher. The author receives in polite language a plain No. Suppose—which is possible, but not likely—the same reader received afterwards the same MS. from the same author, he wou;d state at length his opinion of the faults in style, the errors of taste and judgment, and the other defects which —-always in his opinion—might militate against the woik, either from a literary or a commercial point of view. He would give, in fact, such an opinion as might be of assistance to the writer. -Publishers, in fact, do not give authors a critical opinion on the MSS. submitted. Considering that they have to refuse ninety-nine per cent, of MSS. offered, it can hardly be expected thattheycan act as teachers and coachesintheartofliterarycomposition. The author receives his MS. back with a courteous letter giving no reason, or perhaps only general reasons. This is the practice. I have seen one or two carefully drawn readers' opinions, calculated to help the aspirant, but these are rare. What the Society gives is such an opinion. The reader is asked to consider a MS. partly as a schoolmaster considers a set of Latin verses, and partly as a publisher would consider it, namely, from the commercial point of view. He is asked to give his opinion partly on the artistic, dramatic, and literary worth or demerits of the work, and partly on its chances as a saleable article. As a writer or a critic of experience he can do the former; as a publisher's reader he can do the latter. This part of our work, therefore, if it is properly carried out, may be very useful indeed, and in many cases has proved very useful; for instance, a recent work was altered in accordance with the suggestions of the very reader quoted above, and has proved a very considerable success owing to these very alterations. And many young writers in consequence of the "opinion" they received, have either abandoned further effort in a hopeless direction, or are working intelligently and earnestly in the right direction. Needless to add, that these opinions have kept many young writers out of the hands of the gentry whose readers never fail to "report so favourably that they are prepared to offer the following liberal terms." Our friends, the knavish publisher and the sweating publisher, are never weary of procuring misrepresentations of the Society and its objects and actions. I saw the other day an apparently harmless paragraph, beginning about a certain literary man of eminence, but ending with the slander which was the sole reason of its existence. It was inferred, not actually stated, that the Society advocated the breaking of agreements, and regarded keeping them as "the basest way of evading a moral obligation." A similar slander was admitted some months ago into a monthly magazine, and I daresay, will be admitted in a good many other papers whenever a tool, or a fool, or a busybody can be found. Let our friends meet such charges with the assurance that the Society has always pro- claimed the necessity of keeping agreements— indeed, the law takes care of that. But that, if the Society has any influence at all, it is persistently directed to encourage the examination of agree- ments; to awaken jealousy and suspicion as to literary, as well as any other kind of property; and to make writers insist upon knowing what they concede to their agent, as well as what he proposes to give them. It is this persistence, not any exhortations to break agreements, which makes certain tools and busybodies active, and it is a sure and most satisfactory sign of influence* that they are active. It is not until the wasps' nest is disturbed that the wasps try to sting. I have received from a Victim certain papers connected with a now defunct "Association." It perished perhaps under the weight of its own vast labours, which were concerned with the advancement of literature, art, science, music, the drama, and "&c." As regards the literary depart- ment, which was managed by a gentleman calling himself the Hon. Sec, it undertook for the small sum of one guinea a year: 1. To reply by return of post to questions of all kinds; 2. To read and report on MSS.; 3. To publish works at the expense of the Association; 4. To offer MSS. for sale; and 5. To give commissions to members. Here were in- ducements for young, and even for experienced writers. The Association would publish their work at its own expense, all out of the yearly guineas! If the work was not good enough for the Association, it would be sold to publishers, w-ho, it is very well known, are content with the leavings of such a Society, and deeply grateful for getting them; and it would, besides, give commissions—what writer would not leap at the chance of getting commis- sions? A benevolent Association, truly. In one case mentioned in the prospectus, a writer whose work had been refused by seven publishers in succession, got, through the instrumentality of the Association, the sum of ^157 io.y., cash down, for it! The oddness of the amount carries convic- tion with it. The commission offered to members  ## p. 134 (#170) ############################################ 134 THE AUTHOR. was noble. It could be obtained in this way: the Association ran a sixpenny monthly magazine, which was written entirely by members. Now, any member who should procure twenty new subscribers to the magazine might receive twenty copies of the magazine for £4 a year, which of course he would sell for sixpence a copy, to his twenty subscribers, pocketing £2 a year by the transaction. His yearly subscription was also remitted to such an active worker. Never was such a disinterested Association! » The Victim was a young writer who hoped to obtain in this Association the opening which up to that time he had failed to find. He became a member—he sent up a guinea for membership, and six and sixpence for subscription to the magazine; he also sent a MS. This was immediately read by the official reader of the Society, and as an acknow- ledgment of its worth, the writer was promoted from a simple member to a "staff member," that is, "one whose contributions can be accepted and paid for immediately proofs are passed by the Editor." Here was .success! and after the nasty envious editors of the other magazines had all with one consent refused this writer's works! He submitted accordingly more MSS. He was informed that one was accepted for the magazine, and would be shortly published and paid for; that another was under consideration; and that they were "sparing no efforts to place " a third, but as yet, unsuccess- fully. The result may be foreseen. He lost his money, his time, and his MSS. Nothing was placed, nothing was published; and in course of time the "Association" disappeared. There have been several other associations or societies of a similar character during the last few years. Considering the comparative safety of the enterprise, one is astonished that there are not more. One of them called itself the City of London Pub- lishing Company. Among other little dodges of this concern they proposed to publish a volume of poetry, a copy of which was to be bought byevery contributor of a one page poem for half-a-guinea. The aim of the projectors was, of course, to make unknown poets known to the public. I never heard anything more of this volume. The Company succeeded the Charing Cross Publishing Company, and took over, I believe, the valuable business of that eminent house. The Literary Guild started in the same year, and with the same address as the City of London Publishing Company, but I know not if the two were the same concern. The objects of the Guild were to afford to amateur and non-professional authors the same advantages of popularity and price enjoyed by established writers. The prospectus promised to "introduce them"—one does not know how—"to the reading public," and "to open to the inexperienced the road to one of the most agreeable and remunerative of the professions." Through the agency of the Guild, members, we are told, might publish on exceptional terms—and so on. The Guild, in fact, was an agency, whether connected or unconnected with the City of London Publishing Company does not appear. I do not know if the Guild still exists. Its members were entitled to affix the letters M.L.G. after their names. That, indeed, was a most valuable privilege. But the Company during its existence succeeded in pursuading a good many to believe in them, and published no fewer than a hundred and fifty books, and not one in the whole list that anybody ever heard of! The London Literary Society was the longest lived of these bogus publishers. It lasted for eight or nine years. The manager of this Society, in fact, the chairman and the committee, and the secretary, all in one, was a gentleman, now' un- fortunately bankrupt. He had some genius, as shown in the invention of a certain clause in the letter which he invariably sent on the receipt of a MS. He said, "Sir or Madam,—Our reader has reported so favourably on your MS. that we are prepared to offer you the following terms. We are willing to produce the work shortly .... and meet all demands for sales, through the trade, up to io,oco copies, at the publishing price of provided you pay us j£ "(generally double the actual cost of production), "and give us one-half the profits." The notion of modestlylimiting his liability to 10,000 copies caught the flats right and left, because they immediately sat down and calculated how much they would get on a sale of 10,000 copies at least. The London Literary Society (Manager, Playster Steeds) is now defunct, but a business of the same kind, including the favourable report of the reader, the offer to meet all sales up to so many thousand, and the proviso of the cheque down, is still carried on by a firm called Digby and Long. We have in the office a letter signed J. Baptiste Long for J. Playster Steeds. That gentleman when passing his examination in the Bankruptcy Court, stated that Long had been his clerk. Messrs. Digby and Long wrote to the Publishers' Circular, on Novem- ber 15th, 1888, protesting that their firm had never had anything to do with the Literary Society.  ## p. 135 (#171) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. i35 Lastly, we have a little legal document connected with Digby and Long, in which the Christian name of Long is given as J. Baptiste Long, so that, after all, there would seem to be a kind of a sort of a succession or connection, apart from the similarity in the conduct of the business. To make an end of these so-called companies, there was the Amateur Authors' Association, hailing from Windsor. The "manager " of this precious concern vanished with all the MSS. There was another man called Bentley who advertised for MSS. Many were taken in, thinking of the well known firm in New Burlington Street. This person also vanished with all the MSS. There was quite lately one McGuire, who vanished under circum- stances detailed in the first number of The Author. There are doubtless others contemplating the same career. Let us be on the watch for them. One thing is truly astonishing, that respectable people—people of decent position—should befound to give their names in support of these schemes. Thus the Literary Society had quite a long list of apparently respectable people who were called patrons. They thought, I suppose, that to figure on such a list, gave them a position in the literary world. As regards authors, it is quite certain, that credulity will never cease. It is as lasting and as full of life as the roguery which feeds and thrives upon it. It seemscruel to disturb the innocent faith of a guileless world, but really one is jealous! Why should publishers, alone of all trades, professions, and callings, bear upon their front the seal of perfect sincerity and honesty? We are always exhorting everybody to extend to this class of community exactly the same confidence—that, and no more—that is offered to every other trade or calling. Yet no sooner does a man call him- self publisher than the simple folk rush into the trap that he has spread for them. The other day an advertisement appeared in one of the morning papers to the effect that a "literary firm" was ready to give clerical work to ladies in their own homes. Applicants were instructed to write to "Publisher "—the advertiser knew the saintliness which clings to that venerated name—and to enclose a stamp for reply. In two days 1,100 letters reached the address. The advertiser, un- luckily, did not apply for them. His courage failed. One or two of the letters were opened. Finally they were all opened by the Post Office and sent back to their writers. Now here is a case in which an active detective should have rooted out the whole business. The man should be caught and prosecuted. To call himself a publisher, in- deed! To trade on the character for disinterested- ness and generosity which belongs to that body! It was a touch of genius, however. I would advise him next time to "go one better." He should advertise the address of the "S.P.C.K." He would then get a million answers, so great is the admira- tion of the world for that venerable Society and its publishing department. I have read in one or two papers that I am endeavouring to establish an Authors' Club. This is news to me. I am endeavouring no such thing. It is true that an Authors' Club has been spoken of, and that it may be attempted in friendly union with the Society, not as a part of it nor in oppo- sition to it. The Society exists for the purpose of advancing and protecting authors' material interests, pot for social purposes, and if authors will only be good enough all to belong to it—at present we number only 600 instead of 1,000 at least—there can be no doubt of efficient safeguarding. One difficulty in forming such a club would seem to be the fact that a club implies a certain uniformity of social level. Now authors belong to a great many social levels, and though there can be no reason why they should not, as members of the same profession, meet together in friendliness, we do not see that other professions do so. There is a Law Institute which is a kind of club, but it is really a society for protecting the material interests of solicitors. There are military clubs, but then all military men are supposed to be on the same social level. At the same time, for country or suburban members—even for town members—it would be a very useful thing if the Society could have near it a set of rooms with a library of reference, conve- nience for writing, facilities for getting lunch or afternoon tea, and so forth; in fact, a house of call and convenience. And this has certainly been suggested a rid advocated by several persons. ►— Mr. Brander Mathews has sent me the little book of the Authors' Club in New York. The objects of the club are stated in the prospectus to be for "literary and library purposes, and the promotion of social intercourse among authors." It is to consist of not more than 300 men—no ladies. All the members are to be actual authors; the sub- scription is four pounds a year and five pounds  ## p. 136 (#172) ############################################ 136 THE AUTHOR. entrance; the club is to assemble fortnightly; the committee elect; the fortnightly meeting means, I believe, a dinner; and there are about 250 mem- bers. I understand that the club rooms are generally empty except at the fortnightly meeting. This seems as if American authors were not exactly clubable among each other. Whether we have an Authors' Club or not, what we want most is a Members' House of Call—and perhaps some day we may get it, though our annual guinea sub- scription would not go very far towards supporting it. ♦ An interesting experiment in publishing is about to be tried, which we shall follow with great curiosity. It will, if successfully carried out, as there seems every hope that it will be, reveal practically what we have advanced and maintained from estimates and the piecing together of infor- mation, namely, the need of exact information as to the proportion of publishers' profits on successful works compared with author's. I would suggest to the inventor of this scheme that the greater reticence he observes about it for the present, the better it will be for the scheme. Once successful, all the world may know and follow the example. Once divulged, every kind of opposition, hindrance, and secret spokes will be set for it. An entirely new profession has lately come into existence, and though in these days every honest way of making money is immediately thronged, and this way will certainly prove no exception, it is in these columns freely offered and given away. There are as yet only two ways of practising it, but of course the wit of man will speedily multiply those ways. First, you write to as many well-known men as you can; you ask them, as if you were thirsting for knowledge, for an opinion on any point that happens to be under discussion at the time. When you have got answers from most of them, advertise autograph letters from W. E. G., or anybody else, containing his opinion on such and such a subject. Price of this unique autograph letter—two guineas. An industrious man who knows how to choose and to change the subject may do very well indeed on this lay. The second method is simpler. You write for an autograph, you keep on writing to everybody until you have got quite a nice collection, because it is surprising how many people will grant your simple prayer. You then advertise your collection for sale. One young gentleman of sixteen who has already begun to practise this business, confidently hopes to pay his expenses through Oxford out of the proceeds. The following lines seem to show that the practice is of great antiquity. We may yet chance somewhere upon a collection with the autographs of Cicero, Virgil, Horace, and Ovid. Nomina facta manu venatur odora viri vis; En, sibi vir prcedam destinat ille suam; Nescit ut accipiter flecti, miserescere tigris, Sic quoque venator solvere nescit iter. Et licet aufugiens se victima torqueat usque, Haud mora; mox proprio sanguine tincta jacet Turn spolia assiduus retulit venator opima, Collectasque novo nomine ditat opes. To which the following is tendered as an imi- tation :— The autograph hunters are keen on the scent, The autograph hunters have singled their prey; As a hawk cannot swerve, or a tiger relent, So these never turn them nor stop on their way. And though he may wriggle and though he may run, The quarry will presently lie in his gore; And the autograph hunter, his victory won, With exult o'er the fallen with one name the more. * A scrap-book library is being formed in the Brooklyn Library to utilise the material relating to topics of interest which would be lost in the files of the daily papers. Its nucleus was the gathering of a large number of excerpts from the newspapers by one Wilcox, a war correspondent. The librarian, Mr. Bardwell, got his assistants to sort the scraps, and they were arranged by subjects and pasted on sheets of uniform size. They are not bound, but are on heavy manilla paper, and additions can be made at any time. Those relating to any particular subject are put together in a box, which is properly labelled, and the subjects are arranged in alphabetical order. For some subjects several boxes are needed, as biography, for instance. It is as easy to find any particular topic in the boxes as in an encyclopaedia or dictionary. Besides 50 volumes already made up, with about 350 clippings in each, there are three times as many not yet pasted and prepared for use, making a total of over 75,000 clippings. This seems a thing to be imitated. Mr. Howells made an onslaught in the August number of Harpers on the literary critic, and especially on the anonymous critic of the news- papers. The Boston Herald has taken up the case. Here the writer declares that so far as America is concerned there are not more than  ## p. 137 (#173) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. 