https://historysoa.com/files/original/5/483/1903-05-01-The-Author-13-8.pdf 377e4d3dfcab8c24b995cf26ba900624 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) 1903-05-01 Volume 13 Issue 8 Pages Page range in volume 193–224 Ngram Date Version of the date in YYYYMMDD format for use by the Ngram plugin 19030501 Ngram Text Version of the text with no HTML formatting for use by the Ngram plugin Che Huthor. (The Organ of the Incorporated Society of Authors. Monthly.) FOUNDED BY SIR WALTER BESANT. Vou. XIII.—No. 8. May ist, 1903. [PRICE SIXPENCE. THE TELEPHONE. The Telephone connection has now been estab- lished, and the Society’s number is— 374 VICTORIA. ——_>— > —_____ NOTICES. —— + OR the opinions expressed in papers that are K signed or initialled the authors alone are responsible. None of the papers or para- graphs must be taken as expressing the opinion of the Committee unless such is especially stated to be the case. Tue Editor begs to inform members of the Authors’ Society and other readers of The Author that the cases which are from time to time quoted in The Author are cases that have come before the notice or to the knowledge of the Secretary of the Society, and that those members of the Society who desire to have the names of the publishers concerned can obtain them on application. —+-—~— + —_ List of Members. Tue List of Members of the Society of Authors can now be obtained at the offices of the Society, at the price of 6d. net. It will be sold to the members of the Society only. ——— + The Pension Fund of the Society. THE investments of the Pension Fund at present standing in the names of the Trustees are as follows. This is a statement of the actual stock; the Vou. XIII. money value can be easily worked out at the current price of the market :— RO 2 en £1000 0 0 G8 08s 500 0 0 Victorian Government 3 % Consoli- dated Inscribed Stock ............... 291 19 11 We A i 201 8 8 otal 2. £1,993 9 2 SPECIAL APPEAL. Tue Appeal sent out by the Chairman of the Society at the request of the Pension Fund Com- mittee has been very successful. The total amount of subscriptions and donations up to Dec. 1st is :—Subscriptions, £46 8s. 6d.; donations, £116 14s. 6d. Further additions to either list are set out below. Subscriptions. Dec. 1, Finnemore, Mrs. . . £0 Dec. 3, Caulfield, Miss Sophia < 0-1 Dec. 5, Hecht, Mrs. . s 02 » Hamilton, Mrs. G. W. 1 . Brinton, Selwyn 0 Dec. 9, Dill, Miss Bessie 0 Dec. 18, Sutherland, Her Grace the Duchess of : : : Dec. 19, Toplis, Miss Grace . Dec. 22, Anonymous ; Dec. 29, Seton-Karr, H. W. Pike Clement, E. 19038. Jan. 1, Pickthall, Marmaduke 3 Deane, Rev. A.C. . Jan. 4, Anonymous Heath, Miss Ida i Russell, G. H. : Jan. 16, White, Mrs. Caroline 5, Bedford, Miss Jessie Jan. 19, Shiers-Mason, Mrs. Jan. 20, Cobbett, Miss Alice : ; Jan. 30, Minniken, Miss Bertha M. M. — OOS Orn ooocoece ooocoo oOocooaceg 9 22 me Oo Oo Or COCO So OS Oo > bo or on eoooocoocooooan  194 Jan. 31, Whishaw, Fred. > 6 Keb. 3, Reynolds, Mrs. Fred 0 Feb. 11, Lincoln, C. 0 Feb. 16, Hardy, J. Herbert . 0 » Haggard, Major Arthur . 0 Feb. 23, Finnemore, John . : 0 Mar. 2, Moor, Mrs. St. C. . 1 Mar. 5, Dutton, Mrs. Carrie 0 Apl. 10, Bird, C. P. 0 Apl. 10, Campbell, Miss Montgomery . ( oC Donations. Dec. 1, Sanderson, Sir J. Burdon 5 - Smith, G. C. Moore 1 Dec. 2, T'revor-Battye, Aubyn 1 » Marks, Mrs. . 0 Dec. 9, Moore, Henry Charles (0 Dee. 11, Lutzow, Count 9 », “Leicester Romayne ” 0 », Hellier, H. George. 1 Dee. 12, Croft, Miss Lily 0 », Panting, J. Harwood 0 » ‘attersall, Miss Louisa . 0 Dec. 19, Egbert, Henry 0 Dec. 23, Muirhead, James F. 0 Dec. 28, A. 8. 1 » Bateman, Stringer . 0 Dec. 31, Cholmondeley, Miss Mary . 10 1908. Jan. 3, Wheelright, Miss E. : 0 5 Middlemass, 1] Miss Jean . 0 Jan. 6, Avebury, The R ight Hon. The Lord . : » Gribble, Francis : Jan. 13, Boddington, Miss Helen . Jan. 17, White, Mrs. Wollaston » Miller, Miss E. T. . Jan. 19, Kemp, Miss Geraldine Jan. 20, Sheldon, Mrs. French Jan. 29, Roe, Mrs. Harcourt Feb. 9, Sherwood, Mrs... Feb. 16, Hocking, The Rey. Silas Feb. 18, Boulding, J. W. . 5, Ord, Hubert H. Feb. 20, Price, Miss Eleanor » Carlile, Rev. J. CO. . Feb. 24, Dixon, Mrs. Feb. 26, Speakman, “Mrs. Mar. 5, Parker, Mrs. Nella Mar. 16, Hallward, N. L. . Mar. 20, Henry, Miss Alice . Mar. 20, Mathieson, Miss Annie . Mar. 20, Browne, T. A. “ Rolfe Boldre- wood” A Mar. 23, Ward, Mrs. Humphry : Api. 2, Hutton, The Rev. W. H. Apl. 14, Tournier, Theodore cCorcezocoorecocooresm fon = tec Or Or or or — ee acnc es acounorce e H corcauno Cire — i0 THE AUTHOR. caoamoococceo cooooccoococeocesco eageocooco eoocoo The following members have also made subscrip- tions or donations :— Meredith, George, President of the Society. Thompson, Sir ood Bart., F.R.C.S, Rashdall, The Rey. H Guthrie, Anstey. Robertson, C, Dowsett, G, R ‘here are in addition other subscribers who do not desire that either their names or the amount they are subscribing should be printed. SPECIAL. CONDITIONAL SUBSCRIPTIONS. Subscriptions, Hawkins, A. Hope : ‘ £10 0 6 Barrie, J. M. . ; : : . 10 0 0 Drummond, Hamilton : ; - 10.0 0 Wynne, Charles Whitworth : - 10 0 0 Gilbert, W. 8S. . : : ; - 10-0 9 Sturgis, Julian . : : : - 10 0 0 oe Sir Walter Besant Memorial Fund. THE amount standing to the credit of this account in the Bank is......... £330 3 6 There are a few promised subscriptions still outstanding. The total of these about £4. The subscriptions received from July 1st to the date of issue are given below :— Patterson, A. . : : 8 Salwey, Reginald E. Gidley, Miss E. C. Nixon, Prof. J. E. Dill, Miss Bessie Moore, Henry Charles Kemp, Miss Geraldine Clarke, Miss B. ao acnanoor _ eco coc oF —_—_——_——_-—___+____—_ FROM THE COMMITTEE. —+-~> + T the meeting of the Committee held on the 30th of March twelve new members and associates were elected to the Society. Their names are, as usual, printed below. Mr. George Gissing and Mr. Justin McCarthy were elected members of the Council. They have consented to accept the responsibilities of the position. There was only one case before the Committee, and it was adjourned for fuller information on one or two points. is, roughly, ©  nt THE AUTHOR. Elections. “Ben Marlas”’ Bird, C. P. (D. I, M.) Drybridge House, Hereford. Bowman, Robert Cynwyd, Curwen, N. Wales. Corelli, Miss Marie. Mason Croft, Stratford- on-A von. 11, Chaleote Gardens, England’s Lane, N.W. Exeter College, Oxford. Dearmer, The Rev. Percy Donovan, P. V. de P. Douglas, Miss Maud 28, Oakley Street, Tsidore Chelsea, S.W. Douglas, Robert Langton 50c, South Street, Dorking. Lechmere, Mrs. (Cecil 29, Cadogan Gardens, Haselwood) S.W. Stott, Miss Beatrice Moorside Road, Flix- ton. Sutro, Alfred 10, Russell Mansions, W.-C: Wyatt, Geo. Herbert Henley House, West Side, Wandsworth Common, 8.W. —_—>—+— Another Pension. Iy the month of May the Pension Fund Com- mittee will proceed to consider applications for pensions to be granted under the Pension Fund Scheme of the Society of Authors. Pursuant to the power to make bye-laws for regulating appli- cations for pensions vested in the Committee by the Schenie, the Committee have made and hereby give notice of the following regulations :— 1. All applications must be in writing and addressed to the Secretary of the Society of Authors at the Offices of the Society (39, Old Queen Street, Storey’s Gate, S.W.), and must reach the Secretary on or before June Ist, 1903. Envelopes should be marked “ Confidential.” 2. Applications may be made (a) by the appli- cant for a pension, (/) by any two members of the Society on the applicant’s behalf. In the latter case the Committee may require the applicant to signify in writing his willingness to accept a pension if granted. 3. Applications must state, to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person or persons making the same : (a) The fall name, description, and present address of the applicant. If the applicant has written under an assumed name such name should also be given, (6) The age of the applicant and the date at which the applicant became a member of the If the applicant has ceased to be a Society. member, the date of his or her retirement must be given. (¢) The financial position of the applicant, including an account of the applicant’s entire annual income from all sources (including volun- tary allowances, if any). (d) The names of the publications relied on to establish the merit of the applicant’s literary work. 4, Applications may, if desired, be accompanied by not more than two testimonials to the appli- cant’s character, and to merits of the applicant’s works or either of them, and bya further statement of the applicant’s financial position from some person acquainted therewith. 5. Applications and the contents of all state- ments relating thereto will be treated as confiden- tial, the names of the recipients of the pensions and the amounts granted alone being stated in Zhe Author. 6. All communications’ whatever must be ad- dressed to the Secretary, and to him only. Canvassing of members of the Committee, either by or on behalf of the applicant, is prohibited. 7. The pension created will be granted as from March 25th, 1903, and will be payable, as to the first instalment immediately, and thereafter in quarterly instalments in advance on the usual English quarter days. By order of the Pension Fund Committee, G. HERBERT THRING, Secretary. 4 OUR BOOK AND PLAY TALK. i HE Rev. Edwin A. Abbott, D.D., formerly Headmaster of the City of London School, and author of “ The Spirit on the Waters,” ** Newmanism,” “ Through Nature to Christ,” etc., has just published (Adam and Charles Black) a very interesting and scholarly pamphlet, entitled “ Contrast; or, a Prophet and a Forger.” Dr. Abbott is convinced that the author of the Fourth Gospel is often, historically as well as spiritually, closer than the Synoptic Evangelists to the truthful conception of the birth, nature, life, and resurrection of our Lord. At the same time he is firmly convinced that the author was not the son of Zebedee, nor an eye-witness of the facts he relates. He was one who considered him- self but the pen of John the son of Zebedee, and gave unity to the preaching and revelations of John. Dr. Abbott has in the press a work entitled “From Letter to Spirit; an Attempt to Reach through Voicesand Words the Man beyond them”’ (Adam and Charles Black). 196 Sir Lewis Morris has added to the last edition of his works, to be published immediately, several poems written last year, including the lines on “The Peace Thanksgiving in St. Paul’s,” “The Coronation Ode,” written by the King’s request, and set to music by command, by Dr. Cowen ; “ Peripeteia,” or an pode, which appeared in the Times ; the announcement of the King’s illness ; the lines on “The Last Pageant,” of October 26th, and the “Ode on the Installation of the Prince of Wales as Chancellor of the Welsh University at Bangor.” ‘The new issue comprises also the lines on “The Jubilee of the Free Libraries at Manchester,” held as late as the 3rd of the present month. Sir Lewis, we understand, is now desirous of bringing his poetical career to a close, if his friends the public will permit. Lieut.-Colonel E. Gunter has published, through Messrs. Wm. Clowes & Sons, Limited, 28, Cock- spur Street, S.W., a seventh edition of his military pocket-book, ‘‘ The Officer’s Field Note, and Sketch Book and Reconnaissance Aide-Mémoire,” which was much used by officers during the late Boer War. This edition, which has been brought up to date, contains the amendments in war establish- ments, new sketches, showing the latest designs for field trenches, etc., as the result of the war experi- ences, and other matter useful for field training, besides materials for Field Sketches and Reports. The Religious Tract Society has shown its appreciation of Sir William Charley’s recent work, “The Holy City, Athens and Egypt,” by placing in their saloon, 56, Paternoster Row, and 65, St. Paul’s Churchyard, copies of the work for sale. This volume is founded on personal obser- vation and the researches of modern explorers, and is a vindication of the Bible narrative against the assaults of the Higher Criticism. Sir William has written a lecture on “The Higher Criticism and the Bible,” which he will shortiy deliver. Sir William Charley’s legal works, “The Real Property Acts” (Sweet) and “The Judicature Acts” (Waterlow), each ran through three editions and are now out of print. But there are three of his books still in circulation: “The Crusade against the Constitution; an Historical Vindication of the House of Lords” (7s. 6d., Sampson Low); “Ending and Mending the House of Lords” (2s. 6d., Simpkin, Marshall); and the above-mentioned “The Holy City, Athens and Egypt” (10s. 6d., Marshall Bros.). “The Sword of Azrael,’ Mr. R. E. Forrest’s latest novel, is a chronicle of the Great Mutiny. The title-page has it that the writer is Major- General John Hayman, late Hon. E.I.C.S., edited by R. E. Forrest. This is, of course, a mere literary device. We will not divulge the plot of this vividly written story; our readers can THE AUTHOR. follow John Hayman’s realistic narrative for themselves ; they will find it very interesting, , Mr. Forrest has published four books, all con- nected with India. The first one, entitled “The Touchstone of Peril,” was most favourably re- viewed. The second, “ Hight Days,” came out in the Cornhill Magazine, and in book form went through four or five editions. The third was “The Bond of Blood” (Little Novels series : T. Fisher Unwin). It was a small book that evoked many long reviews; notably it had a favourable mention in an Ldinburgh Review article on Anglo-Indian Novelists, known to have been written by Sir Alfred Lyall. Miss Beatrice Marshall has in hand a story of London in the time of the Commonwealth, which will be published next autumn by Seely & Co. Her “ The Siege of York,” a story of the days of Thomas Lord Fairfax (Seely & Co.), published last year, proves that she has inherited her mother’s literary gifts. This was Miss Marshall’s second historical romance, the first being “ Old Blackfriars in the Days of Sir Anthony Vandyck.” When Mrs. Emma Marshall died in 1899 her last story was left incomplete. At the request of her publishers it was-finished by her daughter, and so successfully finished that Miss Beatrice Marshall was encouraged to tread further in her mother’s footsteps. Previous to this she had contributed articles, chiefly on modern German literature, to several papers. Two of these, one on Nietzsche and another on Gerhard Hauptmann, appeared in the Fortnightly Review. After the appearance of her translation of Sudermann’s great novel “Der Kalzensky” (John Lane), Messrs. Smith Elder invited her to take part in the translation of the Bismarck Memoirs. The biographical sketch of her mother has gone into a second edition. It contains a por- trait of that prolific novelist besides twelve illus- trations (6s., Seeley & Co.). The writing of it was a real labour of love. Mr. William Westall, in spite of ill-health, has nearly finished a present-day novel which he pro- poses to call “ Dr. Wynne’s Revenge.” He hopes soon to begin a long contemplated Lancashire story, dealing with the stirring period of the cotton famine and the American Civil War. Ian Maclaren (the Rev. John Watson) is not at present engaged in any literary work owing to considerations of health. Mr. Walter Jerrold is editing a big collection of Nursery Rhymes for Messrs. Blackie. There are to be numerous illustrations by Charles Robinson. Besides this Mr. Jerrold is editing (1) Mrs. Gaskell’s “Life of Charlotte Bronté” for Dents’ Temple Classics; (2) “ Longfellow’s Poetical Works” for a new series of Poets to be published  THE AUTHOR. by Messrs. W. Collins & Sons; (3) and he is also editing Dents’ edition of Thackeray’s Prose Works. Mr. Robert Machray’s new serial, “ The Mystery of Lincoln’s Inn,” started in 7%t-Bits on April 11th, where it will appear for the next three or four months. The story, which Mr. Machray describes as an ‘“‘experiment in sensation,” will be published in book form by Messrs. Chatto and Windus in September. ‘The Mystery of Lincoln’s Inn” is built round that somewhat familiar fact of every- day life, the defaulting solicitor. Miss Montgomery-Campbell has written a Pre- face to a volume, shortly to be issued, entitled “ Old Days in Diplomacy.” It is by the daughter of Sir Edward Cromwell Disbrowe, En. Ex., Min. Plen., G.C.G., and is inscribed to the Honble. Mrs. Richard Boyle (E. V. B.). This volume, illustrated with portraits, is 7s. 6d. net—by post 7s. 11d. The edition is strictly limited, and the price will probably be raised in the case of those who do not subscribe for it. “Old Days in Diplomacy,” written at the request of many friends, gives an account of life at the Courts of Russia, Wiirtemberg, Sweden, and the Netherlands, during the first half of the nineteenth century. The ceremonies at the foneral of the Emperor Alexander and the Coro- nation of the Emperor Nicholas are described, also the official visits of the Dukes of Wellington and Devonshire to St. Petersburg, as well as the inter- course with Prince Metternich. It contains many most interesting personal recollections of royalties and celebrities at home and abroad. A fifteenth edition of Lieut-Colonel Sisson C. Pratt’s “Military Law, its Procedure and Prac- tice,” was published a short time ago, and a fifth edition of the “ Military Law Examiner” (Gale and Polden) will be issued this spring. Before long Lieut.-Colonel Pratt will have to take in hand the revision of the official “‘ Précis of Modern Tactics,” which was re-written by him, and in view of the recent experiences in South Africa a new edition will be of general interest. Mr. Morley Roberts’ new book, ‘‘ The Promotion of The Admiral, and other Sea Comedies,” is a volume of short stories well worth reading. The first, which gives the book its title, is in two parts, and tells how Shanghai Smith, of San Francisco, tries to get even with a sailor who had once given him a thorough licking; this sailor being now Rear-Admiral Sir Richard Dunn, K.C.B. How Shanghai Smith is himself paid out and how the Admiral comes up top we will not reveal. “The Scuttling of the Pandora,” the last in the book, is a remarkable little tale of an unlucky ship. Here is a passage from it :— ‘‘T want to see her sink,” Joe said savagely. “I want to see ’er go where she’s put so many good men. What 197 right ‘as we to save ’er to do more ’arm? It ain’t alone as she’s drownded my chum or the others, but she ’as a black record that ain’t finished unless we finish it. She’s strong and will go on killin’ for twenty years, Geordie. She'll oa praney for them as doesn’t care, but what of the likes of us ?* He was greatly moved. “She’s caulked with men’s lives, and painted with their blood!” he cried passionately. “I'd rather she sunk with me than sailed the seas any more.” Mr. Charles Whitworth Wynne, author of «Ad Astra,” &c., has just published through Messrs. Kegan Paul a drama in five acts, called “David and Bathshua.” It is founded on the story in the Bible, and Saul, Jonathan, Abner, Uriah, Natham, Michal, and Merab are among the dramatis persone. Mr. F. Marion Crawford’s fascinating book “ Ave Roma Immortalis,” being studies from the Chronicles of Rome, has gone into a second and cheaper edition. In his “Studies in Contemporary Biography,” Mr. Bryce gives us twenty graphic impressions of twenty notable men. Lord Beaconsfield, Mr. Gladstone, Dean Stanley, Anthony Trollope, Mr. Parnell, Archbishop Tait, Cardinal Manning, Lord Acton, are among the personalities presented to us in these interesting pages of biographies. This is a book not to be missed. Miss May Crommelin’s “Midge” forms No, 51 of the Weekly Telegraph novels. This is “‘a monthly series of copyright books by the best authors.” “Midge” is a readable story. Miss Iza Duffus Hardy has written No. 31 of this series, ‘‘ Hearts or Diamonds.” John Strange Winter has contributed No. 46 of the same series, “Mignon’s Secret.’ No. 48 is “The Dancer in Yellow,” by Mr. W. E. Norris; No, 47, “The Peer and the Woman,” is by E. P. Oppenheim. ; “Helen” is the name of a new story by Cherry Rowland—a pleasant tale with a happy ending. Copies can be had of the writer at Llwyn-y-brain, Whitland, South Wales. Mr. I. Zangwill’s “ The Grey Wig ” (Heinemann) is a collection of stories old and new. ‘“ Merely Mary Ann” is an old one, but is none the less welcome for that. “The Grey Wig,” the first, and we fancy one of his latest, is very good indeed. In his recently published book “The Danger of Innocence,” Mr. Cosmo Hamilton has given us asmart Society satire. It is published by Greening & Co. at 6s. Mr. J. Bloundelle Burton’s novel, “A Branded Name” (Methuen, 6s.), is full of incident. The name, branded on a woman’s shoulder, was a mark that would remain upon that shoulder as long as her life would last.  198 The “Star-Dreamer,” by Agnes and Egerton Castle, is full of charm—‘ the story of a woman’s influence.’ The atmosphere of a herb-garden and a laboratory respectively permeate the tale. In Sydney ©. Grier’s “The Advanced Guard” (Blackwood, 6s.), the hero is Sir Dugald Haigh, who was doubtfully blest with an uncomfortable wife. The story begins in India; the time is, the ‘* Dickens period.” Mr. Rider Haggard’s new romance, “Pearl Maiden” (Longmans, 6s.), is interesting from start to finish. Miriam, the Pearl Maiden, is born aboard a Phcenician merchant galley bound for Alexandria. Miriam is brought up among the Essenes. She endures many things during and after the siege and fall of Jerusalem. In this portion of the romance Mr. Rider Haggard has surpassed himself. Mr. William Archer’s article in the April Fort- nightly Review has been attracting a great deal of attention. He advocates the formation of a Critical Court of Honour to which disputed ques- tions theatrical should be referred. He suggests that a body of six delegates should be selected from the representative societies of the different classes interested, viz., the Society of Authors, the Institute of Journalists, and the Actors’ Associa- tion. ‘These delegates to elect an additional member as president with a casting vote. Com- plainants would be expected to appear before this board, and Mr. Archer says, ‘‘ We may be sure that a plaintiff who had refused to submit his case to its arbitration would go into the law courts under a heavy handicap.” We understand that the leading réle in Mr. Sydney Grundy’s new play, Zhe Gipsy, is to be played—created, in fact—by Miss Fay Davis. —_—— + +-____- PARIS NOTES. —1—~<—+ MONG the recent novels which have had the greatest success here are “ Dona- tienne,” by M. René Bazin; “L’Inutile Effort,” by M. Edouard Rod, and ‘‘ La Nouvelle Espérance” by the Comtesse de Noailles. Curiously enough, in each of these three books the most prominent feminine character is an absolutely selfish woman singularly devoid of conscience. Donatienne, in M. Bazin’s story, is the young wife of a Breton peasant. She is the mother of three children and the idol of her husband, but poverty compels her to leave the little cottage Just home and engage herself as nurse in Paris. THE AUTHOR. continual presence of the husband’s _ details to the end of the volume. at first she sends her earnings to her husband to enable him to keep the little home together until better times. Gradually, however, she becomes accustomed to the luxuries and amusements of her new life Her letters to her husband are rare and finally cease altogether. The poor Breton peasant is somewhat slow of comprehension, but when it dawns upon him that his wife hus no intention of returning to her family, the little home, with its memories, becomes unbearable to him, and with his three children he sets out with a vague idea of seeking his fortune elsewhere. The story is most pathetic and the dénouement both touching and tragic. It is told with a simplicity that adds greatly to the pathos. There is not a word too much, not a line of any descrip- tion which could be omitted, and the book is certainly one of the finest of M. Bazin’s novels. “L’Inutile Effort” is a. masterly study of character. Leonard Perreuse is the ambitious man of our modern society, the man whose one object in life is to succeed. He is seconded by a wife who is narrow-minded, selfish and unscrupu- lous. They are both somewhat hampered by the brother Raymond, a man who has not advanced or rather degenerated with the times, and who is old- fashioned enough to have a conscience. The story of the book turns on the trial of a French girl in London, who has been arrested on the charge of murdering her child by pushing it into the Thames. On reading the account in the newspaper both brothers are convinced that the child is Leonard’s, and they are equally convinced that the poor girl whom he deserted is incapable of the crime of which she is accused. Raymond, who had always blamed his brother’s conduct in this matter, had taken an interest in the girl, kept up a corre- spondence with her for some years, and helped her when, through illness, she had been in difficulties. He persuades Leonard that their duty now is to go to London and give their evidence in favour of the prisoner. Leonard’s wife, fearing the consequences of ascandal for herself and her children, insists that her husband must relinquish this plan. Raymond, in his indignation, refuses to enter his brother's house again. “Ihe unfortunate girl is condemned to death, and from that moment Leonard’s punish- ment begins. His conscience is aroused at last, and in desperation he leaves everything and goes with Raymond to London to see if anything can now be done. We will not spoil the story by telling all the It is a book in which all the characters live, and it is undoubtedly the strongest of M. Rod’s novels. THE AUTHOR. As regards ‘La Nouvelle Espérance,’ by the Comtesse de Noailles, the title is quite misleading. From the first page to the last of the book one searches in vain for the “new hope.” With such a fine title one naturally expects some elevated thoughts and ideas, but the whole book is “ of the earth, earthy,” with a woman as the principal character who is positively repulsive. ‘‘ The Degenerates’”’ would have been a more suitable title for such a novel, as, with the exception of the unfortunate husband of the heroine, all the cha- racters are more or less unwholesome. There is very little plot or even story to the book. It is merely the account of an idle, selfish, luxurious woman, who imagines herself ultra-refined and who has no aim or object in life. She has a devoted husband whose chief fault appears to be his blindness to his wife’s defects. Having absolutely nothing to do, she is naturally bored to death, and being an extremely self-centred person she spends hours brooding over her own feelings and sensations. She then endeavours to make love to various friends of her husband. Her third attempt, only, is a success, and this liaison with a married man relieves the monotony of her life until the new lover discovers that he has a conscience and retires with his wife to the country. The extraordinary feature of this book is the absolute depravity of the woman, which, consider- ing her education and surroundings, makes the whole story appear unreal. When her lover goes away she decides that she cannot live without him, and without the slightest compunction as far as her husband is concerned, she prepares a strong dose of morphia, writes a farewell letter to the recreant lover, which she leaves for her husband’s sister to forward, and when the clock strikes midnight takes her departure from this world. In this farewell letter she says, “Vous m’aimiez et vous €tes parti parce que votre femme et votre fils yous Pont demandé. . . . Vous avez fait ce que vous deviez faire : les hommes ont de la conscience. Les femmes, mon ami, n’ont pas de conscience ; elles ont une épouvantable volonté de n’étre pas plus malheureuses qu’elles ne peuvent.” _ On closing the book one can only wonder why it should have been written. As a great French eritic said about the works of another author: “ When such things are read and meet with success, eritics can only write a page of history on the Manners and customs of a society which reads such 00ks,” “La Bastille des Comédiens ” is the title of the new book by M. Frantz Funck-Brentano, the well- snown author of “ Le Drame des Poisons” and L’ Affaire du Collier.” In January, 1902, the Société de I’Histoire du 199 théatre opened a competition for a study on For PEvéque, the famous prison in which so many comedians, dramatic authors and critics were incar- cerated. So little was known about this old prison that it has been no easy task to collect the necessary information from the various libraries and the national archives. M. Funck-Brentano’s work was unanimously declared to be the best, and the volume now pub- lished, illustrated with eleven engravings, is a most interesting study of Old Paris and its history and customs. About a third of the book is taken up with a description of the prison itself and its history, while the remaining two-thirds tell us of the strange customs of those bye-gone days, when prisoners were notified that they were sentenced to a few days’ seclusion, and accordingly wended their way to the prison unescorted. The author tells us amusing stories, too, of the way in which fathers could have their sons im- prisoned for a short time. In 1744 a M. Thibaut, of Bordeaux, writes to the police-lieutenant of Paris to the effect that his son, aged thirty, is in the gay capital. ‘He is leading a dissipated life,” writes the anxious father, “and the result may be that he will disgrace his family.” All that’ the father asks is that his son may be detained in prison for a short time and he is quite willing to pay the expenses. The police-lieutenant investi- gates the case, and signs a paper on the 5th of April, “ Bon pour prison, aux dépens du pere.” The son objects to the hospitality provided for him and appeals for a release. The father’s consent to this is necessary, and on the 25th of April, evidently considering that the lesson has had time to be beneficial, he signs the paper for the release of his son. Comedians who were wanting in respect either to the king or to their public were detained at For l’Evéque for a time, and we are told many amusing anecdotes about them. Life in this prison was by no means monotonous, and some of the inmates entertained their friends in the most hospitable manner. ‘The celebrated actress, Mlle. Clairon, gave “des soupers divins et nombreux,” and carriages filled the street from morning till night as long as she was in prison. When the artistes of the Francais were im- prisoned they were always allowed liberty for their performances and rehearsals, as the Comédie could not dispense with their services. In the magazines there are some excellent articles this month. In the International Theatre M. Max Nordan writes on “Theatrical Censorship.” The authorities in Berlin have forbidden the production of Paul Heyse’s “Mary of Magdala,” and M. Nordau thinks that “all civilised Europeans should blush 200 to tolerate the existence of that degrading vestige of feudal despotism : theatrical censorship.” The English are specially favoured in the cur- rent number of this theatrical paper. M. Sardou has allowed the editor to publish photographic reproductions of the principal scenes of his new play “ Dante,” which is to be produced soon by Sir Henry Irving. About eight of these scenes are reproduced, accompanied by an excellent article giving an idea of Dante’s original concep- tion of the Inferno. Madame Réjane has had to postpone until next season the new play she was rehearsing: “ La Meilleure Part.” “Ta Rabouilleuse” is a success at the Odeon. It is a four-act play cleverly adapted by M. Emile Fabre from Balzac’s “ Ménage de Garcon.” Ouida’s “ Two Little Wooden Shoes ” has been produced at the Opéra Comique as “ Muguette.” The music is by M. Missa. “Tyes Affaires sont les Affaires,” by M. Octave Mirbeau, is the event of the moment at the Francais. It is an extremely up-to-date satire on the omnipotence of wealth. The piece is a literary triumph, the dialogue brilliant and the interest well sustained. “T’Autre Danger,” by M. Maurice Donnay, is still a success at the Francais. It is admirably put on, but the subject is a very delicate one—of the same nature as that of M. Paul Bourget’s novel, “Le Fantome.” “Lucifer” was the title of the last piece of this season produced by M. Bour at his International Theatre. It is a very strong play in four acts, translated by M. Monnier from the Italian of M. Butti. Lucifer is the name given to a free-thinker, who was formerly a priest, by the students to whom he lectures. This ex-priest has married and has a son and daughter, whom he has brought up as atheists. An old friend of his comes to live near him as Professor at the University. This friend is a religious man, and has an only daughter. The ex-priest’s son falls in love with her, but her father refuses his consent to their marriage on religious grounds. The lovers elope, and after their marriage return to the ex-priest’s home. In the last act the young wife has taken a severe chill and is dying. Her husband, in the presence of Death, implores his atheist father to teach him a prayer, as in his desperation he suddenly feels the need of religion and the certainty that there is something beyond this life. The struggle between his pride as a savant and atheist and his family affection is very terrible, and the scene between the father and son is most dramatic. M. Bour was remarkably fine in this réle. “Lucifer” and “ Alléluia” are undoubtedly his two THE AUTHOR. best creations. M. Bourny, as the son, was also excellent. M. Bauer had only a small part, but he was as fine as usual in it. M. Bour has also produced another play by M. Robert Bracco, a one-act piece entitled “Don Pietro Carusi,” which is quite a chef d’wuvre. ALys HALLARD. 9 LITERARY, DRAMATIC, AND MUSICAL PROPERTY. es Literary Larceny. R. HARTLEY ASPDEN, the Editor of the Sunday Companion and Sunday Circle, has - laid before the Secretary of the Society of 7 iw Authors a case of literary larceny of a very serious | character. | As it is probable that similar cases may have oe: occurred, and as it has always been the object of —F the Authors’ Society to maintain the rights of authors against all comers, members of their own profession or not, it has been thought right to publish the facts in detail. In January of this year, Mr. Aspden, as Editor of the papers mentioned, received from a Mr. Reginald Nash, a story entitled “Through Great f°. * Tribulation.” This story he was inclined to accept, and wrote to the author as follows :— B iyky DEAR S1R,—My reader has reported favourably on your : story “Through Great Tribulation.” Please tell me if you are the author of the story, and if you are willing to accept £15 (our usual price for these stories) for it. Yours faithfully. THE EDITOR. The author’s reply was on a post card, to the following effect. Dar SrR,—Received offer for story entitled ‘Through _ Great Tribulation,’ which I accept. Believe me, I am, Yours faithfully, (Signed) R. NASH. By chance Mr. Aspden discovered that the story had already been published about two years pre- viously in another of his publications entitled Golden Stories. The story was word for word the same,” with the exception that the title had been changed and the name of one of the characters. He thereupon wrote a second time to the author, and — requested to know whether the story was his own production. In answer, he received a letter stating it was the author’s own production, and implying that he was” a contributor to many other magazines. . : The original story was written by Mrs. H. B. Welch. If Mrs. Welch had been a member of the” Society of Authors the Committee would, no doubt,  THE AUTHOR. have gladly taken up the case on her behalf and exposed the matter in the courts, but the Com- mittee had no locus standi, and left it therefore to Mr. Aspden to bring the affair before the public. Further correspondence made it clear that this was not the only story that had been taken from other papers and forwarded to editors as the anthor’s own work, and we are indebted to Mr. Aspden for having thrashed out the matter carefully. In con- sequence Mr. Nash has written, signed and published + in the Norwood Free Press the following apology : I, Reginald Nash, of No. 1, Dassett Road, Knight’s Hill, West Norwood, beg humbly to apologise to the Editor of Sunday Stories and Golden Stories for having, without his knowledge and consent, taken stories published in those journals, and endeavoured to dispose of them for payment as my own original compositions, and I hereby promise not to repeat this offence in the case of Golden Stories or Sunday Stories or any other paper. (Signed) Witness, H. Brown, Dated 18th Mareh, 1903. The matter is of serious interest to all members of the Authors’ Society, and we think it expedient to publish in full this apology, which has already appeared in one newspaper. REGINALD NASH. 1 An Unwarrantable Infringement. ANOTHER case has been brought to the notice of the Secretary. In the autumn of last year a paper entitled the Science and Art of Mining gave a prize for the best answer to certain questions concerning mining. One of the questions was : ‘« What are the chief causes of boiler explosions ? —What precautions would you take ?” The prize was awarded to John R. Ford. Mr. Powis Bale, who is a member of our Society, an engineer, and a writer of some valuable books on the subject, discovered in a roundabout fashion that the answer to the prize question was copied directly, without any acknowledgment, out of his book “Steam Engineering,” although one of the rules of the competition especially forbade this. If those who enter prize competitions are in the habit of competing on these lines the sooner the fault is exposed the better. Mr. Bale placed the matter in the hands of the Secretary, who at once wrote to the editor of the paper. It is quite clear from the answer of the pro- prietors that they were unaware of Mr. Ford’s methods. They have at once taken steps to express their regret in a public manner, by publishing in their paper a statement of the facts approved by the author whose copyright they had unwittingly infringed. 201 Mr. Ford’s mistake has been acknowledged, and Mr. Powis Bale has kindly consented to refrain from taking any further action on the publication of the apology set forth below :— In the autumn of 1902, the Science and Art of Mining proposed a prize competition, one of the conditions of which runs as follows : “Original answers are specially desired. In all cases where quotations or extracts are made. the source and authority must be stated. Any breach of this regulation which comes to our notice will debar the offender from all future competitions in these columns.” Contrary to the rule quoted, I copied my answer —consisting of 205 lines—to Question 5, entitled, “What are the Chief Causes of Boiler Explosions ? —What Precautions would you take?” from Mr. Powis Bale’s well-known book, “A Handbook for Steam Users,” published by Messrs. Longmans, Green & Oo. As my answer won the Prize, it was published in the issue of the above periodical on October 11th, 1902, infringing Mr. Powis Bale’s copyright. I tender my sincere regret to the Author of the Book and the Editor of the Paper, and in order to make my apology public, I give leave that you should publish it in the Engineer, Engineering, and the Mechanical World, and in any two others you may think fit. (Signed) Joun R. Forp. To M. Powrs Bats, Esq., 16 & 17, Appold Street, London, E.C. eo THE AUTHORS’ ASSOCIATION. Oe N last month’s Author a short article was pub- I lished referring to this association. One of the statements contained in that article was as follows :— ‘Every member, we must mention, has the right to have one MS. of 5,000 words criticised each year, free of charge.” We have had a letter from Mr. Galloway Kyle in which he points out that we have misquoted the words of his prospectus, which run as follows :— ‘Hach member is entitled to have one novel, or three shorter MSS. of not more than 5,000 words each, dealt with thoroughly per year.” Weare glad to correct this inaccuracy, and express our regret that it should have occurred. The publisher, whose offices are situated at 62, Paternoster Row, E.C., which was referred to in the same article as the temporary address of the Asso- ciation, writes to inform us that this address is no longer connected in any way with the Association. 