https://historysoa.com/files/original/5/479/1903-01-01-The-Author-13-4.pdf ba1e6b87d5d8b789be4427edeff8736f 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) 1903-01-01 Volume 13 Issue 4 Pages Page range in volume 81–108 Ngram Date Version of the date in YYYYMMDD format for use by the Ngram plugin 19030101 Ngram Text Version of the text with no HTML formatting for use by the Ngram plugin The Huthor. { Tg i 6 of (The Organ of the Incorporated Society of Authors. FOUNDED BY SIR Monthly.) WALTER BESANT. Vou. XIIT.—No. 4. JANUARY Ist, 1903. THE TELEPHONE. The Telephone connection has now been estab- lished, and the Society’s number is— 374 VICTORIA. eg NOTICES. pe ee 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 7he 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. Tur 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. Tur 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, [Prick SIXPENCE. money value can be easily worked out at the current price of the market :— ee £816 5 6 Wocal Goans =) a 404 10 0 Victorian Government 8 % Con- solidated Inscribed Stock............ 291 19 11 WearciGal 2. QOL 9.23 Total 33.5. £1,714 4 8 SPECIAL APPEAL. Tur Appeal sent out by the Chairman of the Society at the request of the Pension Fund Com- mittee has been very successful. Up to and including the 19th of December, the list of subscriptions and donations promised and given is set forch below. Further subscriptions and donations will be acknowledged as they come in. Subscriptions. Nov. 14, Tuckett, F. F. ' ; .£1 0 0 S Cox, Miss Roalfe 0 5 0 , Loynbee, William . 010 6 , Anonymous . : : L070 » odd, Miss Margaret, M.D. tt 0 » Pearson, Mrs. Conney 2 2 0 5 Seaman, Owen : ; - tt 8 , Abbot, Rey. Edwin A, D.D.. 1 0 0 . . Witherby, Rey. C. . 0 5.0 » Salwey, Reginald E. 0 10 0 Vacher, Francis 110 Nov. 15, Parr, Mrs... ; 1 fr 0 4 Davy, Man EO. : . 010 6 . Allingham, Wiliam, FRCS. 1 1 9 ,» Armstrong, Miss Frances 0 5 0 Holmes, Arthur H. (condi- tional) ; : : Rattray, Alex. : ‘ : ,, Brodrick, ‘The Honble. Mrs. . Noy. 17, Nisbet, Hume : ; : Keene, H. G., C.5.1. : : Bayly, Miss A. E. (Edna Lyall) 3 Forbes, E. . : : . ss Spiers, Victor. ” a? owe oor cre — en bo Re OO Rt Ot eceocoooocosoo  82 Noy. 17, Kroeker, Mrs. Freiligrath » Burrowes, Miss Elsa » Cooke-Taylor, R. W. Noy. 18, Voysey, Rev. Charles , vones, W. Braunston » Anonymous . 5 Salmond, Mrs. Walter » Amonymous . » Clough, Miss B. AL » Stanton, Miss H. M. » “Lucas Malet” Nov. 20, E. G. ao enkins, Miss Hadow Morrah, H. A. A Hatton-Ellis, Mrs. . Bertouch, The Baroness de ,» Anonymous Nov. 21, Parr, Miss Olive Nov. 22, Forbes, Lady Helen » Twycross, Miss M. Nov. 24, Smythe, Alfred » Haggard, Mrs. John ,, Anonymous ‘ », Dale, Miss Nellie . oe Tresham Quaines” . Noy. 25, Young, W. Wellington . Nov. 26, Young, Capt. Charles Dec. 1, Finnemore, Mrs. . Dec. 3, Caulfield, Miss Sophia Dec. 5, Hecht, Mrs. : 5» Hamilton, Mrs. G. W. Brinton, Selwyn Dec. 9, Dill, Miss Bessie Dec. 18, Sutherland, Her Grace the Duchess of Dec. 19, Toplis, Miss Grace . ” ” Donations. Noy. 13, Bullen, EF. A is Roberts, Morley (an annual subscriber). : Nov. 14, Rossetti, W.M. . : es Marshall, Capt. Robert . »» Hoyer, Miss ‘ : . EM 8B. “ Lefroy, Mrs. . » Sinclair, Miss May (an annual subscriber) . : ‘ » McBride, Capt. E. E. » Garnier, Russell . Noy. 15, Burchell, Sidney H. » Spero” : 5 “ Cecil Medlicott v », Harker, Mrs. Allen » Banks, Mrs. M. M. », Spielmann, M. H. » Garnier, Col. J. . », Benecke, Miss Ida . Oe or So by oor Of © KSPR wWOoOOCCNOFRFS connnacd oro a illo e e aooccunce o orn HONS OO COLON OH HOA OLOTS OLD OH OHMS WN i He Howonmonworcneu THE AUTHOR. oacocoococoo => oo cCooaoocooeoeoo soso S OS Soo RSS So ecocoocoacaoceo eoocooocoo Nov. 15, Atton, Henry ; 05 0 Nov. 17, Panter, Rev. C. R.. 0 5 0 » Keene, H.G,CSi . 