137 half-a-dozen journals whose critical judgments of current literature carry weight and credit for more than book-advertising. "Literary criticism in the United States was never at so low as ebb. Mr. Howells is justifiedin what he saysof the anonymous American critic. He is dreadful in his blunders, in his bad manners, and in the venom which is too often characteristic of his work. This is due to the fact that but little attention is paid to critical writing. It is thrown out of the magazines, it has but a precarious existence in the weekly papers, it lacks authority in the purely literary journals, and very few of the principal dailies employ critical writers who are competent for their task." ♦ What about our own criticisms? In the matter of literary criticism there are two or three pro- vincial papers a long way ahead of the London dailies, which have mostly got into the unholy habit of lumping all the books together, and dis- missing each with a few lines. Of the weeklies it cannot be said that they have in any way lost their authority. A good review in the Saturday, the Spectator, or the Guardian, is still excellent for stimulating the demand. Unfortunately the Spec- tator's notices are too often belated. I recall the case of a certain book which appeared in a certain month of May. By the month of November it had had a great run; but the first rush after it was over, the libraries could do without more copies, and people were borrowing copies instead of buy- ing them. At this time appeared a notice of the book—long and laudatory—in the Spectator. It was too late—the world had already pronounced (verdict, and the book had practically had its run. Another point in which authors veniure to disagree with the Saturday, the Spectator, the Athemcum, and the Academy, is the lumping of all the novels, all the theological books, or indeed, all the books of any one class, into one article, and reviewing them each with half-a-dozen lines. Now if a novel is worth reviewing at all, it is worth reviewing seriously, and as a work of art. Certainly there is not an average of two novels a week which are worth reviewing seriously. Again, ;t cannot but be known to the editors that three-fourths of the novels are paid for by the authors—that can always be told by the name of the publisher: that these things are always the sorry rubbish refused by the better houses; that nobody ever buys them, and that to review them is labour, time, temper, and space absolutely thrown away. Does one review all the trash and daubs that hang on the walls of the Royal Institute or the Grosvenor among and between the good pictures? An unadorned marble cross has been set up over the grave of Wilkie Collins in Kensal Green Cemetery with the words, "Author of 'The Woman in White' and other works of Fiction" placed underneath the name and usual dates. A few yards away lies Sydney Smith, and not much farther distant, Leigh Hunt. On May 7th of this year a MS. was sent to a certain journal for the editor's consideration. On June 5th, exactly four weeks later, the editor says that he thinks he can shortly use it. On this understanding the author allows the MS. to remain until September 28th, when he sends a reminder on September 26th. The editor writes that he may be able to use it for a Christmas number. Again on this understanding the author allows the MS. to remain. On October 2nd the editor instructs a secretary to write that he will not be able "for some time" to give "any further information " about the subject. He therefore sends back the MS. This is five months after receiving it. Is there any other business in the world where the common courtesies of civilized life are so little regarded as in literary matters? Here is an author—not un- known or obscure—kept cooling his heels on the kerbstone for five months while the editor makes up his mind. Four months after promising to use the MS. he sends it back. A writer in Life is responsible for the following story. It would not be printed here but for the fact that similar cases have been brought before the Society by victims. And it is a pity that the exact accounts in this case are not given, because it would seem as if the case might be really worse than the editor thinks. He says that in receiving the arcounts for a certain work, written either by himself or by some friend, he made the discovery that 25 per cent, had been fraudulently charged on all the accounts, which showed a profit of ^7 ioj. Also he says that the book had run through three editions. Now, I do not know what kind of book that is of which three editions—3,000 copies—could be sold to produce a profit of only £1 10s., even making allowance for the fraudulent 25 per cent., or by what kind of agreement the result was arrived at. The author, on discovering the fraud, called upon that publisher and demanded a cheque for the whole amount, with interest. And he got it. This strong-armed person has now taken up the case of two ladies, who have given him a power of attorney to act for them, Let us await the result.  ## p. 138 (#174) ############################################ 138 THE AUTHOR. We have to deplore the death of one who has been a steady friend of the Society from its founda- tion, the Rev. Henry White. He published little, but his sympathies with literature and with those who make the literature of the day were deep. His loss will be widely deplored. The Church has few clergymen who can quite fill the place he occupied in public esteem and affection. Walter Besant. * "THE METHODS OF PUBLISHING."* THIS book may be regarded as a sequel to the "Cost of Production." In that work, which was issued for the use of members only, men of letters learned for the first time what is the actual cost of composing, printing, paper, and bind- ing, for the production of books of various kinds. The little book was the result of a great deal of trouble, investigation, comparison of estimates and consultation with printers. Even when finished it has been found incomplete in parts, and a new edition is under preparation. Meantime, there has been accumulating in the offices of the Society since its foundation a great quantity of "cases," generally of complaint arid grievance. Nearly every one of these cases contains among its papers and letters an agreement signed by the publisher and the author. In this way the Society has been enabled to peruse agreements from nearly every publishing house in the country. In the same way it has also been enabled to learn the tricks and frauds which these agreements may be designed to cover in the hands of unscru- pulous men. Now a signed agreement can only, as a rule, even when it can be clearly proved to be one-sided, unjust, and procured by misrepresenta- tion, be broken and set aside by a costly and doubtful action in the High Court of Justice. Con- sequently, in many of the cases brought to the Society in which highly unjust agreements had been carried out to the letter, no redress could be obtained. When a man signs a document which he does not understand, he has only himself to blame if the agreement places him, bound hand and foot, in the hands of a robber. It is therefore ap- parent that prevention is better than attempt to cure. This conclusion is the raison d'etre of the book. Mr. Sprigge designs, by classifying agreements, quoting examples, explaining the meaning of ciauses, * " The Mclhoils of Publishing," by S. Squire .Sprigge. (Jlaiiher, Strand. Trice 4s. t>d. and exposing the frauds and tricks that are carried on under cover of agreements, to educate his readers into a becoming jealousy of their property, whether it lies in fields or in written pages. We have long lifted up a warning voice and cautioned authors against signing any agreement whatever, underany pretence or after any representa- tions, without advice—and that, not from their own solicitors, or from any lawyer lhat offers, but from the Society whose business it is to protect them. We are now in a position to explain and justify this admonition. Authors may now read for themselves and learn in detail what is actually and daily practised, and what is the meaning of the various clauses by which they sign away, and part with, valuable property. In other words—Let no writer sign any agree- ment until he has teamed what the publisher reserves for himself, and what he proposes to give the author. In no other transaction affecting property would one party dare to present an agreement designedly drawn up so that the other party should understand nothing of what it means. The book is very earnestly recommended to the attention of every person engaged in literature. It is designed as the most serious contribution to the defence of the author ever yet offered—most serious because it is the only paper which rests, not on argument, but on facts and figures. These facts cannot be denied, nor can these figures be dis- proved. They are all in the archives of the Society, and can, if necessary, be published at length with the names of the publishers con- cerned. Probably, however, they will not be anxious for this kind of publicity. The position of the Society in respect to this kind of information is absolutely unique. No publishers have it; no single individual possesses this knowledge; no other body possesses it; and the whole of it has been placed in Mr. Sprigge's hands. The book is divided into eleven chapters. The first two of these are devoted to the general consideration of literary property. The next four to the four methods under which all kinds of pub- lishing may be classed, viz., the Half Profit System, the Royalty System, Sale Outright or Limited, and Publishing on Commission. Agreements of all kinds will be found set forth at length and analyzed in these chapters. The remaining five deal chiefly with certain common ways of trickery, with the statement of such safeguards as may protect the author. One quotation only shall be made here. It is a short summing up as to the laxity with which literary property is generally treated :— "At present it would seem that too often the author does not, and the publisher cannot, rea''~e  ## p. 139 (#175) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. 139 that literary property has an existence and a value. "If a man believed his book was an actual property he would not deal with it by methods so vague, unsatisfactory, and unbusinesslike, under agreements teeming with clauses he does not understand. "He would not dispose of his right over it without the formality of a written agreement. He certainly would not airily hand over to the publisher his rights in other property of a similar kind whose value he does not yet know, and for an indefinite number of years, simply on request. "He would insist upon alleged expenditure being proved to him, before his account was debited with it. "He would insist upon having accounts rendered at the right times, and his executors at his death would similarly insist. "lastly, if a man thought his MS. was a property in the sense that his watch is a property, what would he do if he found that, in spite of his letters, he could not get it returned to him by the tradesman who had it for inspection?" * "THE LITERARY HANDMAID OF THE CHURCH." I. Memorandum on the S.P.C.K.'s relations to Authors, drawn up by the ^ijb-Committee appointed to consider the Charges made in Mr Besant's Pamphlet. I.—The principles on which the Society's publishing business is conducted. THE Society for Promoting Christian Know- ledge is not a General Publishing Agency. The sole purpose of its publishing enterprise is to produce and circulate as widely as possible a wholesome literature, both religious and secular. This purpose is realised by putting on its publications as low a price as is consistent with giving a fair re- muneration to Authors, and securing such a margin of profit as will protect the Society against a finan- cial loss. The average yearly profit of its entire business has for many years been about ^6,000, and is not a larger percentage on the capital employed than the vicissitudes of a very large publishing business require for its stability. More- over, this profit is not really profit accruing to the Society through purchases by the public, inasmuch as the Society annually gives away in Grants of Books several thousand pounds more than the profit, and in the ledgers of the Publishing Depart ment credit is taken for all these grants, averaging some ^12,000 a year. It will be thus seen that the sales and grants of books, taken together, so far from bringing in a revenue applicable to other purposes, take several thousand pounds annually out of the Society's income. II. —Dealings with Authors. 1. Royalties (varying from one-tenth to one-sixth of the published price) are in ordinary circumstances paid to writers who are recognized as specialists in any particular subject, or whose names, inserted on the title-page of a book, would give it a distinctly greater commercial value than the book would have if published by the Society without fuch name. Some writers who would naturally fall into this class prefer a sum down in place of a royalty. 