202 AN AMERICAN POINT OF VIEW. ee a (This Article is taken from the American Book and News Dealer, March, 1903). Of Interest to Authors, Publishers, Booksellers, Printers, Compositors and Electrotypers. + NDER the heading “ A Plea for the Abolition of the Duty on Books,” Mr. George F, Brett has recently written a pamphlet for private circulation, which was published for the author by the Macmillan Company. Mr. Brett says : “Tf it be conceded that a duty on books was needed in the early development of our country, either for purposes of revenue or to protect the printing and allied trades, or, more important still, for the purpose of fostering and encouraging the original work of our native authors, it must be clear that such a duty is no longer for any of these reasons either necessary or expedient.” The argument here used is precisely ment used by all Free Traders to show why protective tariffs should be abolished. It is possible that the next Presidential campaign will be fought on the Tariff issue ; but if so it is not probable that the Free Trade party would be willing to wage the campaign against a special branch of trade or industry that the argu- all would directly antagonise ail American authors, publishers, book- sellers, printers, compositors and electrotypers. It is certain that the Ways and Means Com- mittee of the Congress would give a hearing to representatives of these important industries before reporting to the House a Bill that would strike down all protection they now enjoy under the protective tariff. The undertaking to carry such important legis- lation through the Congress is worthy of one who is credited with the overweening ambition to publish all of the books for all of the American people. But Mr. Brett continues : « When we turn to the matter of protection for the printing and allied trades, the duty is unneces- sary, as these important trades can no longer be called ‘infant industries’ in any sense of this ‘much-abused term, and in the production of the cheaper classes of books this country may, without doubt, I think, claim to lead all English-speaking countries, both in the amount of material produced and in the cheapness of its costs of manufacture. «Tf protection to these trades, moreover, were still needed, it is already provided, and in a much more effective form, by the provision of our Inter- national Copyright Act, which makes a copyright THE AUTHOR. in this country depend upon the manufacture of the article copyrighted within the limits of the United States.” If it be true that the International Copyright Act affords ample protection for the manufacturing branches of the book trade, then why repeal the protective tariff laws that protect and foster these trades? If they are amply protected under the one law, why not give them the benefit of both ? Does not Mr. Brett seek to have this law repealed in order that he may import still more English-made books without paying any revenue into the United States Treasury ? Would not the repeal of the tariff law materially lessen the amount of work now done by the American book-manufacturing trades, in setting up the type, making the paper, electrotyping the plates and printing the English books that are now reprinted in this country ? If not, then why repeal the law ? Again, Mr. Brett continues : «When we turn to the more important reason for the existence of the duty, the only reason, if there be one, worthy of serious attention, 7¢., the necessity of fostering a native literature, a litera- ture which shall echo the needs and voice the sentiments of our national life, it still appears that we may with entire safety abandon the duty on books, a duty which has been often and aptly termed ‘a tax on knowledge.’ “ Here, again, the workings of our International Copyright Act, an act of ‘justice to foreign authors, has had results of great importance to our own people. Our younger and less known authors have, since the passage of the Act, found a much more ready welcome and appreciation at the hands of American publishers, who are no longer able to appropriate and exploit the works of foreign authors without payment. “ Let us, then, remove the duty on books as ‘a tax on knowledge’ and freely welcome what English authors may have to offer us that is worthy of acceptance, in order that we may move forward to our manifest destiny as the greatest nation the world has yet seen, whether we are judged by the standards of finance, commerce, literature or art.” Here, again, it is urged that the International Copyright Act affords ample protection to American authors ; but if so, why repeal the law? Would not its repeal again result in flooding the American market with the product of English authors, manu- factured and published in England ? Are American authors prepared to make the test ? Do American booksellers wish again to have the American market flooded with cheaply-made English books ? There is bu} little profit in the sale of cheap books,  THE AUTHOR. 203 especially when the trade discount afforded by the importer is so short that it allows a sales profit less than the actual cost of handling the books. Would not such a measure directly antagonise all American booksellers ? It is pertinent to enquire whether the publication of this pamphlet by a house of English publishers is the beginning of a Free Trade propaganda ‘to break down the American industry of writing, publishing and selling books. If this is not true, it would be well for the English house of Macmillan & Co. to disavow such purpose before it estranges the goodwill of all American booksellers, If the impression created is allowed to go un- disputed, it will be necessary for all English authors, who hope for a fair measure of patronage in the American market, to take to cover in self- defence. Neither English authors nor English publishers can afford to have their books sold in this country by booksellers who would be compelled to band together in self-defence, and to sell only so many of such books, from under the counter, as may be necessary to hold their favourite customers. In such case it would be necessary for English authors to place their books with such English publishers as have American connections of such character as can command the goodwill and patronage of the American bookselling trade ! It will be recalled that William McKinley was exalted to the Presidential chair, in Opposition to the combined influence of the leading politicians of New York, New England and Pennsylvania, by the American people, simply because he had become recognised as the leading apostle of the American policy of protective tariffs. Since the enactment of the Dingley Law, the American people have been enjoying a great wave of prosperity, that has been constantly accelerated by cumulative energy, until our thriving industries have made this great nation the cynosure of all eyes and the object of envy by our European rivals. This is the priceless heritage left to the American people by our late martyred President. Can it be supposed fer a moment that we will lightly cast it aside ? 9 LITERARY COPYRIGHT: THE PERIOD OF PROTECTION. Se ONSIDERABLE differences of opinion exist as to what should constitute the period of protection for literary matter. Some con- sider that the existing period of protection is not long enough; others contend that literary pro- perty should be regarded like other forms of property, and that copyright should be perpetual. Authorities differ, and distinguished authors dis- agree, as to the expediency of permitting the period of protection to be indefinite. It has been said that an author’s right to his work is, on every ground of reason and justice, absolute ; and that in the whole sphere of property, there is probably no right which rests on such solid foundation, as that of creation. Mr. Edward Jenkins, a member of the Copy- right Commission of 1876-8, appointed to consider the chaotic condition of the existing Copyright Acts, in his report said: “The statute law creates, it does not recognise, copyright. There is no such thing as an inalienable natural right to the form in which a man has embodied his ideas. The copyright law is, like the patent law for inven- tion, a creation of a temporary monopoly, for the encouragement of learning. It is the outcome of expediency and not of principle.” Sir James Stephen, a member of the Copyright Commission, said: “ The law of copyright ought, in my opinion, to protect money interests only ; and I think that the only money interests which it should protect are those which it creates—that is to say, the money interest of the author of a work of literature or art which is capable of being reproduced by mechanical means in such a manner that every copy is as valuable as the original. I approve of copyright in books, because the MS. has no value till it is printed, and because when it has been printed, every copy is of equal value, so that unless a copyright law existed the author of the most valuable book would have no money reward for writing it.” Sir Louis Mallet, who was also a member of the Copyright Commission, in the course of his report, said : “I do not consider that a copyright law, or, in other words, a law which enables a copyright owner to prevent other persons from copying pub- lished works, rests on the same grounds of public expediency as those which justify the recogni- tion by law of proprietary rights generally. Nor does it appear that in modern times it has been ever so regarded by the legislation of the countries where it exists. The right conferred by a@ copy- right law derives its chief value from the discovery of the art of printing ; and there appears no reason for giving to authors any larger share in the value of a mechanical invention, to which they have con- tributed nothing, than to any other member of the community. It is not even claimed that an author should have a right of property in ideas, or in facts, or in opinions. It is impossible ever to ascertain or to define how far these are the product 204 THE AUTHOR. of his own thought or of his own labour. It is merely the form in which they are presented for which this claim is advanced, and for this all that is in principle required appears to me to be that he should be protected in any contract which he desires to make once for all in the original publi- cation of his works. Some of the witnesses whose evidence has been received have urged the claim of authors to perpetual copyright, on the ground that the right of an author to property in his published works is as complete and extends as far as the right of any person to any property what- ever. If this analogy were admitted, it appears to me that it would be difficult to dispute the claim of an author to perpetual copyright ; but I ven- ture to submit that the claim of an author to a right of property in his published work rests upon « radical economic fallacy, viz., a misconception of the nature of the law of value. . . . Property exists in order to provide against the evils of natural scarcity. A limitation of supply by artificial causes creates scarcity in order to create property. To limit that which is in its nature unlimited, and thereby to confer an exchangeable value on that which, without such interference, would be the gratuitous possession of mankind, is to create an artificial monopoly which has no warrant in the nature of things, which serves to produce scarcity where there ought to be abundance, and to confine to the few gifts which were intended for all. It is within this latter class that copyright in published works must be included. Copies of such works may be multiplied indefinitely, subject to the cost of paper and of printing, which alone, but for copy- right, would limit the supply, and any demand, however great, would be attended not only by no conceivable injury to society, but on the contrary, in the case of useful works, by the greatest possible advantage. .. . The policy, then, of copyright laws must be sought in another order of ideas, and be made to rest on some ground other than that which is the foundation of rights of property in whatever is the subject to a natural limitation of supply.” Mr. Farrer, now Lord Farrer, secretary to the Board of Trade at the time of the Copyright Commission, in a paper prepared by him_ for the members of the Commission, said: ‘“‘ Pro- fessor Huxley, and I think Mr. Spencer and Professor Tyndall agree with him, states in the strongest and clearest terms his view that the foundation of copyright law is the absolute right of the author once and for ever to the form in which he has uttered his thoughts, and he ingeniously suggests that this law is merely a convenient substitute for a sale by the author of each copy, with a condition attached that the purchaser shall not copy. It is needless to say that this suggestion is as fictitious as it is ingenious. A chattel going about the world with an implied covenant by every one, who with or with- out consideration gets possession of it, that he will not imitate it, would certainly be a legal novelty. The real history and fact of copyright law are very different. As to the absolute and perpetual right, not only has it never been recog- nised as a matter of fact, but analogies are against it. Words, thoughts, and actions, when uttered or done, pass, as a general rule, into the common domain, and it is thus that human life is carried on. In those productions of the human mind which are most essentially original, and which are at the same time the most useful to mankind ; in such things as the moral doctrine of the Sermon on the Mount, the intellectual theory of gravitation, of evolution, or of the conservation of energy, there is and can be no exclusive right. Nor, again, is there, as a matter of practice, any exclusive right in more ephemeral matters, ¢.g., in the news, information, or articles of a newspaper, or in a political speech. It is only when put into the particular form of a book, or a lecture, or a picture, that an exclusive right over the productions of the human mind has been recognised, and that with certain limitations and for a certain specified purpose.” It has since been decided that for copyright purposes the author of the report of a speech is the “ author” of the speech within the meaning of the Act. The existing period of protection according to the Act of 1842, passed ‘‘to afford greater encouragement to the production of literary works of lasting benefit to the world,” is forty-two years from the date of publication, or life and seven years, whichever term may be the longer. As to the adequacy or otherwise of this term we might very well refer to the report of the Copyright Commis- sion. The particular paragraphs read as follows : ‘““ We have already stated that we consider some kind of protection in the nature of copyright desirable ; and it appears to us that the existing terms are not more than sufficient, if indeed they are sufficient, to secure that adequate encourage- ment and protection to authors which the interests of literature, and therefore of the public, alike — demand from the State. We proceed, therefore, to call attention to the three objections to the present duration of copyright : “ First, the period is said not to belong enough. The chief reasons for this assertion are that many works, and particularly those of permanent value, are frequently but little known or appreciated for many years after they are published, and that they do not command a sale sufficient to remunerate the authors until a considerable part of the term  THE AUTHOR. of copyright has expired. Some works, as, for instance, novels by popular authors, command an extensive sale and bring to the authors a large remuneration at once, but the case is altogether different with others, such as works of history, books of a philosophical or classical character, and volumes of poems. In some instances works of these kinds have been known to produce scarcely any remuneration until the authors have died and the copyrights have nearly expired. It is also urged that in the case of many authors who make their living by their pens, their families are left without provision shortly after their deaths, unless their works become profitable very soon after they are written. “These arguments and others of a like kind, which will be found not only in the evidence we have taken, but in the debates in Parliament, are in our opinion of great weight, but on the other hand, we do not lose sight of the public interest which, it has been urged upon us, would be prejudiced by prolongation of copyright. Greater freedom of trade and competition are said to be desirable that books may be more abundant and cheaper in price. ‘The second objection to the present duration of copyright is, that copyrights belonging to the same author generally expire at different dates. That it -is well founded is manifest, for if an author writes several works, or one work in several volumes which are published at different times, as is frequently the case, the copyrights will expire forty-two years from the respective dates of pub- lication, unless the author happens to live so long that the period of seven years after his death is beyond forty-two years from the publication of his latest work or volume. “ Under the present system, moreover, copyright in an earlier edition expires before copyright in the amendments in a later edition of the same work. We have had evidence that in one case the first and uncorrected edition of an important work was republished before the expiration of the copy- tight in the later and improved editions. But if the alteration in the existing term of copyright, which we suggest hereafter, were adopted, namely, that it should be for the life of the author and a fixed number of years after his death, all the copyrights of the same author would expire at the same date, and it would then be open to any pub- lisher to put out a complete edition of all the author’s works, with all the improvements and emendations which have appeared in the last edition, in a uniform shape and at a uniform price. “The third objection to the present duration of copyright is that it is frequently difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain its termination, owing to the fact that the expiration of the period depends 205 upon the time of publication. It is in most cases easy to ascertain the date of a man’s death, but frequently impossible to fix with any certainty the date of the publication of a book. Under the present law it is uncertain what constitutes pub- lication; but whatever may be a publication sufficient in law to set the period of copyright running, it generally takes place in such a manner that the precise date is not noted even if known. It is sometimes said that the date printed in the title page of a book should be considered the date of publication, but books are frequently post- dated, and in many cases bear no date at all. This objection is one which, in our opinion, should be removed.” The above, I think, is a fair presentment of the points considered by the Royal Copyright Com- mission. Many years have elapsed and we still find that little has been done to co-ordinate the various Copyright Acts which were considered by the Royal Commissioners to be in a chaotic con- dition, and frequently unintelligible. In the Bill drafted by