2. Commissions for most of the chief works of fiction, published every autumn, are given before- hand to writers of whose competence the Com- mittee is satisfied, on the following conditions :— "If the work be accepted by the Society, the sum of £ will I>e paid you for the copyright, which will then be the property of the Society. The Society will reserve to itself the right to use the author's name. If the Committee for any reason do not accept the work on behalf of the Society, one-half of the sum offered for the copyright will be paid to you; and you will have in addition the offer of the use of the standing type with a view to your making other arrangements for the publication of your work." The payments made in this manner are certainly as high as, and probably higher than, those offered by other publishers for the same class of litera- ture. 3. Besides these commissioned works, the Society receives unsought, every year, thousands of MSS. of small stories, which are offered without condition for the Society's approval and for publi- cation. Such of these MSS. as the Committee may approve are paid for according to the Committee's view of their merit, but generally somewhat lower than the scale adopted in the case of commissioned works. The Society has had no reason to suppose that these payments have been disappointing to the writers who have contributed works to the Society. III. —Royalties v. Copyright. It has sometimes been suggested, and the suggestion is endorsed by Mr. Besant, that it would be better that all writers for the Society should be paid by royalty, but it is not difficult to show that the indiscriminate giving of royalties by  ## p. 140 (#176) ############################################ 140 THE AUTHOR. the Society would be inequitable, and even im- practicable. With respect to the stories and small works of fiction published with the advantage of the Society's imprimatur, it has to be remembered —whether the fact be satisfactory or not—that in most cases the circulation of such books depends at least as much upon the manner in which they are printed, bound, and illustrated—arrangements with which the writer has little or nothing to do— as upon the merit of the writer himself. The fact that this is so throws upon the Society's Com- mittees a very grave responsibility for the character of what is thus circulated by their agency, and at the same time it materially affects the question of the equitable mode of remunerating the authors of these little works. Vast quantities of such books are annually given away by the Society, or sold at a reduced rate, thus swelling the apparent sales far beyond the real purchases by the public. In fact, if royalties were given on the small works of fiction, which, by means of its peculiar organization and connections, the Society is enabled to circulate by thousands, not only would the price of the books be materially raised, and the sales proportionately diminished, but the anomaly would arise that a writer of little training and capability would, from a book costing a few days' labour, receive a far larger sum than could be obtained either by royalties or otherwise by the most distinguished writers on the Society's list. Thus, a narrative Tract of four pages, which is circulated by grants to the extent of hundreds of thousands, would bring to the writer, by any appreciable royalty, a sum out of all proportion to the literary work involved, and a similar principle applies in its degree to many of the Society's larger publications. IV.—Mr. Besanfs Specific Charges. Much of Mr. Besant's pamphlet forms part of a controversy in which the author has been long engaged respecting the general system of pub- lishing adopted both in England and abroad, and into the merits of that controversy it is not necessary here to enter. With respect to his charges against the Society, the author asked, through the Guardian of January 23rd, 1889, for information from writers for the Society as to their treatment. Three of the answers he received seemed to him to call for notice, and on these his specific charges rest. 1. The first and principal case is that of a writer from whom only one book has been accepted by the Society. This book was published—not, as alleged, "two or three years ago "—but thirteen years ago. The author received a small sum for the copyright of the work (,£12 12.C), because the Committee of the time did not see their way to estimate it at a higher figure. Probably the Committee were unwise in yielding to the writer's urgency to accept it at all. As the Committee truly foresaw, it has not proved a commercial suc- cess. During the long lapse of thirteen years the apparent circulation has gradually mounted up to 5,520 copies, but a very large proportion of these have not been purchased by the public, but have been issued by the Society in grants for lending libraries, &c, at home and in the Colonies. Even crediting the bookselling account with the value of all the copies both sold and given away, the total apparent profit up to date is ,£57 8s. \od.—a very small percentage on the money sunk on it for thirteen years. No promise of future payments was made to the author; but, in reply to his inquiries, he was informed that the Society did then (what it continues to do now) give, in the shape of a gratuity, and not in any way as a con- dition of purchase of copyright, occasional pay- ments in cases where books turned out exceptionally successful. It appears evident that whatever strength may seem to be afforded by this case to the charges levelled against the Society is derived from a mis- conception of the facts. 2. The second case is that of a writer who has been contributing to the Society's list since 1861, and who has, within the last three months, been paid for a book which will appear next October. During this time she has supplied some twenty works to the Society, ranging from little tales at 2d. and 3d. each, to books of three or four hundred pages. The writer has received in all for these twenty books ^716 2s. That she has voluntarily continued to write during all these years for the Society would seem to indicate that she has had no serious cause of complaint, especially as she has, it is understood, been also publishing books through ether agencies, and has thus been able to weigh the relative terms offered to her. As to the allegation, which is made in general terms, that she received more in times past for her books than at present, the evidence, speaking in the same general way, seems to point to an opposite conclusion. In 1871 she received ^25 for a book of 50,000 words, in 1876 ^40 for a volume of 75,000 words, and in 1886 £50 for a book of 57,000 words. The varying quality of her books must also be taken into consideration, as well as the fact that some of them had been previously published elsewhere. 3. The remaining case is that of a writer who also continues to write for the Society. He has written in all for the Society since 1873 twelve small books, for which he has received .£060. He says that for his first work for the Society he received ,£30, and seven months afterwards for  ## p. 141 (#177) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. the same book an unsolicited cheque for £20. The memory of this gentleman seems to have misled him, as the Society's ledgers show no trace of such a cheque, and the inference drawn from its supposed payment must therefore be allowed to fall to the ground. The additional .£30 paid in 1882 was not a gratuity; it was payment for bringing a new edition up to date. The charge that " half the sums expended in founding Bishop- rics belong in all equity to needy authors " is of the same baseless character, as will be seen from the statement given above. Further comment on this writer's letter seems needless. Such are the grounds on which the author of the pamphlet bases his somewhat sensational indictment, and they appear signally insufficient. So far as can be ascertained, the Society holds a prominent position among publishers for its fair dealing with authors, and enjoys their esteem and even gratitude. That works of all kinds are pressed on its acceptance by thousands of writers, and that out of the many hundreds of whose services use has been made, only three seem to have responded to the invitation to state a grievance, are facts which afford strong evidence of the injustice of Mr. Besant's accusations. Nathanaei. Powell, H. C. Daubeney, H. Wace, Principal of King's College, Treasurers of S. P. C%K. Randall T. Davidson, Dean of Windsor. William Sinclair, Archdeacon of London. Brownlow Maitland. W. II. Clay. C. J. Bun yon. July 25, 1890. _ II. The Reply to the Memorandum. I.—The Principles of the S.P.C.K. This is the document which is tendered as a reply to my pamphlet. It contains a false state- ment on its very title. I made no charges in that pamphlet. I called the attention of the Publica- tion Committee of the S.P.C.K. to certain well- known and recognized principles in the acquisition and the administration of literary property. I enu- merated certain classes of publishers. I then detailed certain cases selected from a great many in my hands; and I asked the Committee to which class they themselves belong. It is to this question that we seek an answer in the Memorandum. But we seek in vain. The "Memorandum" contains four sections. Let us take each in order. The first is called "The Principles on which the Society's publishing is conducted." Principles? But there are none. The S.P.C.K. is "not a General Publishing Agency." Well, they publish, for as much profit as they can get, every kind of book. If that is not a "General Publishing Agency," what is it? "Its sole purpose is to produce wholesome literature." And make no profit? That can I not believe. If so, why was not that ^7,660 profit, made last year, divided among the sweated authors? "This purpose is realised by putting on its pub- lications as low a price .as is consistent with a fair remuneration to authors." What is "fair"? On what principles is this justice to authors? This is the gist of the whole question: what do they mean by "fair"? There is no reply. There is no attempt to reply. The signatories are so careless as to their words, so blind to the real point, or so determined to evade the real issue, that they refuse so much as to state the principles by which they are guided in deciding what is fair. Now we might very well lay the paper down at this point and refuse to read any more. But there is much more to be noted, if only to show the condition of mind to which a body of apparently intelligent men may be reduced when they are bidden to sign such a paper as this. "The average profits (we are told) amount to about ^6,000." Well, but last year they were put at £7,660. This seems, at first sight, a straightforward state- ment. But there is no such thing as a straight- forward statement in the whole paper. "An average profit of ^6,000." What is " profit"? The tradesman buys a thing for a shilling and sells it for eighteen pence. The sixpence over is his profit. The sixpence is his pay for storing and distributing, buying and selling. This a law universal in every kind of trade. In the publishing trade, if a book costs twopence to pro- duce and twopence for the author, and sells for sixpence, the twopence is the publisher's profit. Out of this he has to keep up his establishment and make his own income.* * Since they may attempt to deny this, I subjoin two publishers' accounts. They are the accounts of honourable men. One is that of the sale of one volume of Gibbon's "Decline and Kail"; the other is an account of this year, also rendered by an honourable publisher. The practice of reckoning profit on this difference is, it will be remarked, the same to-day as a hundred years ago. "State of the Account of Mr. Gibbon's ' Roman Empire."' Third Edition. Eirst Vol. Number printed, 1,000. April 30, 1777. £ s. J. Printing 90 sheets, at .£1 6s., with notes at the lx>ttom of the page ... ... ... ... 117 o o 180 reams of paper, at lgs. ... ... ... 171 o o Paid the Corrector, extra 5 5 0 Advertisements and incidental expenses ... 16 15 o ° °  ## p. 142 (#178) ############################################ 142 THE A U Til OR. The ingenious gentlemen of the S.P.C.K. have invented a new kind of profit. What they call profit is the remainder after tlu zvliole expenses of their establishment are met. Thus a partner in a house of business would say, "I have kept a whole army of clerks. I have kept up my country house and my carriages. I have paid for the boys at Cambridge and Rugby. There remain £6,000. These are the profits of my business for the year." In this case the Secretaries represent the partners. What remained over is not the profit, but the saving, of the year. Thus they made last year by selling books, .£85,013. (Report for 1889, pp. 92, 93.) They had to spend ,£22,812 in buying books to sell again, chiefly Bibles and Prayer Books. They spent on producing books, £38,375. They paid editors and authors—poor authors !— ,£2,988 altogether for the whole year. Let us deduct the money spent in buying books. ^85,013 22,812 There remains ,£62,201 They spent on producing books... •••.£38,375 There remains ,£23,826 l,00O books, at i6j. Deduct as above ... £ s. 800 0 • 3>° 0 d. 0 0 Profit on the Edition £49° 0 0 Mr. Gibbon's two-thirds is £ s. ... 326 13 d. 4 S Messrs. Strahan and Cadcll's third is ... ... 163 6 The next, an account of the present day, is ns follows. The figures are not necessary, and for obvious reasons are £400 0 0 suppressed :— £ s. </. Composing — sheets, at £— Machining ... ... ... ... ... ... Paper Corrections Binding Advertising '.. Total cost ... ■ ■£ By sale of— copies, producing £ '■ d. Less cost of production Profit ■■■£ Of which Author's two-thirds £ s. d. Publisher's one-third / as the real profit for the year on the sale of the books. On the half-profit system the authors would have had £11,913. What did they get? Less than £3,000 1 But, they say, large quantities of books are given away, "amounting to an average of £12,000 a year," so that there is a loss on the publishing business of many thousands. Observe that if they lost a hundred thousand a year by giving books away it would not affect tha question in the least. The grant of books belongs to another department. Whatever expenditure is made under this head is made out of the general funds of the Society, and from the income derived from all sources. However, let us look into the allegation. What do they give away? Chiefly Bibles and Prayer Books, as appears from the Report. They issued during the year 561,869 Bibles and Prayer Books. The greater part of the annual grant consists of Bibles and Prayer Books. Now if they had not been given away they would not have been bought. Therefore the amount expended in giving Bibles and Prayer Books must be deductedfrom both sides. Did the Committee of Inquiry inquire into the meaning of their own assertion before they set it down? If they did and discovered what it means, what are we to think of them? If they did not, but signed the Memorandum without examination, what, again, can we think of them? Suppose, for instance, ,£5,000 worth of Bibles and Prayer Books and other books bought by the Society were included in the ,£8,562 set down for grants in 1889, that amount would have to be taken from the £22,812 spent in buying books. Where then is the loss of " many thousands "? ♦ II.—On Dealings with Authors. We are told that "royalties varying from one- tenth to one-sixth of the published price are {Jven to writers who are recognized as specialists, or whose names on the title-page of a book give it a greater commercial value, &c." Did the Committee examine this statement before they made it? Do they know how to examine into the truth of such a statement? I will tell them. They shouid first learn what is meant by a royalty of one-tenth, one-sixth, &c, that is to say, what it gives the author and what it leaves the publisher. They must, of course, bear in mind at the same time the legitimate gains of the publisher,  ## p. 143 (#179) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. 143 else they have no standard of right and wrong. Next, they should inquire into the reasons of the difference—why a tenth here and a sixth there? They should then demand an exact list of the books published on royalties, and ascertain what considerations the royalty fixed in each case, what the publisher made by the transaction, counting the publisher's profit legitimately in excess of receipt over expenditure, not after "establishment charges " are made. I should like very much to see this list. The variation of the royalty, without cau se assigned, is accepted by the Committee of Inquiry without the least question. Why should there be variation in a royalty? The system of royalties means an admission that the work of an author is to be remunerated in proportion to the saleable nature of the book. The money value of a property—which is a separate thing from its artistic value—means plainly what it will fetch. Further, the price of a book is always regulated by the cost of production. Thus we have (1) price; (2) cost of production; (3) difference between these two. The royalty means that propottion of the difference which should be justly divided between author and publisher: why, then, should there be any variation? As an abstract proposition there should be none. But one can quite understand a house declining to publish certain books whose sale will be small unless so small a royalty is granted to the author as will leave the masters a remunerative profit. But "recognised specialists." Take the excellent short histories issued' by the Society, for instance— Roman-Britain, Saxon-Britain, Norman-Britain— all by specialists. Did they get a royalty? Not so. They got ^50 each for the copyright. So that this statement must be received with reservations. We then come to works of fiction. They con- fess that in these books their method is to pay "a sum " down for the copyright. They do not dare to allege that in their decision as to the amount offered there is any regard whatever paid to the profits which they mean to make on the book. The most they venture to plead is an allegation that their payments are "as high as, and probably higher than," those offered by other publishers. Can anything be weaker or more unworthy of a great religious Society than such a plea? Weak, because it is evidently signed without the least investigation. Into what publishers' books did the Committee look before they put their names to this assertion? What publishers have given them information as to their treatment of novelists? I can assure them, from my own know- ledge, and most earnestly and truthfully—that the only publishers whose prices can compare with their own are the lowest class sweating publishers. I declare deliberately, and with a full knowledge of what is done in every house in London, that none but the sweating publishers can be ranked or compared with the Literary Handmaid of the Church. I have given the prices paid to one writer. I have before me those paid to a great many others. It is the same dreary tale—from £20 to ^50 for the whole copyright—sweater's prices. In my pamphlet I mentioned three authors only. They were meant to be represen- tative, and the Memorandum impudently pretends that they were all I could get! They do represent, in fact, the great bulk of the unfortunate writers who have fallen into the clutches of this religious Society. What do they prove? This. That the Society habitually and deliberately pay the lowest price that will be taken, without any reference to the profit that they know will certainly be made. Once more—He who buys a piece of work for the lowest sum which the necessities of the producer will allow him to take—knowing that he will make twice, three times, fifty times that sum for his own profit— is a Sweater. Will the Committee of Inquiry deny this propo- sition? Now, in the case even of untried and unknown writers, the Publication Committee know by ex- perience that there is a certain minimum sale on which they can confidently reckon, provided that reasonable care has been exercised in the refusal of absolute rubbish. In the case of a popular writer they can reckon on a sale of many thousands. Will the Committee enquire into the case of those few popular authors whose works have been published by the Society, and ascertain what royalties have been paid to those authors, if any. The section winds up with the allegation that the Society's authors are satisfied with their pay. That is not my experience. That is not what I learn from the dozens of letters I have received. The writers of these letters hate the Society. They loathe the Society. They say that they only write for the Society because they must. They tell me so in confidence, but they implore me not to let the Committee guess that they have done so—lest they feel the vengeance of that Committee—the Com- mittee of the Literary Handmaid of the Church! But even if all the authors in the world are con- tented with their pay, that would not make an in- justice become just. III.—On Royalties. Here follows a very muddled passage. I gather from it, if it means anything, the following remark- able statements and opinions :—  ## p. 144 (#180) ############################################ 144 THE AUTHOR. 1. The sale of books depends partly on their get-up and appearance. This is perfectly true. The fact belongs to all books, not especially those published by the S.P.C.K. It is the part of the publisher's business to put out his books handsomely. He is paid for looking after this part of the work. Therefore, says the Memorandum, an author must not have a royalty. The connection of thought is difficult to follow. 2. "Vast quantities of books are given away." I have already considered the giants. They belong to another department, and cannot be considered in connection with the Publishing Department. "Vast quantities," however, is a vague -statement. Last year books to the amount of ^8,562 were given away. If ^5,000 represents Bibles given, and ,£17,000 represents Bibles sold, we have it that about 6 per cent, of the books sold are bought by the General Department to be used in accordance with the objects of the Society. Tlurefore, says the Memorandum, the author must not expect a royalty. 3. If royalties were given, the price of the books would be raised. Indeed! Then how is it that in other houses where royalties are given the price of the books is not raised? In fact, the royalty system depends upon a proportion, not a price. It applies equally to a shilling book and to a six-shilling book. 4. If royalties are allowed, an author, by a few days' labour, would present the "anomaly" of obtaining—what ?—the produce of his own labour! Here is, indeed, an anomaly. Here is a muddle of thought. If with a few days' labour an author can produce a work which commands a large and continued sale—why not? It is his production—his book— his property. The "anomaly " is that the Society ■—a religious Society—should want to take away his property. That a body of Christian men should say, "You shall have none of this income. It is true that it is of your own making. We will take it. All shall be ours." Is it possible that the Committee of Inquiry should not understand the immorality of such a contention? 5. There seems to underlie this section a feeling that because the S.P.C.K. has exceptional powers of selling books—which I recognize fully—the books should belong to them. In other words, because the administration of property can be carried on advantageously, the property belongs to them. Or, again, because it can be sold for very- large sums, it should be bought for very small sums. I do not suppose that this view would be seriously advanced. But let us clear away the fogs, and show it in its nakedness. He who acquires property must pay for it in proportion to its value. Otherwise he is a sweater, or a thief, or both. He who administrates property must be paid in pro- portion to the extent and value of that property. Thus, an honest publisher who administers a successful book is rewarded according to the extent of his sales. The book does not belong to him because he sells a great many; but he reaps the advantage by the proportion equitably allotted to him. As a matter of fact, the larger and more important is the house, the better, we commonly find, are the terms which a successful author receives. 6. There is another very odd confusion of thought lying on the mind of the writer of this Memorandum. It is one of contempt for authors. He cannot bear to think that a little story—a simple little thing—the delicacy, artistic finish, and simplicity of which he cannot for the life of him understand—should be able to bring in for the author an income for years. That it does bring in to the Society an income for years he knows very well—has he not bought it for a ten-pound note, out and out, of the trembling gentlewoman who wrote it? But that she should have the proceeds of her own labour—that she, whom he has sweated with impunity—should get rich, is beyond him. He cannot understand it. The thing cannot be right. Why, he has bought a whole six-months' work of her for thirty pounds over and over again! IV.—Specific Charges. We come next to what are called "Specific Charges." Again, I repeat, there have been no specific charges. A few facts, out of many, were advanced, and the S.P.C.K. were invited to give their own opinion on them. 1. As to the first case—not the most important, as they pretend, but the most obvious and glaring case—they acknowledge the sale of 5,200 copies. It does not matter to us whether the other depart- ment bought them or the general public. The book is now priced at 2s. I think, but am not sure, that it was formerly 2s. 6d. This means a trade price of is. 2d. very nearly. But the ready- money sales (about one-fifth of the whole, see Report, p. 93) are at i*. 6d. each. The cost of production is about 5^. a copy. By sales— £ s. d. 4,400 at is. 2d. a copy ... 256 13 4 i, 100 at is. 6d. a copy ... 82 10 o ^339 3 4  ## p. 145 (#181) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. M5 Hence:— 5,520 at sd. Paid to Author Advertising, say Profit of the Society £ s. d. . 115 0 o 12 12 O 5 0O 206 II 4 £2,2,9 3 4 And this profit, £206—that is, seventeen times that of the author !—they call "not a commercial success "1 If these figures are wrong let us have the right ones, only let us refuse to have dust thrown into our eyes by taking savings for profit. 2. "No promise of future payments was made to the author." My client says there was. On whose authority does this Committee of Inquiry rest their asser- tion? My client insists that there was. By what right, or after what investigation, does the Com- mittee dare to deny the truth of this positive assertion? Is it on the word of one man? Why is he to be believed more than the author? Now there is one simple way of testing this fact. Have the Committee tried this way? 3. "The total profit"—we have seen the real profit above—"is ^57 8*. iod., a very small per- centage on (he money sunk in it for 13 years." The italics are my own. This sentence actually belongs to the Memorandum. Can it be possible that intelligent men should have been deluded into a statement so ridiculous? Consider. The book began with 3,000 copies, say, and subsequently another 3,000 have been printed. Thirteen years ago the sum of £70, or so, was expended in producing the book and paying the author that noble—that princely—honorarium of twelve guineas. The sale of 1,200 copies, which was certainly reached within a year, paid back this £70. Observe, therefore, that £70 was sunk in the book for the period of one year only. The interest, at 3^ per cent., on that sum for that period was Jj2 gs. exactly. That would take a few more copies. Then the ^70 was back again in the Committee's hands to be invested in some other book. It has been used over and over again in the thirteen years. It has been sunk over and over again, invested, recovered, and re-invested in twenty books. Yet the Committee of Inquiry actually advance the claim that this £70, paid off—returned to the investors—twelve years ago, should be still paying interest! In other words. A lends B ,£70. At the end VOL. I. of a year B repays the amount with interest. According to these gentlemen, B ought to be pay- ing interest to this day. 4. The second case, one of a great number, is met by the statement that the lady has received in all ^716. 5. The third case is met in the same way. The author has received in all £660. What has that to do with the question? The sweated needlewoman's pay of n^d. a-day, spread over twenty years, mounts up to the prodigious sum of ^300, and yet she is discontented. Let us make a little estimate, taking a book by the third writer, who is a capital writer for boys—and very popular. I take a 35. book by him. It is a very rough estimate, but the figures, I know by experience, are not far wrong. Sale of 5,000— £ s. d. 4,000 at if. gd. ... ... 350 o o 1,000 at 2s. 3d. ... ... 112 10 o ^462 10 o Cost of an edition of 5,000— At 8d. a copy, say Author, say... Advertising, say Profit to S.P.C.K £ s. 170 o 45 0 *5 ° 232 10 d. o o o o ^462 10 o If these figures are wrong let us have the right figures. The Committee of Inquiry affect to believe that I have three cases, and three cases only, of injustice and cruelty to allege against the S.P.C.K. In the first place, before I wrote a line, I had satisfied myself that the practice of buying their books at a miserable sweater's price, without the least regard to the profits which would accrue, is only departed from when the Committee find that they must—that they cannot get a book without some show of fair treatment. The lady, whose case I brought forward, is typical of I know not how many others. Grasping in all their dealings, the Publishing Committee make even success an excuse for lowering their terms. I will show how. A lady wrote a book and submitted the MS. They accepted it, offered her ^30, and published it. Probably they sold five or six thousand copies and cleared seven hundred. It was so successful that they in- vited her to do some work for them. She completed a second work. She took the MS. to the office and left it with the Editor, or his  ## p. 146 (#182) ############################################ 146 THE AUTHOR. representative, explaining clearly that if they wanted it they must make an offer. What did they do? They seized the MS. Having appropriated this lady's property, without her consent, they set up the copy in type, and they sent her the proof with £,■20. Her success had actually lowered her price! And they seized on her property without her con- sent. Perhaps they measured her manuscript with a tape and found it a few pages shorter than the last. One would like to know, in both cases, viz., the first and the second book, what the Society made by the transaction. Meantime, it is quite certain that no private publisher would dare so to treat the property of other people. There is another lady who has done a good deal for the Society. Her work is very fine, delicate, dainty, and of high tone. She is deservedly popular. What have her prices been? I have a list before me. She averages ^25 to £do. Let us consider. I take one of her books, pub- lished at 2S. 6d. Let us suppose an edition of 5,000, all sold. Sold— £ s. d. 4,000, at is. 6d.... ... ... 300 o o 1,000, at is. gd.... ... ... 87 10 o £387 1° o £ s. d. Cost of production, say 8d. a copy ... 166 13 4 Author, say ... ... ... ... 40 o o Profit of the Society 180 16 8 £387 10 0 Now, from an honourable house, that lady would have received at least a royalty of one-sixth, or 5*/. on every copy. She would have made over a hundred pounds, and the publisher would have made rather more. Are these enormous profits denied? Then here is a case which cannot be denied. It is a very pretty story, and, I daresay, has been placed in the hands of the President and the Vice-President by this time. A. B. wrote for the Society four books. For the first book he received a royalty, which gave the Society only double what he himself obtained; for the second he received a royalty which gave the Society three times what they gave him. Let me explain that these amounts were, on their own showing, after deducting establishment charges—the true publishers' profit was very much greater. Then there came the next two books. The author was persuaded to leave the royalty to the Society, on the ground that a fixed sum ham- pered them. Presently he became very much dissatisfied with the result. As he could get no satisfaction from them, he very properly brought an action, at the same time offering to submit the thing to arbitration. They doubtless believed that he would not dare to go into court against so powerful a corporation. But he did dare. The case was set down for hearing before Lord Coleridge. At the last moment they backed out. They consented to an arbitration. The arbitrator ordered the production of the accounts. You shall now understand how far greed can be carried by a body of Christian gentlemen. The first of the two books showed, after the precaution of knocking off establishment expenses, a profit of ^633 to the Society, and £62 to the author, a proportion of 10 : 1. The other book showed the same proportion, a profit of £1,246 to the Society, against .£130 to the author.* The arbitrator awarded a lump sum to be paid by the Society, together with all the costs of the action. This is a very pretty case. It shows that the Publication Committee simply grasp at the highest profit they can screw out of the poor unfortunate author. If this case is denied or questioned the author is willing to publish his name. Again, one of the ladies who has been writing largely for the S.P.C.K. has recently taken her work to another religious society. She receives from them the same amount which the S.P.C.K. gave, but, coupled with a royalty from the beginning. Will the Church of England be too proud to learn from the Dissenters? A writer for a Noncon- formist Society recently addressed the Secretary on the subject of the pay awarded her for the copy- right of a certain book. Remember that she had no claim; she had sold her rights. The Society, however, reconsidered her case; they said that her work had proved a far greater success than when they bought it; they sent her a large cheque, and, in addition, placed the book upon a royalty system. Again, in illustration of the unscrupulous manner in which they appropriate other people's property, here is a case :— A.B. offered to prepare a book of a special charac- ter for S.P.C.K. In reply, the Secretary wrote that he did not think that it would be a commercial suc- cess, but he would consider anything submitted. As this alone would not justify the preparation of such a * Taking the figures of the balance sheet, the establishment expenses amount to 27 per cent, of the whole profit. There- fore the whole profit on this last book would be about £2,000 against £130 to the author. Are these figures wrong? Then let them be set right.  ## p. 147 (#183) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. 147 work, A. B. sent two articles which he had written, merely as specimens of the manner in which he would treat the subject. This he was careful to explain. He received a printed acknowledgment, which was all that he did receive for three months. Then to his amazement his MSS. were sent to him with proofs, but not a word of explanation, beyond a note on the MSS. probably for the printer, "Set up for Dawn of Day." Dawn of Day is a halfpenny monthly of S.P.C.K., against which A. B. has not a word to say, but that he had not the most remote intention that his articles should appear in it. As the matter had gone so far, he did not like to seem ungracious and withdraw. The articles came out in driblets, with the connection of the subject broken, and without illustrations. When the first instalment appearedheventured to askforacheque— he had parted with his MSS. for more than six months—adding a gentle hint which he thought that S.P.C.A'. would esteem, viz., that anything that he could earn with his- pen was devoted to a religious purpose. He had to wait, however, four months more, and then received the magnificent sum of three guineas for the two articles, and not a word of apology for their misappropriation. For the shilling books which the Society issues it appears that they pay £10 or jQ\2 down, and the authors have no means whatever of ascertaining their own success. There are no dates and no numbered editions. Some of them are selling for many years. Now to one who knows the large sums made by shilling books, this dealing seems to require the strongest and the plainest language. A shilling book is generally produced at 2d. or 2\d. Consider the figures— Sale of 10,000 at 6|</. ... j£21° 'fa- &d. £ s. d. 10,000 at 2\d., cost 104 3 4 Author ... ... 