Lord Thring, based on the recommendations of the Copyright Commission, it was proposed that “the copyright in a book shall begin with the publication thereof, and shall subsist for the term of the author's life and thirty years after the end of the year in which the author dies, and no longer.” The effect of such an Act would obviously be that, although the copyrights of authors’ works would expire simultaneously, immature efforts would enjoy a longer term than works of greater value, though, of course, it does not thereby follow that the sales of the former would be the greater. Some time ago, the writer approached several of the leading publishers for their opinions as to the duration of the period of protection. Mr. John Murray considers that a new Copy- right Act is urgently needed in this country. He thinks the period of protection ought to be life and fifty years. Perpetual copyright, though it would be equitable, is impossible, he considers. Messrs. Macmillan think that the present period of protection is insufficient ; life and thirty years would be more satisfactory. They see no reason to dissent from the view taken by Mr. Alexander Macmillan, a former head of the firm, in his evi- dence before the Royal Commission in favour of perpetual copyright. Mr. William Heinemann, while favouring the fullest protection possible for literary property, thinks it would be a matter of serious national loss, if literary productions were not, after some time, made popularly accessible. Mr. E. Marston considers perpetual copyright an impossible idea. He thinks that life and thirty years would prove a satisfactory term. 208 Messrs. Kegan Paul & Co, remark that un- doubtedly the limitation of copyright tends to the general diffusion of good literature, though they think it hard that a man of outstanding genius, having produced property of value calculated to survive his own life, should not have the privilege of leaving the interest in the property to his descendants. Messrs. George Bell & Sons certainly think the present period of protection insufficient. They favour the proposed extension to thirty years from the author's death. They are also inclined to think favourably of a suggestion that has been made, that direct descendants of an author should, on certain conditions, have the privilege of obtain- ing further extensions for successive terms of years so that a valuable copyright might be kept alive for an indefinite time. Mr. A. Nutt can see no reason why literary property should be placed in a different category trom other property. In any case, copyright, he thinks, should have a clear hundred years’ run from the death of the author. Another publisher, who has issued a large number of charming reprints, thinks that the present period of protection is long enough, except in exceptional cases ; he does not think that anyone can argue that the time presses hardly upon any relatives of a man’s family if, after forty-two years and seven years, the copyright is given to the public. In all patented works, it is acknowledged that the public have rights, and in books, it seems to him that so long as a man has been comfortably paid for his labour, the books belong to the public more than even matters of invention. Thus we have a variety of opinions upon an interesting and somewhat complicated subject. We can assume that the life of the average book is not forty-two years. Novels which have an immense sale at the time of first publication have their day and practically cease to be, in many instances. How many of them will be in demand thirty years after the decease of the authors or in some cases the manufacturers of them ? Text books, of course, get out-of-date. Similarly with works of reference. Comparatively few books are absolutely original in every respect. In the majority of cases, the authors are dependent to a more or less degree upon the labours of their pre- decessors. And literary matter would be of com- paratively little commercial value in the absence of any method whereby 1t could be rapidly repro- duced in quantity. ‘he peculiar nature of literary property is obvious. In the course of the life of the author, plus thirty years, it ought to be possible to find a sufficient demand to make most worthy books remunerative to author and publisher, if the field is properly worked, But in special cases, THE AUTHOR. such as in regard to books which have involved special labour and expense to produce, and which have not proved sufficiently remunerative during the period of protection, it ought to be possible for the publisher, or author, to obtain an extension. If it were practicable the period of protection should depend on the degree of originality of the matter. This would obviously be a difficult question to decide. J. A, Ret. ee THE PUBLISHERS’ ASSOCIATION. Oo ¢ The Annual Meeting. HE screeds Association has held its annual general meeting, under the presidenc of Mr. C. J. Longman, and has batted its report to its members. The Authors’ Society has already had note of the steps that were taken last year with a view to dealing with the question of copyright. It is unnecessary, therefore, to repeat the extent to which the Association also rendered its valuable assistance in endeavouring to push forward legis- lation. : The President, in his speech, dealt with one or two interesting points, and, in addition to the questions connected with the report, mentioned the contract for serial rights. He stated as follows :— “Of course a good many matters come up at the Council meetings which it is not desirable to trouble you with or to put into the report, but here and there one comes up which may be of interest. Now there was a subject mentioned not long ago— a small affair if you will, and only of interest to a certain section of the members who are novel publishers. Buta case came up in regard to the question of serial rights. It has been not infre- quently the practice, particularly with literary agents, to sell not only what are known as serial rights, but what are known as second serial rights. Unless there is some limit in time put as to when these second serial rights are to run out, it may be an intolerable nuisance, and I know cases in my own business where it has become a nuisance. There are certain syndicates who buy serials for circulation in the Press. They buy absolute serial rights, which is understood to mean that so long as the term of copyright exists they go on cireu- lating the novel, or any other work, in the columns of newspapers, magazines, and so on. A publisher buys the copyright, but this spectre is never laid. You never know where it may turn up, and the thing gets out of control. Sometimes, as in the case which I have in my mind, the work gets  THE AUTHOR. published under another title, or is abridged. The only reason I have in mentioning it is that I think it very desirable, in the interests of publishers, that they should decline to buy a novel in which the serial rights are sold without limit of time-— that is to say, the serial rights should cease when the book is published. If there is any question of the book being circulated again, which may possibly be done occasionally, that should be a matter decided by the copyright owner, who may be the publisher or author, or both, but I think it very undesirable either to buy or publish a novel with these indefinite rights hanging over it. That is not, perhaps, a very important point, and it only refers to one section of our members.” This question may be a small question to pub- lishers, and only touch a certain section of them, but to authors, to those who write fiction, is of great import. Firstly, we have always insisted, and now insist again, that it is absolutely essential that contracts with regard to the sale of serial rights should be clear and limited, and should not be general or indefinite ; that when serial rights are sold they should be sold either to one paper or to a limited circle of papers for one issue only, or for a limited time. Secondly, that under no circumstances should fiction writers sell the copyright of their works to the publisher for a sum down or otherwise; and, thirdly, if, contrary to all advice, they do sell the copyright, they are bound to disclose to the pur- chaser a contract of this kind for the sale of serial rights. If this is the case, then the publisher buys with full knowledge, and has no cause for complaint. From Mr. Longman’s statement it would appear that either the publisher has not taken the trouble to enquire into the point, or that the author has, unwittingly maybe, refrained from giving full information. Another important question was dealt with by the publishers. The matter was brought forward by Mr. Frederick Macmillan, of the firm of Macmillan & Co. It refers to the supply of educational books to the educational authorities. This matter is of no little consequence to the providers of educational books, and it is hoped that the cutting of prices which at present rules will not be allowed to con- tinue, and that the publishers will refuse to supply the educational centres direct, but will supply only through booksellers and retail agents. The question is one that affects the educational author very closely, as the following example may serve to show :— A certain member of the Society made his living out of the writing of educational books, and was 207 paid a fixed royalty by the publisher under a hard and fast agreement. Large orders were gent in to the publisher for the purchase of his books, and a demand was made that as the order was large special terms should be stated. ‘The publisher wrote to the author and asked him to accept half the royalty that he was being paid under the agreement, or otherwise it would be impossible for him to supply the orders mentioned, and a large sale would thereby be lost to the author. If the author’s profits had been reduced pro- portionately to the publisher’s profits it ig possible that the publisher's request might have been willingly acceded to, but the figures showed that this was not the case, and it lay with the author to decide whether he would yield to this extraordinary pressure of the publisher or whether he would lose the sale. In this special instance, the royalty on these books was, unfortunately, the bread and butter of the author, and he was obliged to give way. Thus the publisher procured a large sale at a reduced but not inadequate profit, while the author received starvation wages. The other alternative was for the author to refuse to yield, and Insist on the publisher keeping to his contract ; 0 that case the publisher would have refused to supply the market, and the author would have had no remedy. It is hoped, therefore, if this question is satisfac- torily solved as far as authors are concerned, that it will be impossible for such a case to occur again or for undue pressure to be brought to bear upon an author to yield up even the small returns that some of the publishers are willing to pay him for his work. After some discussion it appears from the report of the general meeting of the Publishers’ Associa- tion, that the original question put forward was somewhat modified, and that the following amend- ment was passed :— “That a special committee be appointed to deal with questions affecting educational publishers, and that its first business be to consider the situation created by the Education Act, 1902.” We must congratulate Mr. C. J. Longman on his re-election to the Presidency of the Association —which now represents all the important houses of England. G. oy T. pn *—~>—_+ : SOME FREE LANCE EXPERIENCES. —+—>+— OME little time ago I set forth in these pages S certain experiences that had fallen to me while pursuing the calling of a free lance journalist. Since then a good deal of water has  208 flowed under Westminster Bridge, and, as during this period I have continued on my career, further experiences have naturally come my way. number of these, it seems to me, are worth jotting down on the present occasion, for they are not altogether uninstructive, while a proportion of them have the additional virtue of breaking comparatively new ground. Those coming within this latter category have been gathered mainly in America. The United States, indeed, forms a virgin field for the English free lance. I know that there is a deeply-rooted impression to the effect that the Press on the other side of the Atlantic is a close preserve to all but those over whom the Eagle spreads its protecting wings, but I am convinced that, this isa fallacy. Speaking generally, every paper is open to every- body, and to a wide-awake editor (such as those in New York) the nationality of a potential con- tributor is, like his opinion on conscientious objections, the superiority of the American boot, or the educational value of musical comedy, a matter of complete indifference. Were it not for this fact, the path of the unattached free lance would be a good deal thornier than it is at present. My connection with American papers originated in rather curious fashion. About a year ago I wrote a short article dealing with a theatrical subject in which I was interested. This [ for- warded, together with a number of photographs, to a magazine which had just been started in London with rather a flourish of trumpets for the express purpose of “ministering to the best interests of the Drama.” My effort, however, to promote this high intention was evidently an ill- conceived one. At any rate, the article was returned, with a a curt note to the effect that it failed to reach the standard of “ literary excellence” insisted upon by, let us say, the Footlights Maga- zine. The intimation was also accompanied by an ingenuous suggestion that I should forthwith enrol myself as an annual subscriber to this some- what exigeant periodical, “ and thereby familiarise myself with the editorial requirements.” On receiving back my MS. (in a condition, by the way, that pointed strongly to its having been used as a doormat during the interval), I decided that the English market’ was too limited for it. A voyage across the Atlantic would, I thought, do the article good. I accordingly looked through an American newspaper directory, and, with the airy confidence that is part of the equipment of all free lances, despatched it to the most widely circulated magazine in the United States, and sat down to await the result. This came in three weeks’ time and took the form of a polite letter of acceptance, accompanied by a cheque for seventy-five dollars. altogether. THE AUTHOR. The discriminating periodical in question was Frank Leslie’s Popular Monthly. Another American magazine which I have approached with even more success is Munsey’s. Within the past few months the editor has purchased five articles from me, paying in each instance at a rate that is at least equal to that obtaining among the leading periodicals of the same nature in this country. As my work has appeared in the Pall Mall, Strand, Windsor, and Cassell’s, I may claim to know something on this most important of points. The Cosmo- politan, too, of New York, has proved itself enterprising enough to print work of mine. In respect of weekly journals of Transatlantic origin, my most satisfactory dealings have been with Collier’s Weekly. This, which is also published in New York, has given hospitality to at least half- a-dozen contributions from me in recent numbers. The daily papers, however, have as a rule shown themselves disinclined to permit me to illumine their columns at space rates. They appear to prefer to insert bodily articles of mine which take their fancy when they make their début in English publications. As in doing so such journals seldom go through the formality of either acknowledging their origin or remunerating me for the same, the practice only meets with my qualified approval. Occasionally, I have expressed my views of the matter: so far, however, the result has not been satisfactory. One editor, indeed, relying appa- rently on the fact that the broad Atlantic rolled between us, replied on a type-written postcard as follows: ‘Sir, if you don’t like it, lump it!” Speaking generally, however, I am firmly of opinion that American editors transact their work in a manner that tends to promote the pleasantest possible relations between themselves and their contributors. To this end they are courteous, prompt, reliable, and business-like in their dealings. Whenever I have made a_ proposal for an article, or submitted a manuscript for consideration, the matter has been attended to without delay. Non-acceptances have been notified in so charming a fashion that the pangs of rejection have been in great measure removed As often as not such communications are almost apologetic in tone, and might reasonably give the novice the impression that his work is returned merely because its publication would set too high a standard of excellence. Of course, it merely amounts to the curt “declined with thanks” in vogue in this country; at the same time, however, it has decided points in its favour. The cordiality of the average American editor towards his unknown contributors is quite remark- able. The atmosphere of aloofness which is generally observed on this side of the Atlantic  THE AUTHOR. 209 seems to have no existence in the United States. ““My dear Sir,” is apparently the most formal opening ever employed in inaugurating a corre- spondence, while before two letters have passed this probably becomes “My very dear Sir.” It is the same thing with the terminations. When you are not assured that the editor is « Sincerely yours,” you are begged to regard him as “ Yours most cordially.” One of those to whom I once had occasion to write on a strictly business matter subscribed himself mine “ In all sincerity in every- thing calculated to foster what is best and brightest in contemporary literature.” This somewhat effusive individual conducted a society journal in Chicago. An American editor frequently uses terms that strike English ears a little strangely. I remember, for example, on an occasion when I had written to point out that payment for a certain contribution was overdue, receiving a “ check ” accompanied by a hope that “we should not run up against such snags in future.” A second editor, to whom I applied for a proof before publication, excused him- self on the grounds that I might “rely with confidence on his lynx-eyed compositors.” Another expressed his opinion of my capabilities in this fashion : “ Dear Sir, I like your stuff. It is real spry! Send me some more blocks of it as soon as you please. You are a live news-getter.”’ Occa- sionally, however, a wholesome corrective is administered. One such, sent in answer to a request for a decision respecting an article submitted several weeks earlier, ran as follows : “Dear Sir, your work doesn’t suit us. Our office-boy could write better copy blind-fold.” On the subject of returning unsuitable manu- scripts forwarded them from this country, American editors have a good deal to learn, They appear, for example, to be under the impression that all that is necessary is to put the article into an envelope and affix a one-cent stamp to it. Of course, it then travels as letter-post and is sub- jected to a considerable surcharge on delivery. Even when I have taken the precaution to send a properly stamped uewspaper-wrapper when sub- mitting a contribution, it is very seldom that any notice has been taken of it.. Once or twice I have ventured on a mild expostulation, but the only reply that this has elicited is that “the editor cf the prefers to use envelopes.” He also seems to prefer that their recipients should pay double postage on the same. It must not be thought from the preceding observations that I have permitted the English Press to languish for want of attention on my part during the last few months. So far from this being the case, I have conducted my campaign in this country contemporaneously with my American one, and with equal vigour. The periodicals in which work of mine has seen the light within this interval range from the « serious” monthlies to the more frivolous dailies, from magazine articles and stories in Cassell’s and the Windsor, to “Celebrities at Home” in the World, and para- graph matter in Punch. [ wrote columns of Coronation matter in June and August, and did my best to keep alive public interest in the Boer War long after the declaration of peace. I also furnished for some weeks—in the absence of the regular correspondent—a “ London Letter” for a well-known Indian paper. After the second of these contributions appeared the editor was removed from office by his proprietors. I should be sorry to think that my connection with the paper had anything to do with this, but candour compels me to admit that I was not invited to continue my contributions. The greater portion of my output of late has been published in the different periodicals which owe their existence to the enterprise of Messrs. Pearson and Newnes. The host of “ Bits” journals which emanate from the offices of these Liptous of Litera- ture are a veritable gold-mine to the unattached free lance. They have an insatiable appetite for informative articles on the private lives of dis- tinguished personages, and give a ready welcome to anyone who can write thereon with an appearance of authority. At the same time, I must place it on record that Queer Bits, while expressing itself as pleased to consider a proposed series on “ Duchesses I have Dined with,” uncompromisingly rejected a second on “ Countesses I have Kissed.” The rate of payment obtaining among periodicals of this description is usually the fixed one of a guinea per column of about 750 words. As the standard of literary excellence insisted upon therein is not lofty, the scale is quite a fair one. Indeed, it is superior to that in force in many decidedly more ambitious journals. To one of these, for example (which grandiloquently describes itself as reflecting politics, literature, science, and art—and, no doubt, many other matters as well), I once sub- mitted an article on a military subject. A couple of months afterwards (no proof for revision, or notification of acceptance having been forwarded in the meantime) the contribution appeared. It was set up, however, in the form of a “ Letter to the Editor.” This struck me as a little frigid. Yet worse was to follow, for when—at the end of five weeks—I mildly pointed out that the cheque due to me had not yet reached me, I received a dignified intimation to the effect that “it was not the practice of the to pay for correspondence.” To this I naturally replied that it was not my prac- tice to write articles for publication as “corre- spondence.” I mentioned, however, that I would 210 be prepared to relax my rule in this partieular instance in so far that I would write a letter embodying my views on the conduct of periodicals which filled their columns without expense by the simple expedient of treating articles as “ Letters to the Editor” without the sanction of their authors. The offer still remains open. I have frequently heard it contended that when ladies conduct periodicals they do so in an un- pusinesslike fashion. For myself, I am disinclined to take this view, for I have always found that they are quite businesslike enough in their methods to get as much as they can for nothing. For instance, the editress of a monthly magazine called —let us say, the Perfect Lady—once stipulated that she could only accept an article of mine on the condition that I should induce the people referred to therein to bear the expense of having their photographs reproduced. The offer did not appeal to me. It was the same lady, by the way, who on the second occasion that I submitted -a contribution, offered me two guineas for three thousand words and nine photographs, the copy- right to belong to her. When I sent a district messenger boy to the office to say that I was not in the business for my health, she replied on a postcard, “ There is no oceasion to be rude.” This question of payment is a delicate one. Not even the most brazen of free lances likes to haggle over the matter, but when he receives an experi- ence such as the one just recounted he would scarcely be human if he did not venture on a protest. For myself, I have two working rules. One of them is to take all I can get, and the other is to cash a cheque first and draw attention to its inadequacy afterwards. I applied this latter on one occasion when a certain weekly journal, called, let me say, Our Girls, commissioned me to write a three-thousand word article (entailing the interview- ing of six different people, and the supplying of eight photographs), and then sent me four guineas for the same. On receipt of my letter of polite expostula- tion, the proprietors curtly informed me that if I was dissatisfied I might return the cheque and they would return the article. I explained that my system prevented me sending back the original cheque; I accordingly forwarded one of my own instead. Notwithstanding these little rebuffs I recently approached a third journal, the editorial direction of which was also in the hands of a lady. The paper was a weekly one, and had only just been started. It was, in fact, from reading its initial number that I conceived the idea that it contained an opening for some one who had a slight acquaint- ance with practical journalism. In “Number One,” for example, a prominent feature was made of “Answers to Correspondents,” although no THE AUTHOR. explanation was given as to how “ Constant Reader,” ‘Subscriber from the First,” and the other seekers after enlightenment had written their letters of inquiry before the. paper had even appeared. Several other points in the general make-up and management of Cackle—as I will call the bantling—also struck me as betraying the hand of the amateur. To the office of Cackle, therefore, I went, armed with a selection of articles and an assortment of ideas to be submitted diplomatically if occasion offered, and taking with me a letter of introduction provided by an acquaintance of the editor. At the top of avery long flight of stairs was a door marked “QackLE, Lrp. Srricrty Private.” Having negotiated a hundred and twenty steps, a little matter like this was not going to stand in my way. Accordingly, I rapped on the door and was bidden by a feminine chorus to enter. On doing so, I found myself in a small room occupied by five ladies, sitting round a table littered with manu- scripts and making a light luncheon off; a bag of mixed biscuits and a box of chocolates. I tendered one of them my card together with the letter of introduction, requesting her to convey it to the editor, and then sat down on the only unoccupied chair. While the messenger was absent her colleagues continued an animated discussion which my arrival seemed to have interrupted. From fragments that caught my ear it seemed evident that press-day was at hand. “ What is a stick, Gertie ?”” inquired one peroxide of hydrogen-tinted young woman of another. “Why do you want to know, Maudie?” “Oh, the horrid printer says that he is a stick short,” was the reply, “and I’m sure I don’t know what he means. Yesterday he sent to ask if I wanted galleys or page proofs? Why on earth can’t printers talk English ? " At the end of ten minutes or so the messenger returned. I rose expectantly. “ The editor says she can’t see you,” was the rather disconcerting announcement that met me. “That is sufficiently obvious,” I remarked, blandly, “unless she is looking through the keyhole.” “The editor of Cackle only interviews visitors by appointment,” explained a member of the staff, in the tone that would be adopted when referring to the Times. “ Perhaps you will call again.” There was no mistaking the hint con- veyed in the last observation. I took it without delay. Since then, ladies’ papers as a class have not received any great amount of attention from me. Iam unable to think, however, that this has had that adverse effect upon their circulation that it ought to. H. W.  amt THE AUTHOR, 211 GENERAL MEMORANDA. 1 ERE are a few standing rules to be observed in an agreement. There are four methods of dealing with literary property :— I. Selling it Outright. This is in some respects the most satisfactory, if a proper price can be obtained, But the transaction should be managed by a competent agent, or with the advice of the Secretary of the Society. II. A Profit-Sharing Agreement (a bad form of agreement), In this case the following rules should be attended to : (1.) Not to sign any agreement in which the cost of pro- duction forms a part without the strictest investigation. (2.) Not to give the publisher the power of putting the profits into his own pocket by charging for advertisements in his own organs, or by charging exchange advertise- ments. Therefore keep control of the advertisements, (3.) Not to allow a special charge for ‘office expenses,” unless the same allowance is made to the author, (4.) Not to give up American, Colonial, or Continental rights. (5.) Not to give up serial or translation rights. (6.) Not to bind yourself for future work to any publisher. As well bind yourself for the future to any one solicitor or doctor ! III. The Royalty System. It is above all things necessary to know what the proposed royalty means to both sides. It is now possible for an author to ascertain approximately and very nearly the truth. From time to time the very important figures connected with royalties are published in Zhe Author. Readers can also work out the figures themselves from the “Cost of Production.” IY. A Commission Agreement. The main points are :-— (1.) Be careful to obtain a fair cost of production. (2.) Keep control of the advertisements. (3.) Keep control of the sale price of the book. General. All other forms of agreement are combinations of the four above mentioned. Such combinations are generally disastrous to the author. Never sign any agreement without competent advice from the Secretary of the Society. Stamp all agreements with the Inland Revenue stamp. Avoid agreements by letter if possible. The main points which the Society has always demanded from the outset are :— C1.) That both sides shall know what an agreement means. (2.) The inspection of those account books which belong to the author. We are advised that this is a right, in the nature of a common law right, which cannot be denied or withheld. ————_—_+—~»@—,______ WARNINGS TO DRAMATIC AUTHORS. IES: EVER sign an agreement without submitting it to the \ Secretary of the Society of Authors or some com- petent legal authority. 2. It is well to be extremely careful in negotiating for the production of a play with anyone except an established manager. 3. There are three forms of dramatic contract for PLAYS IN THREE OR MORE ACTS :—_ (a.) SALE OUTRIGHT OF THE PERFORMING RIGHT, This is unsatisfactory, An author who enters ito such a contract should stipulate in the con- tract for production of the piece by a certain date and for proper publication of his name on the play-bills, (0.) SALE oF PERFORMING RIGHT OR OF A LICENCE TO PERFORM ON THE BASIS oF PERCENTAGES on gross receipts. Percentages vary between 5 and 15 per cent. An author should obtain a percentage on the sliding scale of gross receipts in preference to the American system. Should obtain a sum in advance of percentages. A fixed date on or before which the play should be performed. (¢.) SALE OF PERFORMING RIGHT OR OF A LICENCE TO PERFORM ON THE BASIS OF ROYALTIES Ge, fixed nightly fees). This method should be always avoided except in cases where the fees are likely to be small or difficult to collect. The other safeguards set out under heading (4.) apply also in this case, 4, PLAYS IN ONE ACT are often sold outright, but it is better to obtain a small nightly fee if possible, and a sum paid in advance of such fees in any event. It is extremely important that the amateur rights of one-act plays should be reserved. 5. Authors should remember that performing rights can be limited, and are usually limited, by town, country, and time. This is most important, 6. Authors should not assign performing rights, but should grant a licence to perform, The legal distinction is of great importance, 7, Authors should remember that performing rights in a play are distinct from literary copyright. A manager holding the performing right or licence to perform cannot print the book of the words. 8. Never forget that AMERICAN RIGHTS may be exceed- ingly valuable. ‘Yhey should never be included in English agreements without the author obtaining a substantial consideration. 9. Agreements for collaboration should be carefully drawn and executed before collaboration is commenced. 10. An author should remember that production of a play is highly speculative : that he runs a very great risk of delay and a breakdown in the fulfilment of his contract. He should therefore guard himself all the more carefully in the beginning. 11. An author must remember that the dramatic market is exceedingly limited, and that for a novice the first object is to obtain adequate publication. As these warnings must necessarily be incomplete, on account of the wide range of the subject of dramatic con- tracts, THOSE AUTHORS DESIROUS OF FURTHER INFORMA- TION ARE REFERRED TO THE SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY _ HO? HOW TO USE THE SOCIETY. —+~— 1. VERY member has a right toask for and to receive advice upon his agreements, his choice of a pub- lisher, or any dispute arising in the conduct of his business or the administration of his property. If the advice sought is such as can be given best by a solicitor the member has a right to an opinion from the Society’s solicitors. If the case is such that Counsel’s opinion is desirable, the Committee will obtain for him Counsel’s opinion. All this without any cost to the member.  212 2. Remember that questions connected with copyright and publishers’ agreements do not generally fall within the experience of ordinary solicitors. Therefore, do not seruple to use the Society. 3. Send to the Office copies of past agreements and past accounts, with a copy of the book represented. The Secretary will always be glad to have any agreements, new or old, for inspection and note. ‘The information thus obtained may prove invaluable. 4, BEFORE SIGNING ANY AGREEMENT WHATEVER, send the document to the Society for examination. 5. Remember always that in belonging to the Society you are fighting the battles of other writers, even if you are reaping no benefit to yourself, and that you are advancing the best interests of literature in promoting the independence of the writer. 6. The Committee have now arranged for the reception of members’ agreements and their preservation in a fire- proof safe. The agreements will, of course, be regarded as confidential documents to be read only by the Secretary, who will keep the key of the safe. The Society now offers: —(1) To read and advise upon agreements and to give advice concerning publishers. (2) To stamp agreements in readiness for a possible action upon them. (3) To keep agreements. (4) To enforce payments due according to agreements. 7. No confract should be entered into with a literary agent without the advice of the Secretary of the Society. Members are strongly advised not to accept without careful consideration the contracts submitted to them by literary agents, and are recommended to submit them for inter- pretation and explanation to the Secretary of the Society. 8. Many agents neglect to stamp agreements. This must be done within fourteen days of first execution. The Secretary will undertake it on behalf of members. 9. Some agents endeavour to prevent authors from referring matters to the Secretary of the Society ; so do some publishers. Members can make their own deductions and act accordingly. —_—_—_———__+—__+—__—_ THE READING BRANCH. —_—— EMBERS will greatly assist the Society in this branch of its work by informing young writers of its existence. Their MSS. can be read and treated as a composition is treated by a coach, The term MSS. includes NOT ONLY WORKS OF FICTION, BUT POETRY AND DRAMATIC WORKS, and when it is possible, under special arrangement, technical and scientific works. The Readers are writers of competence and experience. The fee is one guinea. —_—_———__+——_o—__———_ NOTICES. — HE Editor of The Author begs to remind members of the Society that, although the paper is sent to them free of charge, the cost of producing it would be a very heavy charge on the resources of the Society if a great many members did not forward to the Secretary the modest 5s. 6d. subscription for the year. THE AUTHOR. Communications for Zhe Author should be addressed to the Offices of the Society, 39, Old Queen Street, Storey’s Gate, S.W., and should reach the Editor NOT LATER THAN THE 21st OF EACH MONTH. All persons engaged in literary work of any kind, whether members of the Society or not, are invited to communicate to the Editor any points connected with their work which it would be advisable in the general interest to publish. —_——_—_—\§|o—< > __—— COMMUNICATIONS AND LETTERS ARE INVITED BY THE Eprror on all subjects connected with literature, but on no other subjects whatever. Every effort will be made to return articles which cannot be accepted. — a Tur SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY begs to give notice that all remittances are acknowledged by return of post, and he requests members who do not receive an answer to important communications within two days to write to him without delay. All remittances should be crossed Union Bank of London, Chancery Lane, or be sent by registered letter only. AUTHORITIES. —-——s—_ N the case of Judge Parry against Mr. Israel Gollancz, which dealt with the publication of “ Dorothy Osborne’s Love Letters,” a general injunction was granted to the plaintiff. Various views of the questions involved have been put forward in the papers during the past month In a letter to the Zimes, dated April 238, 1908, the plaintiff's solicitors state that the proceedings are not concluded. We must therefore defer any comment both on this ground and also because the matter has not yet come before our Committee. Mr. Loneman in his “ Notes on Books” (an interesting trade circular published by his firm) gives the following definitions :— DEFINITION OF THE TERMS “IMPRESSION,” “ EDITION,” “ RE-ISSUE.” ImprReEssron.—A number of copies printed at any one time. When a book is reprinted without change it should be called a new “impression,” to distinguish it from an “ edition,” as defined below. EpDrrron.—An impression in which the matter has under- gone some change, or for which the type has been reset. ReE-IssuE.—A re-publication at a different price, or ina different form, of part of an impression which has already been placed on the market.—From Longman’s “ Notes on Books.” We believe these definitions have been approved by the Publishers’ Association. There is one point, however, which has not been settled. It appears to us to be the most important point of all. We ask Mr. Longman if it is not possible to  Cees & THE AUTHOR. 