10 o o Advertising ... 15 o o Society's profit ... 141 13 4 ^270 16 8 The Committee of Inquiry state that the prices f aid compare with those paid by other publishers. Well, I have myself written two or three shilling books which have had a good sale. Now, had they sold only io,oco copies each I should have received royalties for each over ^, 80, and my publisher would have made nearly as much. There are, perhaps, sweating publishers who give even less than the S.P.C.K. I know of one firm where the rule is to give^5 for a shilling book,,£8 for an eigliteenpenny book, and so on. But even this is equalled by the vol.. 1. S.P.C.K. when they gave £\2 \2S. for a two shil- ling book of which they sold nearly 6,000 copies. Enough of cases. We have seen enough also of the Committee of Inquiry. In illustration of the concluding paragraph, I add one or two extracts from letters from authors who have written for this noble Society. One lady writes to say that she prays the Lord to awaken their conscience—words used not flippantly, but in deep, sad seriousness. Another—nay, a dozen others—sends her case and implores me not to let the Society know that she has done so. Clergymen have written to me begging me to persevere in throwing light—and yet more light—into this dark place! Author after author has written, all to tell the same tale of wretched pay and immense sales. Nay, in some cases, the greater the success the less is the pay. Witness the case already quoted. In token of the esteem in which the Society is held by its writers, let me add a few words taken from a letter written by one of the most charming authors of the age. She says, advising a young writer about the S.P.C.K. :— "The Society, as a rule, makes books from copyrights bought outright. It pays them best "If the work is not very good, their clientele is so large that, with a smart binding, they can command sufficient sale to save them from loss. If they are fortunate enough to have caught a young genius, their profits are very large. The profit of their book trade is enormous "—we have seen what it is. "Their publications have not, however, stood high as literature, which has led them to make great efforts to secure writers of reputation, and as these will not part with copyright, they, have to pay a royalty. Your friend's fate depends entirely on what she can command. They are notoriously close-fisted, and will not give her one farthing more than they can help"—no question of justice and honesty, then? "And if they cannot afford to part with her, they will give her anything she wants. If she thinks her book likely to continue to sell for years, 1 advise her to try for the royalty system, but if not, they have so many dodges for squeezing you at all corners, and it is so difficult to get behind the scenes, that I should think it better to struggle for a good sum down." This is very pleasant reading. This is an ap- preciation of the S.P.C.K.—to the "Literary Handmaid of the Church "—by a woman of the very highest character. I will not, in this place, give her name. Well, is there more to be said? I pointed out in my pamphlet—and I repeat here—that the sweater is one who, knov\ing before- hand that he will make a great profit, pays only what he must. The S.P.C.K., which nteci never l 2  ## p. 148 (#184) ############################################ 148 THE AUTHOR. lose by a book—and knows beforehand, within a few copies, the minimum of its sales—is proved by the cases I have alleged and by the admissions of the so-called Committee of Inquiry, to do exactly for authors what the other sweater does for needlewomen. I pointed out in the pamphlet certain plain broad principles of honest publishing. They are not my invention. They are acted upon by every honourable house; they are reduced to a system in France. The Committee refuse so much as to consider them. They say that "part of the pam- phlet" is part of a controversy in which I have long been engaged. It is not part of a contro- versy. These principles have never formed part of any controversy, because no honourable pub- lisher has ever disputed them. I pointed out that the S.P.C.K. frequently followed the plan adopted by all sweating pub- lishers, of carefully concealing the date of the book and the number of the edition, so that the author shall not learn his own popularity. No notice is taken of this point. I pointed out very carefully that the eighth Com- mandment must be read with reference to literary property. It must, by all honest men. The Committee of Inquiry pass over this point. Why? Can that also be part of a controversy with English clergymen and gentlemen of honour? I pointed out that their list of authors does not include half-a-dozen authors of repute. I asked why the best authors never go near the S.P.C.K. The Committee of Inquiry give no answer. There is no answer to give, except the answer that I sub- mit, viz., that none who can escape the sweater's yoke submit to it of their own accord. Had the Committee of Inquiry inquired at all, they wouldhave foundoutthesecases for themselves. But they have not. To inquire means taking trouble; it also looks suspicious; and it needs a clear head because of the dust that would be thrown in their eyes. Such an inquiry would reveal very startling things to those who understand what is meant by honourable publishing. So to all the real questions at issue, no answer. What is an equitable division of profit between author and publisher? No answer. On what principles are their authors paid? No answer. How much his the Society made—profit, not savings—out of the lady whose case was advanced? No answer. Why do the foremost living authors refuse to enter their walls? No answer. Why do the clergy themselves—those who are leaders in literature—never go to the S.P.C.K.? No answer. Why do not the Bishops themselves—let me add —go to the Society of which they are Vice-Presi- dents? To this question also there will be no answer. Now, if the Publication Committee dare to brave a real inquiry, which (hey will not do unless it is forced upon t/iem, I will tell the inquirers how to set to work. They must send in outside accountants—pro- fessional accountants—who must be instructed to proceed after a uniform method. This will be quite simple. They must construct a table as follows, and fill it in. first itions bpies T3 6 1 aid to the er. ook. s 1 v e m 0 "o . O N & J unt p thor. ox V 0 a Title Date 9 dl JM s |J 0 ! Profi Pu iss d Q. > 6< < * < The profit will be the difference between the cost of production (including the author) and the sales. That is publisher's profit. When this table is constructed, and not till then will the true nature of the transactions of the S.P.C.K. stand out revealed to the world. We shall then understand to its full extent what can be accomplished behind the shield of religion and under the secrecy of books undated, editions un- numbered, and accounts concealed. W. B. * AMERICAN LITERATURE IN AMERICA. IF we were to take any four consecutive numbers of the Athenceum or Academy, and classify the books reviewed, noticed, or announced in those numbers, we should arrive at a pretty accurate idea of the books published during these four or five weeks. In the same way, if we take four consecutive numbers of the Critic of New York, we shall arrive at the books published in the States during the same period. There are now before us the numbers of that paper from August 16th to September 13th, but that for September 6th has somehow been mislaid. Let us see what books are reviewed in these four numbers. The  ## p. 149 (#185) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. 149 titles are written in the order of the reviews and notices as they come, and without any attempt at classification. Kipling's Plain Tales of the Hills. Macmillan. M. Conway Hawthorne. Great Writer Series. Walter Scott. Lovell and Co. Canadian and Australian Verse. Lovell and Co. Cassell. FitzGerald's Omar Khayyam. Macmillan. Mrs. McGahan's Xenia Repnina. Routledge. George Ohnet's Pytre's Soul. Cassell. The Blind Men and the Devil. Lee and Shepard. 50 cents. Smitten and Slain. Nelson and Co. Blind Musician. Stepniak and Westall. Lovell and Co. Aline. Greville. Appleton. 50 cents. A Smuggler's Secret. Frank Barrett. Lovell and Co. Ida. Mabel Collins. Lovell and Co. Boston Unitarianism. Nottingham. G. P. Putnam and Sons. Defoe's Complcat Gentleman, David Nutt. Northern Studies. Edmund Gosse. Walter Scott. Lovell and Co. Hanley's Views and Reviews. Scribner. fava, the Pearl of the East. Houghton, Mifflin and Co. Drury's Journal in Madagascar. Macmillan. Sister Saint Sulpia. Valdes. Lovell and Co. Guy de Maupassant. New Stories. Minerva Pub- lishing Co. Guy de Maupassant. Pierre et Jean. Routledge. Stanley. In Darkest Africa. Sampson Low. Scribner. Underwood's Corean Dictionary. Randolph and Co. Molee's Pure Saxon English. Rand, McNalty and Co. Hearne's Youma. Harper and Bros. Italian Characters. Martenengo Cesaresco. Scribner and Welford. Hall's Society in the Elizabethan Age. Macmillan. Harland's Two Women or One. Cassell. Bjomson's In God's Way. Gosse. Lovell and Co. An Artist's Heaven. Octave Feuillet. Cassell. Written in Red. Cassell. Were they Sinners? Authors' Publishing Co. Vivien. Cassell. Annie Edwardes' Pearl Poivder. Lippincott. Mad. de Mauriscamp. O. Feuillet. Lippincott. 7ss Americains chez Eux. Paris Librairie de la Nouvelle Reveu. Fascimiles of MSS. relating to America. London. Stevens. Poetry. Three English and Three American Poets, Foster's Studies in Theology. Hunt and Eaton. Kipling's Phantom Rickshaw. Lovell. Payn's Burnt Million. Harper and Bros. Throctmcnton. Seawell. Appleton. Stead's Passion Play. Merrill and Co. Three novels from the French. Here are forty-five books reviewed and noticed; of these nine are French or translated from the French, nine are American, the rest are all English. Now it may be that at this time of year there are fewer books of native production than earlier or later. But what should we think were we to find in an English review twenty-six books written by Americans to nine written by Britons—a proportion of one hundred to thirty-six, or nearly three to one? This, then, is one result of the present system, and a result which everybody can understand. The American author is ousted and starved to make room for the Englishman, who, poor wretch, is starved although he is received. * AN OLD MAN'S REJOINDER. IN the domain of literature loftily considered (an accomplished and veteran critic in his just out work* now says), "the kingdom of the Father has passed; the kingdom of the Son is passing; the kingdom of the Spirit begins." Leaving the reader to chew on and extract the juice and meaning ot this, I will proceed to say in melanged form what I have had brought out by the English author's essay (he discusses the poetic art mostly) on my own, real, or by him supposed, views and purports. If I give any answers to him, or explanations of what my books intend, they will be not direct but indirect and derivative. Of course this brief jotting is personal. Something very like querulous egotism and growling may break through the narrative (for I have been and am rejected by all the great magazines, carry now my 72nd annual burden, and have been a paralytic for 18 years). No great poem or other literary or artistic work of any scope, old or new, can be essentially con- sidered without weighing first the age, politics (or want of politics) and aim, visible forms, unseen soul, and current times, out of the midst of which it rises and is formulated: as the Bible canticles and their days and spirit—as the Homeric, or Dante's utterance, or Shakespeare's, or the old Scotch or Irish ballads, or Ossian, or Omar Khayyam. So I have conceived and launched, and worked for years at, my "Leaves of Grass" —personal emanations only at best, but with specialty of emergence and background — the ripening of the nineteenth century, the thought and fact and radiation individuality, of America, the Secession war, and showing the democratic condi- tions supplanting everything that insults them or impedes their aggregate way. Doubtless my poems illustrate (one of novel thousands to come for a * Two new volumes, "Essays Speculative and Suggestive," by John Addington Symonds. One of the Essays is on "Democratic Art," in which I and my books are largely alluded to and cited ai d dissected. It is this part ot the vols, that has caused the off-hand lines above—(first thank- ing Mr. S. for his invariable courtesy of personal treatment). The Essays are remarkably tine specimens of type, paper, and press work—Chapman & Hall their English publishers —and jobbed here by Scribners, New York.  ## p. 150 (#186) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. long period) those conditions; but "democratic art " will have to wait long before it is satisfactorily formulated and defined—if it ever is. I will now for one indicative moment lock horns with what many think the greatest thing, the ques- tion of art, so-called. I have not seen without learning something therefrom, how, with hardly an exception, the poets of this age devote themselves, always mainly, sometimes altogether, to fine rhyme, spicy verbalism, the fabric and cut of the garment, jewelry, concetti, style, art. To-day these adjuncts are certainly the effort, beyond all else. Yet the lesson of Nature undoubtedly is, to proceed with single purpose toward the result necessitated and for which the time has arrived, utterly regardless of the outputs of shape, appearance or criticism, which are always left to settle themselves. T have not only not bothered much about style, form, art, etc., but confess to more or less apathy (I believe I have sometimes caught myself in decided aver- sion) toward them throughout, asking nothing of them but negative advantages—that they should never impede me, and never under any circum- stances, or for their own purposes only, assume any mastery over me. From the beginning I have watched the sharp and sometimes heavy and deep-penetrating objec- tions and reviews against my work, and I hope entertained and audited them (for I have probably had an advantage in constructing from a central and unitary principle since the first, but at long intervals and stages—sometimes lapses of five or six years, or peace or war). Ruskin, the English- man, charges as a fearful and serious lack that my poems have no humour. A profound German critic complains that, compared with the luxuriant and well-accepted songs of the world, there is about my verse a certain coldness, severity, absence of spice, polish, or of consecutive meaning and plot. (The book is autobiographic at bottom, and maybe I do not exhibit and make ado about stock pas- sions: I am partly of Quaker stock.) Then E. C. Steadman finds (or found) marked fault with me because while celebrating the common people en masse, I do not allow enough heroism and moral merit and good intentions to the choicer classes, the college-bred, the etat-major. It is quite probable that S. is right in the matter. In the main I myself look, and'have from the first looked, to the bulky democratic torso of the United States even for esthetic and moral attributes of serious account—and refused to aim at or accept anything less. If America is only for the rule and fashion and small typicality of other lands (the rule of the etat-major), it is not the land I take it for, and should to-day feel that my literary aim and theory had been blanks and misdirections. Strictly judged, most modern poems are but larger or smaller lumps of sugar, or slices of toothsome sweetcake—even the banqueters dwelling on those glucose flavours as a main part of the dish. Which perhaps leads to something: to have great heroic poetry we need great readers—a heroic appetite and audience. Have we at present any such? Then the thought at the centre, never too often repeated. Boundless material wealth, free politi- cal organization, immense geographic area, and unprecedented "business" and products—even the most active intellect and "culture "—-will not place this Commonwealth of ours on the topmost range of history and humanity—or any eminence of " democratic art "—to say nothing of its pinnacle. Only the production (and on the most copious scale) of loftiest moral, spiritual and heroic personal illustrations—a great native Literature headed with a Poetry stronger and sweeter than any yet. If there can be any such thing as a kosmic modern and original song, America needs it and is worthy of it. In my opinion to-day what is meant through civilized nations everywhere by the great words Literature, Art, Religion, &c, with their conven- tional administerers, stand squarely in the way of what the vitalities of those great words signify, more than they really prepare the soil for them, or plant the seeds, or cultivate or garner the crop. My own opinion has long been, that for New World service our ideas of beauty (inherited from the Greeks, and so on to Shakespeare—query—■ perverted from them?) need to be radically changed, and made anew for to-day's purposes and finer standards. But if so, it will all come in due time—the real change will be an autochthonic, interior, constitutional, even local one, from which our notions of beauty (lines and colours are won- drous lovely, but character is lovelier) will branch or offshoot. So much have I now rattled off (old age's garrulity), that there is not space for explaining the most important and pregnant principle of all, viz.: that Art is one, is not partial, but includes all times and forms and sorts—is not exclusively aristocratic or democratic, or oriental or occi- dental. My favourite symbol would be a good font of type, where the impeccable long-primer rejects nothing. Or the old Dutch flour-miller who said, "I never bother myself what road the folks come—I only want good wheat and rye." The font is about the same forever. Democratic art results of the democratic development from tinge, true nationality, belief, in the one setting up from it. Walt Whitman. {In the New York Critic.)  ## p. 151 (#187) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. LEAFLET No. IV. The Quarrels of Authors. IT has been the melancholy privilege of authors, for two hundred years at least, that everything which fortune brings to them, whether good or bad, shall sooner or later become known to all the world This exclusive privilege will, there is reason to believe, shortly be withdrawn from them, partly because they have become too numerous for its general exercise, and partly because other people are beginning to think that their own lives are quite as interesting as those of authors. Hitherto people who are not authors have been contented to sit down and endure in silence. Think of what we know concerning judges compared with what we know concerning poets. Compare the personal interest attached to the names of Erskine, Mansfield, VVedderburn, with that which belongs to Pope, Dryden, Gold- smith. Who wants to know how a Q.C. lives, what letters he writes, what friendships and enimities he makes? Who, again, cares for a life of the ordinary physician? Yet quite small authors find their biographers, and even when one cannot reach the level which demands a special biography, there are countless volumes of re- miniscences, autobiographies, and memoirs which serve to rescue the small fry from oblivion, and set them once more talking and acting, writing, feasting, and drinking for the admiration of pos- terity. The world, I believe, first began to like memoirs of authors because they were the only articulate creatures, and they naturally liked to talk about themselves. Therefore the only memoirs were those written by literary men. Then they have always been such unlucky creatures—born with a most splendid birthright, a noble inheritance, which has always been snatched away from them. Their very misfortunes have lent interest to their lives. For another reason, their lives used to contain quan- tities of letters, and there is no reading in the world more delightful than the reading of letters. Consider the tons of books written about authors, the masses of recollections and memoirs of persons connected with literature. The world reads all; it makes little distinction; it receives the auto- biography of Leigh Hunt with as much joy as if it had been that of Shelley, and it devours the Recollections of a Jerdan with as much avidity as the Confessions of Rousseau. The literary calling, chiefly owing to this readi- ness of authors to talk and of the world to listen, has been so fully illustrated that there seems nothing new to be said about it. Within the memory of man, however, a great change has come over the profession. The Bohemian has well-nigh disappeared; the author has become re- spectable. He no longer thinks it due to the profession that he should behave, even while he is in the twenties, after the manner depicted by Henri Miirger, or, when he is past the twenties, like certain gentlemen of the pen in Thackeray He is even, gradually and slowly, becoming a man of business; He actually demands the audit of his accounts, and he has begun to refuse signing agreements unless he knows what they mean. There are also signs that he is beginning to give up his old bad habit of quarrelling with his brother author. The last is a great step in advance. When an author is no longer ready to fall upon a rival writer; to overwhelm him with contempt: to sting him with epigram, and be- labour him with abuse, there will be the greater hope of his rising to the level of acting with his brother as one member of a profession acts with another—for mutual protection and advantage. Hitherto, it may fairly be said that in no other profession has there ever been witnessed or allowed such unbridled license, such unrestrained insolence of speech, as has been claimed and practised by literary men towards each other. No one can even think of a barrister speaking of another barrister in such terms as are still sometimes used by one author speaking of another. Can we understand the Law Times opening its columns to a young barrister who desires to call his seniors quacks in law and humbugs in oratory? Does one physician charge another in the Lancet with ignorance? Does one architect, in the organs of that calling, accuse another of theft? No. He is  ## p. 152 (#188) ############################################ 152 THE AUTHOR. restrained, first by the unwritten law of the pro- fession, which enjoins the outward signs of respect; and next by the simple laws of good breeding, which do not allow men always to tell each other what they think. Why, some of the very best things recorded of the "wits" are things which in any other class would not be tolerated for a moment. There is, one acknowledges with grati- tude, a marked improvement of late years; yet even now, every editor is quite ready to admit from one literary man an attack upon another. It is not many months ago that there appeared, in a monthly magazine of high standing, an attack upon a living author by another, so scurrilous, so virulent, so full of rage and malice, that it ought to have been brought into a High Court of Justice. But I suppose it never occurred, either to the editor who admitted this article, or to the man who wrote it, that in no other profession would such an article by one follower of the craft concerning another have been admitted, and that a barrister would be disbarred if he dared to write such a paper on the professional character of another barrister. In the old days literary men rejoiced and gloried in giving pain; they killed each other if they could, with abuse and contempt. They loved to dance and jump upon another man simply because he belonged to their own trade. The first reception of Keats, Byron, and Tennyson is well known. The savage ferocity of Macaulay remains gibbeted in that volume of essays which every schoolboy still gets for a prize. Nay, the old spirit is not yet dead; it is only growing gradually disreputable. Within the last twenty years we have seen actions brought for libel by Charles Reade, George Augustus Sala, Hepworth Dixon, Gilbert, Robert Buchanan, Keith Johnston, William Black, and Whistler— there have probably been others. Mostly, the libels which formed the cause of action were written by literary men, and in some cases by well-known literary men. Why? It is difficult to understand the pleasure or the profit of inventing deliberately, and then publishing, a malignant falsehood, con- cerning a man who is not an enemy. Is it envy, or is it sheer stupidity, or is it recklessness? Does the writer desire to pose as a champion of virtue? Possibly this desire has been generally the ruling motive. Vanity is also probably a factor. It is always grand to attack somebody ever so much bigger than yourself. Thus, this Society is accus- tomed to misrepresentation whenever the knavish publisher or the sweater can find an agent. But it was an author who wrote an article in the Contem- porary, indignantly charging the Society with ad- vocating the breaking of agreements—actually, the breaking of agreements! What did he do it for? Probably because it made him feel grand. Are we to have no criticism, then? There is plenty of room for real criticism: it exists already, though, to be sure, not in large quantities. The true critic—he also exists, but in small quantities— does not call names; he does not suggest motives; he does not recklessly accuse of plagiarism; he does not account for success by any but the real reasons—especially that the author deserves success; he neither down-cries, nor depreciates, nor mis- represents. These arts he leaves for the baser sort. One does not find the larger men playing the part of defendants in libel suits brought by authors. Can we imagine a case of Dickens v. Thackeray? This is how it might be reported. "The defendant, a well known man of letters, has recently written an anonymous critique, the author- ship of which is not denied, on a certain work by the plaintiff called Martin Chuzzlewit. In this review he spoke of the writer as a creature of low humour—rather of no humour at all; he said that the characters are dragged out of the gutter; that their language, their action, and their manners are entirely in accordance with their station in life, to which the author himself probably belongs; that some of the scenes, especially those in which a monthly nurse figures, are of a revolting indecency; that the book is throughout destitute of principle or honour; that the hero is nothing but a penniless adventurer: that the author laughs with wickedness and at morality; that he goes so far as to deride, in the person of a respectable undertaker, the solemnity and the awful- ness of Death. . . . Counsel for the plaintiff, after reading tiie reviewand dwelling on certain extractson which his client based his case, pointed out that the defendant was a rival of the plaintiff and jealous of his superior fame. For the defence it was argued  ## p. 153 (#189) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. >53 that authors are notoriously a highly sensitive set of people; that they naturally hate and suspect each other; and that the review was in every particular justified in the interests of religion, morals, and literature. The Judge summed up. . . . The Jury, without leaving the box, accorded damages of ,£10,000. The defendant, a tall man with a broken nose, appeared astonished at the verdict, and left the court promising to make mincemeat of his rival in spite of all the Courts in Christendom." The case reads prettily—but one feels that Thackeray could not have been the defendant. It is not every author, however, who tries to conduct himself according to the laws of good breeding. Nor is it every barrister—yet the barrister must, or else the Benchers will speak seriously to him. Cannot authors create a Bar of Opinion equally potent, though it has no power to expel from a profession which any may enter at any time or leave at any time without asking permission? Can we not beg them, while they are in it, to respect themselves in respecting their fellow-workers? * EXAMINATION IN VANITY FAIR. 1. What do you know of Mary Box, of Mr. Chopper (state his Christian name), of the Rev. Silas Hornblower? Have you any later informa- tion about this gentleman and his wife? 2. Where did Mr. James Crawley reside on the first night of his arrival at Brighton? What favourite accompanied him thither? 3. Who laid the odds, and what odds, against Kangaroo? What charge of unsportsmanlike con- duct was brought against Captain Rawdon Crawley? 4. State the second title in Lord Southdown's family. 5. Give the circumstances of Mrs. MajorO'Dowd's education. What was her favourite consolatory reading? 6. Discuss the relations of Sir Pitt Crawley and his tenantry, and state the results of Dr. Squills' conversation with Mr. Clump. 7. What did Miss Sharp call her maternal stock before they were Montmorencys? Andrew Lang {The Sign of the Ship). Overheard outside the Senate House. "Scan- dalous! Disgraceful! Couldn't answer a single question. We shall all be plucked. Like to set the examiner to answer his own paper." A MODEL AGREEMENT. WE have received from a member of the Society one of the most delightful agree- ments ever submitted to an author. We hasten to submit it to our readers with a few words of explanation. Here it is in brief:— Book. A demy 8vo. volume of 300 pages. Price, 1 of. 6d. Edition of 500 copies. Author to give. (1) Whole copyright; i.e., to part absolutely with his property. (2) Also to con- tribute £60 towards publishing. Certainly more than enough to cover the whole necessary cost of production. Publisher to give. Royalty of 2/. 6d. a copy up to 250, and 3-f. a copy afterwards. What under the most favourable terms can the author get? Here is his account, supposing that all the copies are sold :— jQ s d. 250 copies at 2s. 6d. ... 3150 194 » >, 3* 29 2 o Press, 5° "I _ Author, 6 J £60 7 o So that for all his labour the author may, on the most favourable circumstances, get a profit of 7*.! What does the publisher get also under the most favourable circumstances? Here is the account:— £ s- d. Paid by author ... ... 60 o o 444 copies at 6s. a copy ... 133 4 o £i93 4 o Whole cost of production, £ s. d. including advertising, say 60 o o Royalties to author... ... 60 7 o Profit to publisher ... ... 7217 o £i93 4 o So that if the book sells 500 copies, the publisher will make a profit of j£j2s. to 7*., or a proportion of more than 200 : 1!!!! But, it will be urged, he is taking a great risk; he does not know how many he will sell. Why, it is all profit to him, whether he sells few or many. Let us suppose that he only sells 250. How does the account stand then? It will be found that the publisher has made a profit of £41 odd to the author's loss of £28 15^. Corrections are here neglected, because there is a clause by which the author is to be liable for all corrections above a certain amount.  ## p. 154 (#190) ############################################ 154 THE AUTHOR. A HARD CASE. V. Through a Literary Agent. IN this hard case an author agreed to publish a novel upon the following "advantageous" terms :— a. The publisher was to take "all " the risk. (3. The author was to pay him the trifling sum of £50 to help him support the same. 7. The author was to pay .£21 as a reader's honorarium! Happy reader! 8. The clear profits were to be divided into three equal shares, one of which was to accrue to the author and the other two to the publisher. c. The publisher was to take the copyright. A literary agent, who also had to be paid by somebody, introduced the author to the publisher. Then the bill came in. Every item was ex- cessive. The total cost of production as rendered was .£181 us. nd., inclusive of the enormous reader's fee, and an independent estimate shows that 3,000 copies of the book could have been produced and advertised for under £100. The work was stereotyped. About 800 copies seem to have been sold, and these are set down as having realized £44 14^. 1 id., or 125a'. a copy. The sum is arrived at in this way. The book was published at 2s., but copies are accdunted for at trade price (in accordance with the agreement), but 15 per cent, of all receipts has been deducted by the publisher, to justify which there is not a word in the agree- ment. The probability is that at this period matters stood thus. The publisher had spent dn the pro- duction of the book; if he produced 3,000 copies, from £90 to j£loo. If he printed a smaller edition, it would have cost rriuch less He had received from the author £50 towards the cost of production, and from the public ^52 odd by sales. He certainly was already not out of pocket. The author was ,£50 to the bad, and his chance of obtaining his share of the clear profits is made smaller by the fact that although the sales have realized £52, the publisher has pocketed 15 per cent, of this unlawfully. The account, as rendered, shows a loss on the transaction of £86 17*., and probably there has been really a gain of £10. It must be noted that if the whole edition of 3,000 copies were sold at the ordinary trade terms of 13 as 12 less 10 per cent, and the pub- lisher then deducted 15 per cent, from the result, there would only be about ^142 to place to the credit of the book. Allowing that the book really cost ,£100 to produce, there would then only be £42 to divide between author and publisher. This profit, according to the astounding terms of the agreement, would be divided in the proportion of three to one, the author taking the smaller share. The most then that the author could possibly gain is one-third of £42—or £14, if the whole edition sold. Yet he is asked to pay £50, any or all of which he may lose. This seems to us a particularly hard case, because the author, so far from being careless, seems to have made a very proper attempt to get good advice. Feeling himself unable to understand the business side of the transaction he employed an agent. But what are we to say of the agent? Imagine a man, whose business it is to know what a publishing transaction really means, sanction- ing for his client such downright enormities. First, he allows the author to get one-third only of the profits—that is disgraceful. Secondly, he makes him risk jQ^o on the chance of winning £14, which is surely odds that no one expects a comparatively unknown novelist to lay on himself. Thirdly, he has so little idea of the proper way to word an agreement that he allows the pub- lisher to appropriate percentages to which he has no shadow of right. Fourthly, he sanctions the swelling of the cost of production by a monstrous fee of twenty guineas, as a reader's honorarium. Fifthly, he is so satisfied with his handiwork that he assigns the copyright to the publisher, so that in case the book should be a success the wretched position of the author throughout the first edition might be maintained during the whole period of sale. This is not the first occasion on which it has been forcibly brought home to us that a literary agent is not always the author's best friend. Some- times we think the agent has simply been an ass, which is bad: but sometimes we think that he has deliberately handed over the author for slaughter, which is very bad indeed, seeing that he is occupy- ing in the author's mind the position of guide and counsellor. Let authors understand that just as there are doctors and doctors, lawyers and lawyers, honest men and knaves, wise men and fools, com- petent men and incompetent, so there may be literary agents and literary agents—some competent and some incompetent, some honest men and some knaves. In the search for a Literary Agent it may save some trouble to ask counsel of the Society.  ## p. 155 (#191) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. 155 INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT. WHATEVER may be the fate of the Copyright Bill in Congress, it is plain that the copyright cause has gained greatly by the discussion of the last year. The essential question was never so generally and so well understood as now, and in its recent dis- cussion there has been a refreshing persistence. The old argument—the most ancient, if not the most honourable veteran in a bad cause—that there can be no property in an idea, has been effectually disposed of. He appeared in Congress with his familiar air of conclusiveness and the what- do-you-say-to-that aspect with which he has bullied his way through the debate for many a year. But he has been neatly tripped and floored by Judge Shipman, and will be henceforth only a crippled pensioner upon good nature. Nobody can say whether there can be property in an idea; but whether there can be or not, an idea can be made available only in a way in which there can be property. The good cause has never alleged any other kind of property, and that is the form which the law concedes. Whether the law concedes it as fairly and fully as it should is a question, but there is rio question that it concedes it. The American law having granted to Americans that kind of right, the right is not weakened or lost by mixing it with different things. My diamond does not cease to be mine and valuable to me because you throw it among a heap of pebbles that may be common property. The law says that the form which I give an idea is my property, and it does not cease to be so because the law does not say that something else is property. It may in- evitably follow that by acknowledging my right, the law logically concedes that right in general. But whether this follows or not, the law protects my property in the form of my idea, and lays its hand upon you if you do not respect my right. You cannot take my diamond and make it yours by placing it between two pebbles which the law ought to say, but does not say, belongs to Others. Even if the law gives you a pound of flesh, it gives you no more and no less. Above all, not a single drop of blood. Judge Shipman came evidently from the School of Bellario. My diamond is mine, says the law; and whoever takes it without my permission is a-—conveyor, says the law, and the judgment of the law is ratified in the higher court of conscience and common sense. The great present gain of the cause is that it has been transferred to that higher court whose juris- diction takes cognizance of moral convictions. A moral right exists independent of law. Such, also, is the quality of what is called natural rights. Alexander Hamilton was the chief of pur practical statesmen. But it was Hamilton who said that the rights of human nature are written as with a sun- beam on human consciousness. Among all lovers of justice those rights exist, whether with law or without it, and those lovers do not justify an evi- dent wrong by the plea that no law forbids it. But in truth the highest law forbids it. The absence of good laws from the statute-book is as sig- nificant as the presence of bad laws. Good sir, do you justify the King of the Cannibal Islands for dining upon your lamented grandfather because there was no law of the islands that forbade it? G. W. Curtis {Harpers) * "SING A SONG FOR SIXPENCE." THE jackal sat up in a garret bare And wrote in the midnight cold; Undaunted though hunger and sickness were Sapping his spirit bold. He penn'd for libeity, knowledge, and right A song that will live for aye, To be to the world a beacon of light Until the perfect day. The lion reclined in his easy chair, And drain'd a bumper of wine, As he read with cautious critical air Each bright and burning line. He read and shouted " A triumph I see! I can easily make it go; The fellow's starving; he'll sell it to me For an odd pound or so." The poem came forth and the people read, By thousands editions ran, Till the hearts of all were stirr'd, and they said, "Tell us who is this man; Where dwelleth the poet that we may crown With a world's honour his head, The people's idol from monarch to clown?" Leo replied, " He is dead." W. R. Colles.  ## p. 156 (#192) ############################################ 156 THE AUTHOR CORRESPONDENCE. I The following is from a well-known American woman of letters. Her name is not appended because she has not given permission to use it. For the same reason the title of her work is sup- pressed :— "I have just finished reading a sketch of your Society of Authors, and I feel such a deep and per- sonal interest in it that I must write to you at once. "I have tried in vain to arouse our women to action in the very line which you have so success- fully adopted. Three years since, we proposed an Authors' Club of Women, similar to the one my life-long friend, Dr. Holmes, has presided over, but the women did not respond with enthusiasm. I have worked for years quietly and almost alone, hoping some day to have leisure to do what you have done. I have been defrauded and insulted by publishers, and calmly told that they had made thousands of dollars out of my work, and it is in constant demand. Last Christmas a Boston firm published a book with my name on the ewer with- out my knowledge or consent. It was sold far and wide to my own friends, and liberally advertised with my name. When I called upon them for redress they denied having injured me, and I had no money with which to bring a suit. "Other publishers said it was shameful, 'but the firm was rich, and would fight me cruelly if I at- tempted to obtain justice.' You can never under- stand the burning indignation with which I listened to the robber who said, 'Oh! yes, I used your name because it was the strongest to carry the book, you know.' Had I belonged to a Society, then, which would stand behind me, he would not have dared so to insult and to rob me." No—he certainly would not. In this country things pretty bad are attempted, and very often carried out, but to advertise a book as by a certain well-known author, and to sell it anywhere with that pretence, would be very soon set right. But why does not the Authors' Club of New York take up a thing of this kind? Is there no sense of justice in the States at all? Will honourable men sit down and suffer such a thing to be done? This rascally firm of liars and robbers would fight the poor lady " cruelly " if she dared to bring an action. Are there no good men and true who will band together and fight the firm "cruelly"? We are accustomed to be robbed in the States; we are aliens there; we have no rights; but here is an American lady —she is foully injured by having a Thing labelled with her name and sold as her work, and she can get no redress! II An Authors' Club. Sir,— In your September number the question is asked whether it would be possible for us or better for us to meet in any other way than at an annual dinner. As one of your original members, who has attended all its functions, may I be permitted to remark that they are not satisfying—at least to the soul? Like Oliver Twist, one feels a desperate desire to get up and "ask for more." And, sir, I doubt whether a conversazione would satisfy this craving for professional companionship. These occasions would, no doubt, be useful, from a disciplinary point of view, but so far as my experience of gatherings of the kind extends, one always finds those one wanted to meet, "unavoidably absent." A proposal was made in your pages some time ago of founding an "Authors' Club," and I hope that it will not be allowed to drop, for it seems to me that it would meet the want which is admitted to exist. VVill it be believed, that in days when we hear so much of "Literary London," there is not a single institution which encourages social inter- course between men and women of letters? There are more or less literary clubs enough and to spare, but I am not aware that ladies are admitted to any of these. Considerable financial difficulties are generally encountered in starting a club on tra- ditional lines, but if we began modestly with only a few rooms, it would be better than nothing, and would give people who only meet at " crushes " and "functions " an opportunity of seeing one another informally and of exchanging ideas. If such an attempt met with a reasonable amount of support it would be a comparatively simple matter to develop it to any extent. A Member. * QUERIES. "I find among certain books which have come into my possession one entitled 'The Life and Entertaining Adventures of Mr. Cleveland, Natural Son of Oliver Cromwell, written by himself.' My copy is the second edition in three volumes, printed for T. Astley at the Rose in St. I'aul's Churchyard, 1741. The first edition, as stajgd on the title-page, was in five volumes. Can anyone tell me whether there is any foundation in fact for this work? Was there a natural son of Oliver Cromwell?" "The Author is not a mathematical paper, but I venture to send it a kind of mathematical  ## p. 157 (#193) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. 157 question. It was suggested by a remark in the Saturday Review. How did they carry on the processes of multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction with Roman numerals? For instance, how did they multiply mdcccxc by lvh? And how did they divide mcxlviii by vm?" "Can you tell me who wrote [the following lines, and where the rest of the poem may be found? My husband has had the lines in his possession for nearly fifty years. He believes them to be modern Latin— "Siderum claros imitata vultus Quid lates dudum, Rosa? Delicatum Effer e terris caput, O tepentis Filia cceli!" The same lady suggests that in cases where a lady is a Professor, a Doctor, or any other profes- sion, the German termination—inn—might save a good deal of awkwardness. For instance, instead of saying Mrs. Doctor Garratt Anderson, we should say Doctorinn Garratt Anderson. Perhaps the suggestion is worth taking up. "Was Browning's Poem, 'How they brought the good news to Ghent,' inspired by Turpin's Ride? "Browning once told me in conversation that he frequently received letters asking him on what incident or event in Flemish History the Ride was founded, and declared that it was not based on any." "A monk made a bargain with the Devil. The latter was to pay all the former's debts, in return for which he was to have the monk's soul. The Devil duly fulfilled his part of the bargain, paid off every liability to the last far- thing, and came to claim the other part. 'Not so fast,' said the monk. 'You were first to pay off all my debts. You now say that I owe you my soul. I cannot allow your claim, because, if I am indebted to you for my soul, I am not yet clear from debt, and you have no claim.'" Where does this story occur? DREAMS AND THE IMAGINATION. THE following questions have been drawn up by Mr. James Sully (author of "Pes- simism," "Outlines of Psychology," "Illusions," &c, &c.) and sent by him to writers, especially those who deal with imaginative and creative work. The collection of trustworthy infor- mation on this subject is of the greatest import- ance, and therefore all our members are invited to reply to the circular, even though they have not received one from Mr. Sully direct. His address is East Heath Road, Hampstead. All the replies will be received and treated as confidential; they will, however, be used as materials by him in the scientific work in which he is engaged. 1. Do you frequently dream? 2. How would you describe your dreams? Are they distinct and elaborate, or shadowy and incohate? Do visual imagery and language (whether heard merely or spoken) play an equally prominent part in your dreams? Are they in general characterized by some particular emotional effect, as terrifying, romantically lovely, humorous, &c? 3. Are you able to exert any volitional control over your dreams? More particularly can you prolong a dream when you wish to do so, and can you afterwards pick up the thread of a dream and continue it? 4. Besides dreams proper during sleep (com- plete or partial) are you in the habit of developing visions in your waking hours by gazing into the fire, closing your eyes, or otherwise? 5. Have you for longer or for shorter periods been subject to illusions of sight or of hearing? If so, can you point out the circumstances which appear to favour their appearance? 6. When intently occupied with imaginative work, are you aware of a muffling of the senses as during the visionary state? Do the pictures that come before you at such a time resemble in their distinctness, vividness, and suddenness of presenta- tion, dreams and visions? 7. Can you trace in your case any connection between the process of dreaming and that of artistic creation? For example—(a) Do you find that you dream more (or less) when busily occupied in some imaginative work? (fi) Has the habit of dreaming increased since you took to fiction? (c) Did the faculty of weaving stories grow out of the childish habit of conjuring up faces in the fire or other form of day-dreaming? (d) Have you made any use of dreams or visions in inventing your stories?  ## p. 158 (#194) ############################################ 153 THE AUTHOR. "THE AUTHORS' MANUAL."* THIS book is noticed here in order to em- phasize the fact that the Society has had nothing to do with it. Let our readers make a note of this fact. Let them next make a note of the fact that, although there is in this small volume information—various and mostly use- less—concerning musical criticism, Volupuk (sic), the comic papers, Appuleins (sic), deipnosophy, and the works of Mr. John Dawson, there is nothing in it discoverable that seems likely to be of any real service to authors. Indeed, it seems that the book might as well have been called a manual for wire- drawers, or arch-dukes, so little practical good cap it be to the real author. To Mr. Percy Russell, who, it must be added, is the author of "King Alfred," "After this Life," "A Journey to Lake Taupo," "Australian Tales and Sketches," and of "A Manual of Litera- ture," published by the defunct London Literary Society, "it has always seemed that the whole art of right reviewing lies in this little formula— find out what the book says and how it says it." Now his book, like the walrus, talks of many things. In it the reporter is encouraged to attempt to master "a reportorial style," which "cannot be acquired in a few months"; the paragraphist is exhorted to his own self to be true; and an example of style and truth is given in a paragraph from the pen of Mr. Percy Russell, which appeared in, and was paid for by The North Times, and was derived from Whittaker's Almanac and an Ency- clopedia. The aspirant to leader-writing obtains more practical aid, for he is presented, presumably from the author's Commonplace Book, with some pithy sayings with which to begin his leader. And here they are, "As Lucian says in one of his famous dialogues—The beginning is indeed half of the whole." "Voltaire in one of his most satirical moods asserts," and "Sydney Smith has a story." An aspirant thus armed with apt reference to the classics, to French, and to Sydney Smith ought, certainly, to go far. The Editor and the Sub-Editor, who receive counsel, as well as the journalist and the author, arc urged to make their copy fit their columns, a thing which it is obvious was not likely to have occurred to them, until they saw its convenience recommended in a Manual. Mr. Percy Russell calls attention to "the complete parallelism that * "The Authors' Manual," a complete and practical guide to all branches of literary work, by Percy Russell. London, Digby and Long, Publishers, l8, Bouverie Street, Fleet Street, E.C. exists between the advice given," in his Manuali "and the things to be done." This appears to mean that when he has presented the reader with a precept, he will follow it with an example. Here is the example, given by him for the use of editors, to illustrate the right way to make copy fit. The original sentence runs thus :—" There are poems which the world will not willingly let die, and which will endure long after the dismal caterwaulings of the 'life-not-worth-living' school are buried in oblivion." This, we are told, should, if necessary, and exasperating V .' be edited into "long after the dismal ^ caterwaul- palpably insincere and childish 1 ,' ings of the X 'life-not-worth-living' school of contemporary pessimist well-merited > , 1 1 ^ 1 X are buried in oblivion." When Mr. Russell says this is not a very good example, no one is likely to contradict him. The second part of "The Authors' Manual " is concerned with book-literature, and tells us of ballads ("not to be confounded with ballades") of blank verse, as distinguished from poetry and the " Iliad," of punctuation, and of making a name in Literature. This last heading seems to make it clear that for "The Authors' Manual "we should read "The Aspirants' Manual," and in a chapter on "Proof-reading" we find a really sensible piece of advice to the aspirant. It is " If you want to be paid, say so." It only remains for Mr. Russell to inform the aspirant what he is to do when he has said it, and when he cannot get the money. Of course authors who are no longer aspirants con- tinue on the rare occasions where they take money for their works, to warn these publishers before- hand. Many people used to say it to the "London Literary Society" constantly, with the result that they don't get it, and they keep on saying it with the same result to those upon whom the mantle of Mr. Playster Steeds has fallen. S. S. Sprigge. AT WORK. This column is reserved entirely for Members of the Society, who are invited to ktvp the Editor acquainted with their work and engagements. MISS ESME STUART'S novel, "Kestell of Grey- stone," 3 vols., which has been running through All the YearHound, will be published immediately by Hurst and Blackett. Professor Max Miiller is preparing a new and completely revised edition of his "Lectures on the Science of Language.' This new edition, the fifteenth in England, will have a new title, " Science of Language, founded on Lectures delivered  ## p. 159 (#195) ############################################ THE AUTHOR. 159 at the Royal Institution in 1861 and 1863." The stereotype plates from which the later editions were printed have been broken up. Large portions have been omitted, new chapters have been added, and much has been rewritten. The new work will contain 400 pages more than the last edition of the Lectures. A German translation of it will be published by Engelmann, at Leipzig. The editor of Ruskin's poems is Mr. W. G. Collinwood. It is expected that the poems, which include a great many hitherto unpublished, will take three volumes. "Thoth," Prof. Nicholson's romance, the predecessor of "Toxar," has been translated into German. The authorised life of Ibsen, by Henrik Jager, will ap])ear shortly in an English version. The poetical quotations have been translated from the Norwegian by Mr. Edmund Gosse. Mr. Douglas Sladen, having spent six months in Japan, is contributing a series of illustrated articles on that country to the San Francisco Chronicle. One of our members, who modestly hides himself under the initials of X. L.—perhaps a certain story called Aiit Diabolus aul nullus may be renienbered in Blackivood with these letters appended—has written a one act comedy drama, which he calls " It was a Dream." It was originally written in French, and under the name of " La Fin du Bonheur" was actually accepted by the Comtdie Francaisc. It has been produced with great success by Mr. Kendal at Birmingham, and is intended for his strongest piece in his American tour. Dr. W. H. Besant has in the press a new edition—the fifth— of "Hydromechanics," Part I, and also solutions of the examples in his "Elementary Hydrostatics." These books will be ready about the end of the year. Mr. Hume Nisbet will publish shortly, " The Black Drop" (Trischler and Co.), "A Colonial Tramp" (Ward and Downey), and "Bail up; a Romance of Bushrangers and Blacks " (Chatto and Windus). The second of these works is illustrated by the author. Mr. P. H. Emerson, author of " Pictures of East Anglian Life," "English Idyls," " Idyls of the Norfolk Broads," &c, &c, announces "Wild Life on a Tidal Water" (Messrs. Sampson Low and Co.), with 30 Photo-Etchings by the author and T. F. Goodall, joint authors of "Life and Landscape on the Norfolk Broads." The price to Sub scribers of the Edition de Luxe will be £2 12s. 6d., and after publication the price will be raised to £i y. The ordinary edition is limited to 1,000 num!>ered opies for Great Britain, and 250 for America. The price to sub- scribers will be ,£ I is., and after publication the price will be raised to £1 $s. Mrs. Lovett Cameron's new novel, entitled "Jack's Secret," which has been running as a serial in Belgrama, will l>e pub- lished early in November. The same author announces to appear soon, one of the short-long stories which form the principal feature of Lifpincott's Magazine. A new volume by Mr. J. E. Gore, F.R.A.S., entitled "Astronomical Lessons, or Chapters on the Elementary Principles and Facts of Astronomy," is in the Press, and will shortly be published by Messrs. Roper and Drowley, of II, Ludgate Hill. Mrs. E. M. Edmonds will contribute an English edition of the "Autobiography of Kolokotrenes," with an historical introduction on the Klephts for Mr. Fisher Unwin's "Adven- ture Series." A biography of Rhigas, the Protomartyr of Greece (Longman), has already shown the author's know- ledge of kindred subjects. [We regret that when this book was first announced the title should have been misprinted.] I. H. Leney has just issued "Shadowland in Elian Vannin; or, Folk Tales of the Isle of Man." Professor Skeat has completed his shilling edition of Chaucer's "Prologue to the Canterbury Tales" for the Clarendon Press. The second volume of Professor Skeat's "Principles of English Etymology " is far advanced, and will shortly appear. It deals with the "foreign element" of English, especially with words of Anglo-French origin, and such as are borrow ed from various modern languages. * NEW BOOKS AND NEW EDITIONS. Allen, Grant. This Mortal Coil: A Novel. New Edi- tion. 2S. Besant, Walter. The Demoniac. Arrowsmith. is. Immediately. Birrell, Augustine, M. P. Obiter Dicta. Third Edition. 1 vol. $s. Cresswell, Henry. Sliding Sands. 3 vols. 31.1. 6d. Green, Anna Katharine. A Matter of Millions. 2s. Haggard, H. Rider. Dawn. 1 vol. y. 6d. Hardy, Thomas. A Laodicean; or, the Castle of the De Stancys: A Story. New Edition. I vol. 2s. 6d. Hoey, Mrs. Cashel. Falsely True: A Novel. 1 vol. fir. Hume, Fergus. The Gentleman who Vanished, is. and is. 6d. Karsland, Veva and Collis. The Witness-box ; or, The Murder of Mr. A. B. C. I vol. Is. Kipling, Rudyard. Departmental Ditties. Fifth Edition. I vol. i6mo. 5*. In Black and White. IS. Linton, E. Lynn. The True History of Joshua Davidson, Christian and Communist. Tenth Edition, is. Momerie, Rev. A. W., D.D. Preaching and Hearing. Third Edition. I vol. y. Murray, D. Christie. John Vale's Guardian: A Novel. 1 vol. y. 6d. Murray, David Christie and Henry Herman. One Traveller Returns: A Novel. New Edition. 2s. Pollock, Sir Frederick. An Introduction to the History of the Science of Politics. 2s. td. "Rita." Edelweiss: A Romance. I vol. is. Rohin'Son, F. W. A Very Strange Family: A Novel. Second Edition, y 6d. SlME, William. The Rajah and the Rosebud: A Novel. is. and is. 6d. Sims, G. R. The Case of George Candlemas: A Novel. is. and is. 6d. Stevenson, R. L. Father Damien: An Open Letter to the Reverend Doctor Hyde, of Honolulu, from. u. Tytler, Sarah. A Voung Oxford Maid in the Days of the King and the Parliament. Illustrated, y. 6d. Warden, Florence. City and Surburban: A Novel. is. and is. 6d. Nurse Revel s Mistake: A Novel. Fifth Edition, is. Westall, William. Two Pinches of Snuff: A Novel New Edition. 2s. and 2s. td.  ## p. 160 (#196) ############################################ ]6o AD VERTISEMENTS. "THE LITERARY HAJYDJHAID OF THE CHURCH-" HENRY GLAISHER, 95, STRAND. Price ONE SHILLING. NOW READY. This pamphlet is a reply to the invitation issued by the Publication Committee of the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge in their Report of last year, for any suggestions, which they "will gladly receive," on the best way of making "the Venerable Society the most efficient literary handmaid of the Church of England throughout the world." The suggestions offered in these pages contain, first, some of the elementary principles which guide honourable men in the administration of literary property. The writer next advances three cases, as illustrating the methods adopted by the Society. A copy of this pamphlet will be sent to any member of the Society by application to the Office, including two postage stamps. THE METHODS OF PUBLICATION. BY S. S. SPRIGGE, B.A. NOW READY. This book, compiled mainly from documents in the office of the Society of Authors, is intended to show a complete conspectus of all the various methods of publication with the meaning of each; that is to say, the exact concessions to publishers and the reservation of the owner and author of the work. The different frauds which arise out of these methods form a necessary part of the book. Nothing is advanced which has not been proved by the experience of the Society.  ## p. 161 (#197) ############################################ The Society of Authors (Jncorporated). PRESIDENT The Right Ilon. THE LORD TENNYSON, D.C.L. SIR EDWIN ARNOLD, K.C.S.I. ALFRED AUSTIN, ROBERT BATEMAN. SIR HENRY BERGNE. WALTER BESANT. R. D. BLACKMORE. Rev. Prof. BONNEY, F.R.S. LORD BRABOURNE. JAMES BRYCE. P. W. CLAYDEN. J. Comexs Carr. EDWARD CLODD. W. MARTIN CONWAY. MARION CRAWFORD. Oswald CRAWFURD. THE EARL OF DESART. A. W. DUBOURG. ERIC ERICHSEN, F.R.S. Prof. MICHAEL Foster, F.R.S. HERBERT Gardner, M.P. Richard GARNETT, LL.D. COUNCIL. EDMUND GOSSE. H. RIDER HAGGARD. THOMAS HARDY. PROF. E. RAY LANKESTER, F.R.S. Rev. W. J. LOFTIE, F.S.A. GEORGE MEREDITH. HERMAN C. MERIVALE. 1. C. PARKINSON. The EARL OF PEMBROKE AND MONTGOMERY. Sir FREDERICK POLLOCK, Bart., LL.D. WALTER HERRIES POLLOCK. A. G. Ross. George AUGUSTUS Sala. W. BAPTISTE SCOONES. G. R. Sims. J. J. STEVENSON. JAS. SULLY. William MoY THOMAS. H. D. TRAILL, D.C.L. EDMUND YATES. Hon. Counsel-E. M. UNDERDOWN, Q.C. Auditor-Rev. C. H. MIDDLETON-Wake, F.L.S. COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT. Robert BATEMAN. W. MARTIN CONWAY. I EL MUND GO Chairman-WALTER BESANT. EDMUND Gosse. H. RIDER HAGGARD. A. G. Ross. J. M. Lely. SIR FREDERICK POLLOCK. Solicitors. Messrs. Field, Roscoe & Co., Lincoln's Inn Fields. Secretary--S. SQUIRE SPRIGGE. OFFICES. 4, Portugal Street, LINCOLN's Inn Fields, W.C. VOL. I. M  ## p. 162 (#198) ############################################ 162 ADVERTISEMENTS. TYPE-WRITING. MISS ETHEL DICKENS, TYPE-WRITING OFFICE, AUTHORS' MSS. CAREFULLY TRANSCRIBED. 26, WELLINGTON STREET, STRAND Writings by Post receive prompt attention. (Over the Ofhce of " All the Year Round"). SCIENTIFIC & MEDICAL PAPERS A SPECIALITY. MSS. copied. Price List on application. MRS. GILL, MISSES ERWIN, TYPE-WRITING OFFICE, 13, DORSET STREET, PORTMAN SQUARE, W. ST. PAUL'S CHAMBERS, 19, LUDGATE HILL, E.C. Authors' MSS. carefully copied from MISS GILL, I/- per 1,000 words. One additional copy (carbon) supplied free of charge. References kindly permitted to many TYPE-WRITING OFFICES well-known Authors and Publishers. Further particulars on application. 6, ADAM STREET, TYPE - WRITING & SHORTHAND. STRAND, W.C. | JO, DARKE, M.T.S., LION * CHAMBERS, * BROAD – STREET, “The best of all Journals.” BRISTOL. Published every FRIDAY, price 2d. The advantages of Type-written Manuscript are LEGIBILITY, NEATNESS, RAPIDITY, and Ease of Manifolding. DR. ANDREW WILSON, F.R.S.E. Now is the time to subscribe. | AUTHORS MANUSCRIPTS, &c., prepared for the A New Vol. commenced Publisher. 4th April, 1890. Companies* Reports and patent @gentot Send Specifications Dritten up and Post-card for Specimen Copy. Manifolded. LITHOGRAPHY froin TYPING done in the best To be had at all Railway Bookstalls and Style. Newsagents, or direct from the Publisher- MEMORY LESSONS IN TYPING GIVEN BY 2, PATERNOSTER SQUARE, LONDON, E.C. POST. WRITE FOR TERMS. ESTABLISHED 1851. BIRKB E C K B A N K , SOUTHAMPTON BUILDINGS, CHANCERY LANE. THREE per CENT. INTEREST allowed on DEPOSITS, repayable on demand. TWO per CENT. INTEREST on CURRENT ACCOUNTS when not drawn below £100. STOCKS, SHARES, and ANNUITIES purchased and sold. SAVINGS DEPARTMENT. For the encouragement of Thrift the Bank receives small sums on deposit, and allows interest, at the rate of THREE per CENT. per Annum, on each completed ki. The Interest is added to the principal on the 31st March annually. FRANCIS RAVENSCROFT, Manager. EDITED BY HE ALT H. A WEEKLY JOURNAL OF SANITARY AND DOMESTIC SCIENCE. HOW TO PURCHASE A HOUSE FOR TWO GUINEAS PER MONTH, OR A PLOT OF LAND FOR FIVE SHILLINGS PER MONTH, with immediate possession. Apply at Office of the BirKBECK FREEHOLD LAND SOCIETY. THE BIRKBECK ALMANACK, with full particulars post free on application. FRANCIS RAVENSCROFT, Manager.  ## p. 162 (#199) ############################################ ADVERTISEMENTS. THIS VIEW IS REPRODUCED FROM A PHOTOGRAPH OFAN OPERATOR & THE BAR-LOCK TYPE-WRITER saves the eyesight. THE BAR-LOCK TYPE-WRITER prevents writer's cramp. THE BAR-LOCK TYPE-WRITER prevents round shoulders. THE BAR-LOCK TYPE-WRITER enables you to keep pace with your thoughts, the operation requires less mental effort than the use of a pen, allowing you to concentrate your mind more fully on the matter you are writing on. The writing of the BAR-LOCK TYPE-WRITER is equal to a printed proof, and can be used as such for corrections, thus saving large printer's charges which are sufficient in many books to defray the cost of a Bar-Lock. TYPEWRITER WRITING AT 4 TIMES THE SPEED OF A PEN Supplied for Caslı, or on Our Easy Payment System by Twelve Monthly Payments of £1 19s., or on Hire at £2 2s. per Month. CORRESPONDENCE AND INSPECTION INVITED. . THE TYPE WRITER CO., Ltd., 12, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, LONDON. 40. North John St., Liverpool; Guardian Bldgs., Manchealer: 22. Renfeld St., Glasgow; Ex- change Bldg., Cardiff ; 885, Little Collins St.. Melbourne THE TYPE-WRITER COMPANY, Limited, • 12 & 14, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, É.C. 40, North John Street, Liverpool; 22, Renfield Street, Glasgow; 25, Market Street, Manchester; Exchange Building, Cardiff; 385, Little Collins Street, Melbourne, Type-Writing Taught by Experts. Author's MSS. Copied at is. 3d. per 1,000 Words at all Our Offices. PUBLICATIONS OF THE SOCIETY. 1. The Annual Report. That for January, 1890, can be had on application to the Secretary. 2. The Author. A Monthly Journal devoted especially to the protection and maintenance of Literary Property. Issued to all members. 3. The Grievances of Authors. (Field & Tuer.) 25. The Report of three Meetings on the general subject of Literature and its defence, held at Willis's Rooms, March, 1887. 4. Literature and the Pension List. By W. MORRIS COLLES, Barrister-at-Law. (Henry Glaisher, 95, Strand, W.C.) 45. 6d. 5. The History of the Société des Gens de Lettres. By S. SQUIRE Sprigge, Secretary to the Society. 15. 6. The Cost of Production. In this work specimens are given of the most important forms of type, size of page, &c., with estimates showing what it costs to produce the more common kinds of books. The work is printed for members of the Society only. 25. 6d. (A new Edition preparing.) 7. The Various Methods of Publication. By S. SQUIRE SPRIGGE. In this work, compiled from the papers in the Society's offices, the various kinds of agreements proposed by Publishers to Authors are examined, and their meaning carefully explained, with an account of the various kinds of fraud which have been made possible by the different clauses in their agreements. The book is nearly ready, and will be issued as soon as possible. Other works bearing on the Literary Profession will follow.  ## p. 162 (#200) ############################################ iv. ADVERTISEMENTS. NEW MODEL REMINGTON STANDARD TYPEWRITER. MA III For Fifteen Years the Standard, and to-day the most perfect development of the writing machine, embodying the latest and highest achievements of inventive and mechanical skill. We add to the Remington every improve- ment that study and capital can secure. I WYCKOFF, SEAMANS & BENEDICT, Principal Office- LONDON: 100, GRACECHURCH STREET, E.C. (CORNER OF LEADENHALL STREET). Branch Offices-- LIVERPOOL: CENTRAL BUILDINGS, NORTH JOHN STREET. BIRMINGHAM: 88, COLMORE ROW. MANCHESTER : 8, MOULT STREET. Printed for the Society, by HARRISON & SONS, 45, 46, and 47, St. Martin's Lane, in the Parish of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, in the City of Westeninster, Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Author, Vol. 01 Issue 06 (October 1890) Subject The topic of the resource <em>The Author</em>, Vol. 01 Issue 06 (October 1890) Type The nature or genre of the resource Publication Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 1890-10-15-The-Author-1-6 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015031017927&amp;view=1up&amp;seq=20" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015031017927</a> publications The Author