213 settle the unit of an edition or impression? In every other trade involving weights, measures, and numbers units have been settled long ago. It is only necessary for the Association to come to some conclusion and bind its members to recognise some definite system. A thousand copies seem to be a reasonable number to fix. Thus, if a limited issue of five hundred copies was produced, the publisher could state that he was about t6 produce half an edition, or that the issue would be limited to half an edition. Again, instead of seeing the advertise- ments of the large sales quoted in numbers, it would be sufficient merely to say twenty, thirty, or forty editions or impressions. We draw attention to this special point, as in one case that came before the Secretary of the Society the author com- plained that although his publisher was advertising his book as in its third edition, only twenty-five copies had been sold. This was naturally very annoying to the author, but he had no legal position, and could not claim damage, as the sole control of the issue of the book was left, by the agreement, in the hands of the publisher. Again, there is the guarantee agreement not in- frequently before the Secretary of the Society from another publishing house that states : “* This edition shall be the property of the publisher,” or that “The author shall receive 10 per cent. royalty after the sale of the first edition.” In neither case is the amount of the edition mentioned. It is important, therefore, to all those who trade in books that some settlement of the unit of an edition should be obtained, and when that unit is settled the Publishers’ Association should enforce observance of it on its members. It is well known that some of the editions of the daily papers are little more than formal issues, but it would be unfair to publishers and authors to put the publication of books on the same level as the issue of journalistic editions. Members of the Society will no doubt recall to mind that a discussion occurred not long ago in the Literary Supplement to the Zimes, on the subject of the payment for articles by a cheque with a copyright receipt printed on the back. The discussion arose out of the fact that a banker, acting on the instructions of his client, had refused payment in those cases where the receipt form was altered. It would be interesting to have a list, complete as far as possible, of those magazines and those firms which issue this form of cheque. We should be obliged if those members of the Society who have received such cheques within the last six months will forward to the Secretary the name of the magazine or publisher. In the early days of printing, when literary property began to have a bre definite aan value, there were two forces acting to obtain the profits of the author’s labour—(1) the power of the Crown, which was inclined to adopt printing as a monopoly for its own benefit; and (2) the power of the trade, which was inclined to think that the labour of authors should be for its private advantage, Accordingly, by degrees, legislation was evolved, primarily, for the protection of the Crown monopoly and the printing trade. : As printing developed and literature expanded, the public gradually came to view the matter in a different light, and to consider, after all, that the author might have some right in his own property. Legislation was then introduced, not on behalf of the trade, but to protect the author. In all the civilised countries of Europe modern legislation has tended to give a wider basis and firmer security to the author. Surely to this he is entitled. He is as much the owner of his property —perhaps more so—as the man who buys a piece of land is the owner of that land. In another column of The Author we have much pleasure in printing an article headed “ An American Point of View.” We see with some amuse- ment, not unmixed with sadness, that the American printing trades are still inclined to consider that legislation dealing with literary property should not be passed with a view to the protection of the author, but rather with a view to fostering the: trade. They have headed the article “ Of Interest to Authors, etc.” There is irony in this remark, no doubt suitable to the American humour. 1 THE LATE LIEUT.-COLONEL G. F. R. HENDERSON, C.B. ——~ + N the March number of Zhe Author we I expressed regret that the name of this officer had been inadvertently included among those: members who had died in 1902. We were un- happily only premature in the announcement, for he died on the 5th March, at Assouan, Upper Egypt,. where he had gone for the benefit of his health,. which had for some time been precarious. This was largely owing to his unremitting work. He never allowed himself proper rest from his literary labours, and so anxious was he to push on with the: official history of the Boer War, which had been entrusted to his able pen, that he insisted on taking.  214 his work with him, and had nearly completed the first volume, when he died, in his forty-ninth year. This much lamented officer was the eldest son of the Dean of Carlisle. He was educated at Oxford and entered the Service in 1878. He was appointed an Instructor at the Royal Military College in 1890, and in 1892 had become so well known by his studies and writings on Military History and Tactics that he was given the Professorship of Military History and Art at the Staff College in succession to Colonel F. Maurice. He obtained a brevet majority for his services in the Egyptian War of 1882. He distin- guished himself by his admirable tactical studies, “The Campaign of Fredericksburg,” “ The Battle of Spicheren,” and “ The Battle of Worth,” which were characterised by insight and power of analysis and a knowledge of men, as well as by a literary style to which such works seldom aspire. But his best known work is “Stonewall Jackson and the American War,” which was speedily translated into many European languages, and will ever remain as a model of military biography. Its publication stamped Colonel Henderson as one of the most important military writers since Sir William Napier, and had he lived he would un- doubtedly have had his name inscribed very high up on the roll of fame. He worked indefatigably in South Africa as Director of Intelligence, and was of the greatest assistance to Lord Roberts ; but his health, which had been undermined by over- work, broke down after Paardeberg, and he was invalided home. After an all too brief rest he began the History of the War, and travelled over to South Africa again to revisit the scenes of the battles he was describing as was his con- stant practice. This, though fatiguing, was of benefit to him as giving some little respite from work ; but when he resumed his writing and heavy brain work, it was seen that the strain was too great, and a winter in Egypt was prescribed. His splendid example of constant devotion to his profession, and his high character, exercised a lasting influence upon the officers of the present generation ; and his literary work, though pic- turesque and classical in style, was thoroughly practical in its aims. His descriptions were vivid, and he never ceased to search out the why and the wherefore of events. One of his latest efforts was the admirable and characteristic preface he wrote to Count Sternberg’s “ My Experiences of the Boer War” (Berlin: Reimer, 1901), which was trans- lated into English (Longmans), and which, though in the main a lively and amusing account of adventures as a war correspondent, contains many reflections upon modern war that are at least worth consideration. In every way—as an officer, as a strenuous and clear-minded instructor, and as a THE AUTHOR. writer—Colonel Henderson, who was of a most unassuming and amiable character, will be long regretted in the British Army, and, as a well- known writer of descriptions of foreign armies and their characteristics in his excellent letters written to the Zimes while attending foreign manceuvres, his loss will be much felt by the general public. —___+—>__+____ OF COLLABORATION. + I WONDER if it is a confession of weakness to acknowledge that I find something agreeable in a state of indecision—not with regard to matters of prime importance, be it understood, but with regard to those smaller matters of which the friendly discussion gives point to the conversation of cultivated men. To be poised between two friendly disputants, inclining now this way and now that as one or the other drops fresh crystals of reason into the scale, and finally to attain a state of rest midway between the two, thus testifying to all the world that once more much may be said upon both sides, and that where there is six of the one there is again half a dozen of the other, is a condition in which I like to be, a function I am ever happy to perform. Yet, the function dis- charged, I like to draw the disputants aside and with deference submit to their consideration such points about the matter of debate as I think they may have ignored or failed to see. It has been my invariable experience that I thus acquire some reputation of being an intelligent fellow, one with brains in his pate, sir, open to reason, and not too proud to learn. If I may thus achieve renown as being a clever man, I am well satisfied to let my ears do all the work, and give my tongue a rest. Others may dogmatise: I am content to suggest ; and if, when all is over, captious critics say it has been much ado about nothing. I can quote Shakespeare too, and say ‘“‘all’s well that ends well.” It was thus with me the other day, when the conversation turned upon collaboration in fiction. I found that most of those present had in their early days collaborated with some friend, being induced to do so by the old argument that two heads are better than one, or by their observation of the fact that babies frequently teach themselves to walk by holding on to chairs. I was interested, however, to find that the general vote was adverse to collaboration. Isolated instances of good novels written in collaboration were, of course, known and cited, but it was suggested that there was something in our national temper, or temperament, unfavourable to the method, and the suggestion was supported by the assertion that, with the  THE AUTHOR. exception of Besant and Rice, there was no instance of British authors working together continuously and producing such happy results as did MM. Erckmann-Chatrian and Paul and Victor Mar- gueritte. With this view Besant himself agreed. “If I were asked for my opinion as to collaboration in fiction,” he says, “it would be decidedly against it, Isay this without the least desire to depreciate the literary ability of my friend and collaborateur. ‘The arrangement lasted for ten years, and resulted in as many successful novels. I only mean that, after all, an artist must necessarily stand alone. - +. There will come atime when both men fret under the condition; when each desires, but is not able, to enjoy the reputation of his own good work ; and feels, with the jealousy natural to an artist, irritated by the loss of half of himself, and ready to accept the responsibility of failure in order to make sure of the meed of success... . The collaboration would have broken down, I believe, amicably. It would have been far better if it had broken down five years before the death of Rice, so that he might have achieved what has been granted to myself—an independent literary position.” The modesty and sincerity of Sir Walter Besant were such that it is absurd to try to read between these lines and discover any little-mindedness in roserve. That “jealousy natural to an artist ” is the quality which he discovers in the British temperament unfavourable to the method of joint production, and, so far as collaboration in fiction is concerned, there cannot be much dispute that his point is well taken. Sir Walter always declined to offer any explana- tion or give any account of the method on which he collaborated with Rice, although this was a matter with regard to which he was pestered for information. Why people should be so anxious to find out how collaboration is conducted is a form of curiosity that always inspires me with amused wonder. It seems to me that it should bea reason- ably easy matter, provided proper provision is made at the outset for the ‘personal equation.” For those, however, who desire light upon the subject, and have not had the passage brought before their notice, I may, perhaps, quote a couple of paragraphs from a recent issue of the Daily Mail having reference to Mr. and Mrs. Egerton Castle. “The collaboration of husband and wife is rare and interesting. Mr. and Mrs. Castle plan out their work together, talk it over thoroughly, and finally write it in unison, so that it is almost impossible in the end to decide with whom any particular idea originally started. The authors never write of places or people they do not know familiarly. Mr. Castle states that he never begins to write out a romance until it has been complete 215 in his mind (as discussed and elaborated with his wife) for a very long time. It is only when both character and incident and the reciprocal influence of one on the other have become familiar that the story is begun. “After that the writing goes fast enough at an average rate of 2,000 words a day—writing in the morning and revising at odd moments of the day. Thus a long novel will be written in three months ; but, of course, the period from its conception is much longer—generally a year or more.” The obviousness of that explanation detracts not a whit from its interest, and any difficulty which other people may experience in applying the principle to practical use themselves will be found due to their own personality and that of the writer with whom they work. The old simile of cog- wheels applies to collaborators as well as to friends ; while it is essential that each party to the partner- ship should supply the other’s deficiencies, the wheels must be oiled if they are to run smoothly, and the kind of oil most suitable to the par- ticular machinery will be ascertained without difficulty. This sort of partnership between husband and wife is not, however, so rare as might be supposed. I know of several instances among writers of serial stories for the cheap newspapers. The editor of one of these told me he found the system worked admirably in practice, the wife generally supplying the battle, murder, and sudden death, while the husband supplied the tender passion and what one of Mr. Morley Roberts’s characters describes as “ideal poppycock.” The information struck me as being very illuminating. Upon the question of collaboration in fiction I thus remain in a state of, to me, agreeable inde- cision. With regard to collaboration in the other forms of literary work, I am, perhaps, less vague. In the writing of plays the association of two minds seems very often desirable—one to supply that brilliant superficial cleverness which modern playgoers seem to require at the hands of drama- tists, the other to construct the play on the practical lines necessary to make it effective from the front of the house and practicable from behind. One very well known novelist, and part author of several very successful plays, told me he could never get his people on the stage, If they were put there for him he could make them dazzling in their wit. “You put them in the right place,” he said, “at the right time, and I'll put the right things in their mouths. It’ll be terrific!” Un- fortunately my peculiar genius also runs in the direction of “cackle,” while I am as ignorant of “osses”” as the Jubilee Plunger, so that play is still unwritten. I did, however, write a play once in collaboration with a man whose forte was 216 construction. We had an agreement drawn up and engrossed and stamped; I almost decided to have my copy of it framed. My friend was to supply the bones and see that they were all properly articulated, and I was to put the meat upon them and clothe the finished article in the latest mode. The work was done, upon the whole, without excessive loss of blood, and in due course the play began its round of the managers. Writing a play, by the way, is the easiest part of the business ; the dramatist’s trouble does not begin until that is done. The first manager wrote very civilly to say he had read it with interest; and, whilst it was admirably constructed, it was written in so dull and illiterate a fashion that he was afraid he could do nothing with it. My friend explained that he was only responsible for the construction, and produced the agreement to prove his words and attest his competence to construct another play for the manager to be written by some one else than me. The second manager also wrote very civilly. He found the dialogue amazing in its brilliance ; the wit was pungent, the satire refined, and the whole writing in perfect taste. The construction, how- ever, was so amateurish, and showed such ignorance of stage technique, that he, too, was afraid he could do nothing with it. My friend explained that the writing was his, the construction mine ; and if the manager would supply him with a scenario, upon whatsoever subject, he would be happy to write it up. His explanation on this occasion was uncorroborated by documentary evidence. The third manager wrote more civilly still. Construction and dialogue were both superlatively good—far above the average. The story, how- ever, did not appeal tohim. He thought so highly of the work that he would like to consider the ques- tion of commissioning a play by the same authors. Would my friend explain the terms of the collabo- ration, and give him some information as to my position as a writer for the stage? My friend wrote by return of post to explain that the play was entirely his; he dictated it to me, and my name appeared as part author because, in the then state of his finances, it was inconvenient for him to pay me a weekly salary as secretary, and I agreed to be paid by a percentage of his royalties provided he would allow my name to be published on all pro- grammes and bills of the play. I do not think there is any moral in this anecdote. I tell it because it relates to my only experience of joint authorship, and is, therefore, not mal apropos in an article upon collaboration. V. E. M. THE AUTHOR. AUTHORS AND MODERN THRIFT. es By Bass BLAKE. I. The Best Provision for Age. HATEVER the advantages may be of the career of a successful writer, a uniform income is not one of them. The merit of his work may show uo falling off ; but all the same, his profits are materially affected by changes in the public taste, and the various moods and maladies peculiar to readers. A commercial man, once his position is assured, in many cases produces his income by repetition of those faculties to which he owed its commencement; but with a writer, each year brings with it the necessity for origi- nality, and for the initiation and working out of fresh ideas. A prudent business man will each year set aside a sum for the depreciation of his machinery, with a view in a certain number of years to replace it by a new plant. It is upon far more delicate machinery that the bulk and quality of a writer’s work depends, and it is machinery which can never be replaced ; yet it is common to find that no provision is made for its depreciation. In most cases the writer lacks that foresight which teaches the commercial man to conserve a certain proportion of his income against bad times. The author frequently lives at the top of his income, disburses his capital as it arrives, and whilst being peculiarly at the mercy of changes and depressions, makes little or no preparation for them. A common reason for this omission is that the author’s circumstances and habit of mind do not bring him into touch with those means of thrift with which the man of business ig more or less familiar. That well without water which is termed “the City” is but a name to him, and his financial experiences are often confined to some chance scheme which falls in his way, or to disastrous incursions into the Stock Exchange. He may possess some vague notion that in insurance, pro- viding as it does co-operative protection for the individual, there are some elements of attraction ; but the number of policies are so many, and in their nature so complicated, that he is repelled from the subject. He has small experience of finance, and in the multitude of schemes, each purporting to be the best in the market, he sees only confusion. Modern life insurance nevertheless offers to the author perhaps the only means of providing his family with means at his death, or himself with a provision in age. The popular idea of the question is, that if a man happens to die young it is a good bargain for himself and a bad one for the company, but, should he happen to live, insurance becomes a very poor investment. A policy, however, suited to  THE AUTHOR. a man who is dependent wholly upon his own powers as a means of income, must be one which guarantees to him not only life insurance, but a capital sum when his powers of production may be expected to be on the wane, and is therefore strictly a life, and not a death policy, as in ordinary insurance. The form of policy which on the whole is most suited to authors is that known as endowment assurance. This provides capital to his family at his death, as in ordinary insurance, but it also guarantees to him a sum in cash a stated number of years hence, when, it may be expected, it will be very necessary to him. ‘This contract is simple. The assured pays to the company a yearly premium for a stated number of years, at the end of which the policy matures and his premiums cease. If in the meantime he should die, the sum assured (together with profits attaching to the policy) is paid to his estate. But should he survive to the age stated, the sum assured (with the total profits) is paid to him in cash. Endowment assurances are effected for any term of years—say ten, twenty, thirty, or forty—and, of course, the shorter the term the higher the premium percent. Twenty or thirty years is, however, a suitable term, as being sufficient time to allow the profits allotted to his policy time to accumulate at compound interest to a material sum. A man with any sum to fifty pounds per annum to set aside has very limited channels for invest- ment. In financial circles the advantages are all with the capitalists who pull the strings, and to the profits of whom the small investor cheerfully contributes from his small income. But the author cannot afford to run risks. With a good British company the security is equal to that of a State institution, and an endowment assurance therein offers the best secure investment which, so far as I am able to judge, it is possible to obtain. An instance is provided by a man of thirty who sets aside twenty pounds per annum as apremium. For this he obtains a profit-sharing endowment assurance for £600. At the age of sixty the policy matures and he will receive, with accruing bonuses according to last declara- tion, a total sum of £1,000 in cash. He will have paid in by this time a sum of £600, and he receives £1,000, besides a life insurance cover provided during the whole of the term during which the policy has been maturing. But as a fact, the policy has been even more advantageous to him, as the Government allows a rebate of income tax, alone among all investments, upon life insurance premiums. Reckoning the tax at one shilling in the pound, his £20 premium is reduced to £19, and the amount therefore he actually disburses in thirty years is £570 instead 217 of £600. The return of £1,000 is close upon 4 per cent. compound interest, with the addition of the cover provided of the sum assured, with profits to date, should he die in the interim. Compound interest is a result not achieved without some element of compulsion. There are few men with sufficient strength of mind to compel themselves faithfully to set aside each year in a bank such asum as £20 or £50, and allow it to accumulate at compound interest. Besides, such savings provide no life insurance in the event of early death. The form of a policy provides what may be termed obligatory thrift, inasmuch al- though, after a few years, there is a surrender value to the policy should it be discontinued, by far the best bargain is to be made by following out the policy to maturity. An author with a sense of his responsibilities must see in endowment assurance a matter of some importance. It provides for his family in the event of his death or for his own future in his age. But he is ill-advised to embark upon any scheme without some study and inquiry. Gener- ally, it may be said that a good British office of established reputation offers the best investment, but the results in some companies are decidedly better than in others, and care in selection will be amply repaid. I have shown above the result of an endowment payable at sixty with a premium of £20. The following table shows more completely the results of an endowment payable at fifty with a yearly premium of £50. Cox’s TABLE SHOWING THE WORKING OF AN ENDOW- MENT ASSURANCE. AGE AT ENTRY, 30. AMOUNT oF Poxicy, £1,000. Plan of policy : Twenty-year endowment assurance, viz., payable at age 50 or previous death. £ s. da. Annual premium for twenty years ... 50 8 4 Less income tax at ls, in the £ 210 4 . ninteainamneonnae poet Net cost ... £47 18 0 WORKING OF POLICY. C. At death of insured before age 50. | | In return for net | At end of year. | The company | premiums paid | Return for cost. | will pay— ORE | _ — 3 | £1,045 £143 | £902 5 1,095 239 | 856 io im ae 15 1,313 718 595 19 1,378 910 463  218 B. Inevent of surrender of policy before age 50 the company will grant— ) In return for premiums paid Or cash sur- lA paid-wp policy render value At end of year. She. | of— of— 3 | 8195 ( Ane eka 5 tb ee 139 | 229 9 | «on oo we fe 15 1,063 [ce 510 718 19 1,323 | ons 677 | 910 death. | ‘A. On survival to age 50. The company will pay (including bonuses) £1,438 In return for total premiums paid of... 958 Return over cost ee bo £480 The subject of modern insurance is one of some complexity, but the cardinal facts are straight- forward. There are other forms of endowment assurance, but the simple with-profit policy is found to be the most profitable to the assured. It provides life insurance, and, what is very material, the largest possible sum in cash when his policy matures. For the rest, if there is any point which, to an author interested in the subject, is not sufficiently clear, the writer of this article is at his service. The above figures are those of a first-class representative British office. Se THE LAW OF COPYRIGHT. — t-—~— 9 M* SCRUTTON has got tired of waiting, and no wonder. We welcome heartily the 4th Edition of his able work on Copyright. It has been needed for some time. Mr. Scrutton’s sound and careful deductions, the result of exhaustive and diligent labour, come as a “boon and a blessing” to those who have studied the intricacies and difficulties that surround all the questions of Copyright. ° No writer has presented the subject so clearly and distinctly, has gone so thoroughly to the heart of the question, and swept away all those side issues that might tend to obscure any given point. The work is so ably written that it would be possible for a layman, after perusal of its pages, to deceive himself with the idea that he was an authority on the subject. The chapters dealing with Literary Copyright treat this division of statute and case law from every aspect, and bring forward the very latest decisions. The chapters dealing with Artistic Copy- right are perhaps not quite so full, ‘There are one or two points on which we should have been pleased THE AUTHOR. if Mr. Scrutton had turned his discriminating powers with more freedom. Take as an example the difficult question of Artistic Copyright and Book I]lustration. : With regard to Canadian Copyright (an exceed- ingly involved and difficult matter) the author has not brought together the very latest information. He makes no reference to the last Act of the Canadian Legislature, or the refusal of the Canadian Government to collect the royalties under the Foreign Reprints Act. Although the author has not dealt in any of the former editions with the subject of Copyright in foreign countries, it is a pity that he did not take it up now. As Copyright under the Berne Convention is almost universal it is of great importance to all those who hold literary property to have an epito- mised statement of the limits that surround their property in those countries included in the Con- vention. Mr. Copinger, in his able book, under- took this work, but since the last edition was pro- duced there has been considerable alteration in the laws of the different countries. With Mr. Macgillwray’s book and with Mr. Scrutton’s 4th edition, and we hope—at no distant date—a supplement containing the further informa- tion, Copyright has been lucky in its exponents. Whilst touching on these minor faults of omission, we must pay Mr. Scrutton every compliment and thank him for his labours, which are so amply justified by the result. ———————E HOMES FOR WANDERING MSS. + HE second volume of the “ Writers’ Year Book” is before us. The price is 1s. 6d. net. Itis published from Granville House, Arundel Street, Strand, W.C. The great point in a book of this kind must necessarily be its accuracy, and on looking care- fully through the lists compiled they seem to be satisfactory, though, no doubt, in the publication of all lists there are bound to be a few mistakes. The book is for the assistance of those authors who desire to find the proper channel for their talented productions. It puts before them the names and addresses of five hundred papers that receive MSS., photographs or drawings, and at the same time explains as far as possible the conditions on which these commodities are accepted. The book opens with three articles: “‘ How to Write for the Press,” “Journalism for English and American Women,” and “ Writing for the Magazines.” It is not our desire to criticise these articles, but it is our opinion that in a book of this kind they USO PRRSOS IES  THE AUTHOR. are out of place. It should confine itself entirely to one object, and make its sole aim to be as practical and as perfect as possible on the points it undertakes to elucidate. Articles on the ‘‘ How To” in literature are in evidence in many other works. It is not necessary to multiply them. Ifthe editor had been ambitious to deal with the legal and technical questions surrounding the marketing of MSS., drawings and photographs, a book at least three times the size of the present handy volume would hardly have exhausted his ambition. The book, however, cannot fail to be of use to those literary and journalistic tyros who are anxious either to widen their market or increase their income. a se THE IRRITABILITY OF AUTHORS. es HE irritability of authors is proverbial. What is proverbial may be, in a rough way, assumed to be not very far from the truth. Why the author should be a_ peculiarly touchy and snappish animal does not so clearly appear. The phenomenon can hardly be ex- plained in the latest fashionable way of accounting for everything by the single word ‘heredity.’ Perhaps, however, in the secrets of Nature’s workshop there is some trick of warp and woof that, of necessity, occasions the peculiar com- plexion which constitutes irritability of nature to be a part of the composition of an author’s brain, just as it has been said that all nervous people are monarchists, and all melancholy people democrats ; which, after all, may not he true. Or, a more likely explanation may be sought in the fact that the exercise of an author’s profession, one which induces a nervous sensibility of a peculiarly com- plicated kind, possibly tends to nervous tension that causes the fibre of an author’s brain to jar under circumstances incapable of producing, in more slackly-strung natures, any vibration at all. Be all that as it may, this is indisputable, that only too many people, who have had a good deal to do with authors, are more than ready to bear witness to their being a very captious and touchy species, anything but delightful to their personal friends, and often trying in the extreme to the patience of those whom they ought to treat with forbearance and regard. All this is sufficiently unfortunate. Yet, perhaps, after all, no one is so bitterly punished by the author’s proclivity to snappishness as the author himself. For the only happy aspect of this sad failing of literary people is, that the culprit is not ignorant of his own excessive irritability. Only, seeing that literary people are fully con- scious of this weakness, why are not penmen of all 219 classes constantly on their guard against it ? Why do they not frequently ask themselves, in all serious- ness, ‘‘ What is the use of losing one’s temper ? ” It might have been supposed that a man, when meditating turning author, would recollect amongst other things, that one of the results of his enter- prise, whether successful or unsuccessful, must inevitably be a vast increase of whatever share of natural irritability Nature had put into him. But it is a well-known fact that men mostly become authors either without knowing it, or, at the best, without thinking at all definitely about what they are doing. And one of the consequences of this is, that when the hardships and difficulties of literary enterprises begin to appear, authors are enormously astonished, and not a little out of humour and out of heart. How people can suppose that any human enterprise can exist not beset with difficulties and disillusions is really inexplicable. Yet it is certain that no one thinks much beforehand of difficulties in authorship. The soldier and the sailor must run risks and encounter trials. The lives of solicitors, of medical men, of merchants, all imply many restrictions and much self-denial. Every calling in life has its draw- backs and its dangers. No one is ignorant of the fact. In making choice of a profession men reflect upon its hardships, and prepare themselves to face them. Seldom, however, in the case of literature. Qui nihil scripsit nullum putat esse laborem. Almost every man is persuaded that he could write a book well enough if he chose to take the trouble. After he has begun writing the difficulties appear, and then ensue the phenomena of the author’s peculiar irritability and proclivity to lose his temper. The first person with whom the author gets into a rage is himself. Little harm enough in that, it will be said—a just retribution! Only it is no jesting matter to the man conscious of possessing all the abilities and powers requisite for success—saviny the knack of keeping his temper. The story will not shape itself. The characters will not come out well defined. The scenario is a tangle. The pen will not obey the behests of imagination. So the author gets into a passion with them all. He smashes the pen, curses his dramatis persone, and pitches his manuscripts into the fire. And then, what is his work the for- warder for that ? No difficulties are surmounted by getting into a rage with them, but by taking time and pains patiently to effect what has to be done. The persons with whom the author next gets into a passion are invariably editors and publishers. After many holocausts, some manuscript is at last completed, often more by good luck than by good management. The editor or publisher, to whom 220 it is offered, then refuses it. In nineteen cases out of twenty the author is absolutely ignorant why it is refused—whether because it has been sent to the wrong place, or because it is really worthless, or because the publisher has just accepted a similar work, or for which of fifty other reasons. That does not prevent his form- ing hypotheses. “There is a clique.’ © Ebe publisher’s readers never look at manuscripts, unless they are written by their own friends.” “Nothing but bosh is ever accepted now.” And so forth. The author himself scarcely believes all these things that he says. But—suppose they were true. Then they would be facts about literary work with which he must reckon ; just as the market gardener must reckon with the fact that a single frost may ruin his peach crop for the year. Getting into rages will not alter the case. Why not think of the difficulties with which men contend in other professions? Why not have patience, learn wisdom from failure, and try to offer saleable work in the markets where it is wanted ? Later on the author is in a rage with the critics. Why ? Because they tell him disagreeable truths ? If they do, he is a lucky man. And seeing how difficult a thing it is, under any circumstances, to accept adverse criticism wisely, of what use is it for the author to complicate matters by losing his temper ? But the critics tell him nothing. They are asses! Be it so. And is not a man himself an ass who loses his temper with asses ? Still there remains the public—who have no discrimination ; and “ that great beast the general reader ’—whose Philistine tastes are ruining literature; and “the young person” whose mamma is the occasion of mawkishness marching triumphant through the land ; and the “ idiots ”— who persist in preferring some other man’s books ; and the general “‘ cussedness ” of everything. With all these the author is unceasingly getting into passions of different kinds. And of what use to him are his rages? Do they alter anything ? He says that he cannot help getting into a rage. But he ought to learn to be able to help it. And this is certain, if he would learn, he would have an enormous advantage over the other authors who will not. —_—____—_e—>_+___—_—__- SHAKESPEARE AND LONDON. ——— + HE regret for the loss of Sir Walter Besant, which was touchingly expressed by Lord Rosebery at the last meeting of the London Topographical Society, might well apply to a recent project for the celebration of Shakespearein London. THE AUTHOR. This movement has no fortuitous origin, it is the unfolding of a silent growth, and there has been no writer of equal influence and power so well fitted to be its exponent as Sir Walter Besant. His knowledge of history and of historical criti- cism would have enabled him to perceive that the recognition, in a special sense, of Shakespeare in London is the inevitable result of a process of development. A few words of explanation on this point will be, I think, the best means by which to recommend the matter to the attention of the Soviety of Authors and the readers of this journal. That Shakespeare spent his working life as poet and dramatist in London, and that his plays were published to the world in London theatres and printed at a London press are facts which have not penetrated the public cognisance. Why is this ? After the death of Shakespeare his vogue as a dramatist in London increased rather than dimi- nished under James and Charles; we can trace in the records of the Restoration period that the influence of Shakespeare was competing vigorously with new modes and a different dramatic con- vention; in the literary age of Queen Anne, Shakespeare was promoted from the theatre to his status as a literary classic, and his first biographer, Rowe, turned the attention of readers from the playhouse to the birthplace, Stratford-on-Avon. Ina later generation we find Dr. Johnson, who might almost be considered an embodiment and living-type of London, continuing the editorial labours of Pope and Theobald without a thought for the London associations of the plays in their origin and theatrical history. This example was improved upon by his great theatrical con- temporary, Garrick, who, inheriting the traditions of Davenant and Betterton, in a direct line from the time of Shakespeare himself, showed his unconsciousness of ‘history by becoming the most active promoter of that celebration at Stratford- on-Avon which served only too effectually to divert the minds of the dramatic world away from London, and ultimately, during the last century, to establish the Birth-place as the Mecca of the vast public of Shakespeare’s admirers. The recoil from this position has been slow and sure : its stages may be marked by a succession of literary investigators, from Malone at the beginning of the nineteenth century until the present time. The History of the Stage, which we owe to him; the investigations of Francis Douce ; the History of Shakespeare, and his Times by Drake ; the labours of John Payne Collier and the publications of the Shakespeare Society ; the works of Wright and of Halliwell ; the more popular expositions of Charles Knight and Walter Thornbury; the work and the influence of F. J. Furnival and the publications of  THE AUTHOR. the New Shakspere Society ; the History of the Stage by F. G. Fleay; the recent biography by Sidney Lee; and, perhaps I may add, my own con- tributions to the snbject. These may serve to outline a progressive study of conditions and environment, by which Shakespeare has become visualised as a working playwright, in a London not too remote for realisation from historical evidence. With this brief introduction the prospectus of the London Shakespeare League may be read with a due perception of its significance. The first five paragraphs are as follows :— For long years past there has been an enthusiastic feeling among many Englishmen that the 23rd of April, the day of England’s Patron Saint, should be revived as an annual Festival in honour of the ever-living memory of England’s greatest son and noblest pride—William Shakespeare. “Certainly it was St. George for merry England,” wrote Dr. George Macdonald in 1864, “ when Shakespeare was born. But had St. George been the best saint in the calendar—which we have little enough ground for supposing he was—it would better suit our subject to say that the Highest was thinking of His England when He sent Shakespeare into it, to be a strength, a wonder, and a gladness to the nations of His earth.’’ The 23rd of April was the death-day, and, traditionally, also the birthday of the poet. At the birthplace an annual festival is held, and the “Shakespeare Week” is worthily celebrated ; but few can avail themselves of the celebration there, and many Londoners haye expressed the hope that an organised effort might be made, duly to observe in London by various festivals the greatest day in our calendar, so that the example of the capital might eventually be followed by the Empire generally, and “‘ Shakespeare Day’ become anational and Imperial celebration, helping to re-vivify the sentiments associated with the day in bygone times. The movement which has culminated in the formation of “The London Shakespeare League” took shape during “Shakespeare Week’ last year, and, as the outcome of careful consideration, the League places in the fore-front of its aims an annual celebration to be held in London ; but the celebration is to be merely one manifestation of the work it proposes to carry through for advancing the true knowledge and appreciation of the poet’s works. It is hoped in course of time to secure a permanent habitation for the League available for its many purposes. The accompanying programme is a first attempt at a London celebration, and indicates the manner in which the various learned and dramatic societies may rally round the League and observe the day. An even more effective celebration will, it is hoped, result if the managers of the London theatres, and ultimately theatrical managers throughout the Empire, may be pre- vailed upon to regard as their duty the performance of Shakespearian plays on or about the 23rd of April. Simi- larly, organisers of concerts may be induced to devote the day to Shakespearian music. The League commends its aims to the attention of Shakespeare societies and reading unions,* When this notice appears in 7e Author the celebration will have been held, and whether success or failure attends this first attempt, I * The Annual Subseription to the League is, at present, 5/-. Application for Membership should be made to the Hon. Secretary, Dr. W. Martin, 2, Garden Court, Temple. 221 venture to think the objects of the London Shake- speare League are worthy of the active support of all literary craftsmen. Next year I hope the Society of Authors and the Authors’ Club. will associate themselves with the London Shakespeare Commemoration. The leadership of Sir Walter Besant need not be absent if his patriotism, his devotion, his love for London, his reverential attachment to the memory of Shakespeare, his desire to assist any movement having for its object and effect the awakening of the public mind to the treasures of its intellectual heritage, if his example, in a word, yet lives in the memory of his associates and contemporaries to inspire a resolute belief in the power of an idea. T. FarrmMan OrDISH. > + THE WORLD BEYOND! E HO over that gulf a bridge can throw, Which fearfully yawns between The world of Sense that we think we know And the other that is unseen ? Are there some nerve-cells in the brain, Seemingly fashioned all in vain, Where the sole path may lie ? A lesion slight in the matter grey! Those cells arranged in another way, And solved is the mystery ! Il. Then—only then, will a flash of light Spring forth from the brain to span, Like a bridge of glory, that realm of night, Which shrouds ‘‘ the beyond ” from man ! Yes, then the real world shall we see With eyes unsealed, and ‘iis dream shall flee, And we shall know at last That the things of Sense are but shadows all, Veiling the Spirit-land like a pall— But, we should stand aghast ! III. Yea, happy for us that few will dare To span for us that profound, For nameless terrors may wait us there, Where horrors unguessed abound ! Satyrs and Fauns of ancient Rome In that pale realm may have their home, And things never named by man ! In opened eyes would a wonder strange Amoment dawn ! then to dread would change— We should see the Great God Pan ! F. B. Doveton. Norre.—Suggested by Mr. Machen’s “The Great God Pan,” \  2:22, SOME NOTES ON METHODS OF REJEC- TION AND REVIEW. i WO years ago I sent an article to a well- known monthly magazine. It was returned, with an unusual variant of the customary enclosing letter. I was told that the MS. was in- teresting, but that the editor was already supplied with material enough to last for six months. At the end of six months I again submitted the MS. Again it was praised, but 1 was informed that for several months to come there would be no vacancy for anything. I then dealt with the MS. in other ways, and at the end of a year from the date of the second rejection I submitted another article to the same periodical. On this occasion a similar but intenser form of reply was adopted. ‘ With sin- cere regret the Editor returns the enclosed, not because he fails to appreciate its interest and value, but because, for a few months at any rate, he can accept nothing whatever.” Naturally, it is not my intention to wait until this river goes by. But the system of laudatory indefinite postponement is not frank. No writer ought to complain of rejection after submitting a MS. to an editor who considers it, for an editor, if not always a good literary judge, is presumably the best authority as to the requirements of his periodical. If, however, an editor has a staff upon whom he exclusively relies, he should state plainly that he does not want outside help. I have no reason to complain of the staff system, since for many years a gentleman who controls a certain paper of somewhat humble and restricted scope, has habitually printed and paid for everything I have sent him, thus, indeed, obliging me in honour to edit my own contributions, and prepare them with exceptional care. But in this case outside work is freely admitted when it is suitable, and I suppose that in a world of competition the open door is the best policy. An editor who shuts the gates of consideration on mankind may discover that his readers, as well as his contributors, are a small group, and even the potent advertiser may in time adopt the principle of laudatory indefinite postponement. It may be that it is considered ‘‘neat”’ to reject with praise under colour of surfeit, or it may be that in some cases there is an “inner circle.” But I prefer an editor who will have the courage to say—‘ Not of the slightest use,” or “ Don’t want it. Please don’t send any more.” Rejections by publishers stand on another foot- ing. It is curious, however, that nowadays if you mention poetry to them they shudder as at pesti- lence. One is prepared for reluctance. The THE AUTHOR. commercial objections, based on wide and calami- tous experience, are well known. But what is happening to-day is that the hint of verse causes a fit. To such a miserable depth, of the fatuous and factitious, has this art been dragged by innumerable professors, that the publishing fraternity have generalised, and assume that the human race is no longer capable either of producing or of hearing language in its higher powers. It is assumed that your product will be, at best, of the well-known machine-made variety, to which even the greatest names in the last century not infrequently de- scended, and of which people are tired. Conse- quently, though for aught the publishers know to the contrary you may speak with the tongues of men and of angels, their ears are already filled with wax. Originality is supposed to have exhausted itself in Whitmanism, a product (by the way) of morbidity and American convention, differentiated from other alleged poetry mainly by chaotic manner. In the general Dunciad are included the raw amateur, the maker of dead mosaic, and the pos- sible genius who may be trying to utter some new, important truth, and whose work, designed to transcend all conventional types in matter and form, may bear the same relation to current poetry as the Marconi system of telegraphy bears to the penny post. 7 This is not a wail. The hypothetical genius, of course, confronted by such difficulties, would find a way of overcoming them. He might go to some place where there is a tub, and, mounting thereon, give forth his verse orally to the world at large, thus incidentally creating a public that no book- seller would ignore. It would save much trouble, however, and many fits, if the state of affairs I have indicated were clearly recognised. The perpetration, some years ago, of a small book of verse (amongst other printed writings) is admitted by the present writer, who hastens to disclaim for it any pretence of transcendent revela- tion. But with regard to criticism, one further complaint may be made. The general racket of criticism any man ought to be able to stand “ with- out turning a hair,” especially as the critics are so often mutually destructive. Nor do I much mind the half-educated critic, a common variety, of which a specimen (writing in a newspaper of patrician, professional and fashionable readers) took me to task on a point of grammar. I had used a word in its strict etymological sense, and in such a way as would have given no offence either toa highly-cultured reader or to an uncultured one of simple perception. My usage was denounced, in a superior way, as proof of rusticity. Happily the context was quoted, and I was content that many readers would perceive the true state of the case. In fact, I felt something of the quiet joy of  THE AUTHOR. 223 an angler who has landed a big trout—a trout that complacently generalised, and gobbled everything muscoid within view. * Different were the reviewers (unfair critics, I call them) who, after “faint praise,’ observed that, despite my efforts and certain similarities, I did not at all come up to the level of ‘‘ Mr. Henley” and “ Mr. Watson.” Curiously enough, I had never up to that time read a line of either Mr. Henley or Mr. Watson, but I proceeded to look into their work, and soon found that what they burned I adored and what they adored I burned. I could no more think of imitating those gentlemen in matter or style than (I am sure) they would think of imitating me. Beyond a possible genial sense of human fellowship consistent with a determination to continue gaily on our respective paths, there could be nothing in common between us—certainly the suggested straining and rivalry was absurd. And there is no likeness in the styles. I and my distinguished contemporaries certainly do not write in the language of the critical Press, but that does not constitute a mutual resemblance. Now, my indictment of these reviewers is this, that with the fullest range of good and bad adjectives at their com- mand—they might have pelted me to their hearts’ content either with flints or with flowers—they chose to mislead their readers, and my possible readers, by a foolish comparison. It was much the same as telling the author of an astronomical treatise that he was not Chaucer, and was fairly outclassed by Horace. When will critics learn their trade ? Ruo. CORRESPONDENCE. ——~+— THE ABSURDITY OF MODERN REVIEWING. Sir,—May I call attention to the inconsistency of the modern reviewer, who seems to do his level best to “boom” any book that strikes him as worthless. In a certain daily paper last week a criticism appeared of a certain book that has roused the ire of critics. It began by calling this book “ stupid, vulgar and offensive”; it ended with a recom- mendation that the volume should be thrown in the dustbin, “‘whence we can only hope that the female servants may not by any unlucky chance rescue it for unwholesome consumption at the kitchen supper table.” In the middle of this was a good half column about the book, which was freely quoted in large chunks for the whole world, “female servants” included, to read and digest ! Could inconsistency and absurdity go further? If the book in question is only fit for the dustbin, is it fit to be quoted at length in a family newspaper with a large circulation ? : Other critics have spluttered in the same way, but nearly all have written columns about the book, showing their intense interest in it. Why can they not be candid and say, ‘“ This is the sort of stuff T like, and anyone who wants to be amused should read it”? instead of turning up their eyes to heaven over its iniquity, and, at the same time, advertising it for all they are worth. It is imbe- cility and it is humbug, this way of reviewing. If a book is “stupid, vulgar and offensive,” why hold it up as a lure for the public to run after; why spend hours of time and columns of print over it ? Let it die, or be honest enough to confess that it is vital and deserves to live. Mi Ee. ———>—+ —_ THE SOCIETY’S DINNER. A> Protest. Sir,—My annual shock in the form of an official intimation of the price at which is fixed the yearly dinner of the Society of Authors has just been experienced by me. I note that the amount on this occasion is to be half a sovereign, exclusive of any more exhilarating vintage than cold water, while the scene of the function is once more to be a leading hotel. Now, Sir, this is altogether wrong ; it is entirely opposed to the manner in which such a function should be organised. Would Shakespeare (or Bacon, if you prefer it) or Dr. Johnson have contemplated with equanimity the prospect of incurring this outlay for the mere privilege of eating a meal in the company of their fellow- writers at a big restaurant ? Assuredly no. They would have had souls above the gilded splendours of the Hotel Cecil and the ten shilling menus. Who are we, pray, that we cannot be equally moderate in our requirements? What, too, is gained by disbursing this sum? Nothing, I am convinced, that is at all commensurate therewith. I speak, Sir, from experience, for I have attended several of these annual orgies (each, I grieve to say, at an increased cost). On each occasion the poor but honest author has been conspicuous by his absence ; in his place have been serried ranks of uninteresting nonentities, whose sole claim to being present is that they have been able to pay for their seats. A ten-shilling dinner is for our Pierpoint Morgans, and; the number of these enrolled in the ranks of the Society is, I take it, limited. Then again, it is not as though the dinner were a good one ; on the contrary, it is a remarkably  224 bad one when the cost thereof is taken into con- sideration. On one memorable occasion, indeed, -the price was a guinea, while the meal served. would have been dear at eighteenpence. -It seems to me, Sir, that we are making a great“mistake in this matter. I am no advocate for the chaste simplicity of Lockhart’s or Lyons’, but I am certainly of opinion that the gorgeous saloons of a first-class hotel are not necessary for the proper application of a feast of reason—such as should mark the annual dinner of our Society. I object, too, to the practice of the Committee in inviting guests of their own selection. ‘* Who pays the piper calls the tune” is a sound com- mercial axiom. As the members of the Society meet the bill for the same they should have a voice in inviting those on whose account it is incurred. It is the more excellent way. For myself, I am so constituted that it affords me no particular joy to pay for the dinner of an individual IT do not know (or want to) from Adam. I fancy that Iam not alone in this view. For the Com- mittee to invite outside guests at all is, in my opinion, a mistake. It reduces the annual dinner of the Society of Authors to the level of that of a charitable organisation touting for money. Surely we have enough members among ourselves to secure a satisfactory attendance—in point of num- bers at any rate. Of course, if the Society were on a proper basis it would give its members an annual dinner as a bonus ; failing the realisation of this pleasant state of affairs it ought at least to organise a dinner which should not cost those attending more than five shillings at the outside. I am, yours faithfully, HoracE WYNDHAM. April, 1903. “WHETHER OR NOT.” Srr,—Surely it is disappointing that even such an authority as Prof. Skeat can only refer one to “usage,” though it be the usage of a Shakespeare. Why should not a Scotchman also plead usage when he says, “I will drown and no one shall save me” ? What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. And the people who of late years have affected to be a “trifle” sorry, a “trifle” thoughtful—a erowing band, I fear—are fast making “usage” of a noun as the modifier of an adjective. If acknowledged as usage, one has nothing to say save that there is correct usage and incorrect usage. Your other correspondent, A. Armstrong, also quoting Shakespeare, at least suggests “whether THE AUTHOR. or no”’ might be a curtailed idiom, “ whether ay or no.” But when I say, “ Whether I go or not,” what is suppressed is not an imaginary “ ay,” bat the repetition of the verb. I suppose it is “usage” which makes nine out of ten, if not ninety-nine out of a hundred, of modern authors write “whether or not.” Why have we arrived at that usage ? And I doubt the English school examiner could be found who would pass “whether or no.” in a boy’s exercise book without at least telling him he had better say “or not.” Why so ? hat my inquiry of 7'he Author resulted in such answer (I had asked for good reason) only shows what weak legs our poor King’s English—beloved and beautiful withal—has to stand on! Our language, being so largely the spoil of other languages, is not securely founded in its own con- struction. All foreigners, at least every Frenchman and German learning English, know that. They have been well grounded in their grammar, and when they come to acquire our tongue, behold they find ‘usage ”—too often usage minus reason. Sorrowfully, Kine’s ENGLISH. TYPEWRITING. Sir,—If any of your readers want to know of a really good typewriter I shall be most happy to recommend one: she is a lady, very highly educated, with literary experience, and is thoroughly to be trusted with valuable MSS. Yours faithfully, OuIveE KATHARINE Parr. WANTED A REFERENCE. Srr,—In reply to Mr. J. M. Lely, the passage which he quotes— “ Qui cessat esse melior cessat esse bonus,” was stated in the Daily Telegraph of Thursday, May 29th, 1902 (p. 9, c. 1), to be the motto written by Oliver Cromwell in his pocket Bible, in the possession of the Earl of Chichester. I, too, have endeavoured to ascertain the source of this sentence, but, so far, unsuccessfully, and, therefore, incline to the belief that it was Cromwell’s own composition. Hupert Hass. 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. 13 Issue 08 (May 1903) Subject The topic of the resource <em>The Author</em>, Vol. 13 Issue 08 (May 1903) Type The nature or genre of the resource Publication Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 1903-05-01-The-Author-13-8 publications The Author