0 5 0 », Spielmann, Mrs. M. H. . 1 i4@ » Begbie, Harold ; . 8 3 0 », Stevenson, J.J. . -10 0 0 , Minniken, Miss Bertha M. 0 5 0 Noy. 18, From sale of autograph . 124 » Wintle, H. R. 010 0 » Brickdale-Corbett, H. M. 010 0 » Defries, Miss Violet : 010 6 Nov. 19, Stanton, Miss Hannah M. 1 0 ¥ » Warren, Major-General Sir Charles, K.C.M.G. 1 0.98 » “lucas Malet”. 5 5 0 Nov. 20, Wynne, Charles Whitworth 5 & Nov. 22, Skeat, The Rev. Prof. W. W.. 5 0 0 Nov. 25, Jacobs, W.W. ; : 1 194 ; Young, W. Wellington . 0 5 0 » Batty, Mrs. Braithwaite . 010 0 Nov. 26, Cook, C. H. . 1.1 ¢@ Noy. 27, Gleig, Charles 010 0 » Harraden, Miss Beatrice 1 1@ . Frankland, F. W. 1 0 0 ,» d Auvergne, Mrs. 0 5 0 Nov. 28, Sutcliffe, Halliwell 1 2 8 Nov. 29, Weyman, Stanley J. 5 0 0 Dec. 1, Sanderson, Sir J. Burdon 5 0 0 Dec. 2, Trevor- Batty e, Aubyn 1 14 » Marks, Mrs. . ; 010 0 Dec. 9, Moore, Henry Charles 0 5 0 Dec. 11, Lutzow, Count 2 0 0 « Leicester Romayne ” 0 5 0 Dee. ‘12, Croft, Miss Lily 0 5 0 a Panting, J. Harwood 010 0 . Tattersall, Miss Louisa . 0 5 0 Dec. 19, Egbert, Henry 0 5 0 The following members have also made subscrip- tions or donations :— Meredith, George, President of the Society. Thompson, Sir — Bart., F.R.C.S. Rashdall, The Rev. H Guthrie, Anstey. Robertson, Cc. B. ‘There are in addition other subscribers who do not desire that either their names or the amount they are subscribing should be printed. The total amount of cash actually received is £190 3s. 6d. SPECIAL CONDITIONAL SUBSCRIPTIONS. Mr. Hamilton Drummond, who is a member of our Society, has offered a subscription of £10 for five years, if nine other members of the Society will promise the same contribution before 31st March, 1903. We sincerely hope that sufficient members of  THE AUTHOR. - ef the Society will be found to come forward and ose meet Mr. Drummond’s generous offer, and that . dee ‘before the time expires we may be able to print in », of the columns of Zhe Author the full list of ten » dae subscribers of the required amount. Subscriptions. ive Hawkins, A. Hope . : _£10° 0 0 erisa@ Barrie, J. M. . : : ‘ ~ 10-0 0 jaca Drummond, Hamilton : ; 10-02-60 veg Wynne, Charles Whitworth . 2 19 0-9 es Tue Pension FunD COMMITTEE. a In order to give members of the Society, should ed: they desire to appoint a fresh member to the ,-a89 Pension Fund Committee, full time to act, it has -98e been thought advisable to place in Zhe Author a _ (I full statement of the method of election under the foe Scheme for administration of the Pension Fund. >a Under that Scheme the Committee is composed of ad three members elected by the Committee of the ~- 908 Society, three members elected by the Society at si the General Meeting, and the Chairman of the 908 Society for the time being, ex officio. The three ‘9m members elected at the General Meeting when the os Fund was started, were Mr. Morley Roberts, Mr. ' Wf M. H. Spielmann, and Mrs. Alec Tweedie. Last 98) year, Mrs. Alec Tweedie resigned in due course, Sf and submitting her name for re-election was l/:Gh unanimously re-elected. This year, Mr. Morley 1 99 Roberts in turn, under the Rules of the Scheme, 09) tenders his resignation and submits his name for \/-@ re-election. The members have power to put for- ‘ey ward other names under Clause 9 which runs as wolle follows :— ae! * Any candidate for election to the Pension Fund Com- if mittee by the members of the Society (not being a retiring s@ member of such Committee) shall be nominated in writing © to the Secretary, at least three weeks prior to the General ~ Meeting at which such candidate is to be proposed, and the ‘6 nomination of each such candidate shall be subscribed by, 4; at least, three members of the Society. A list of the names + of the candidates so nominated shall be sent to the members ? of the Society with the annual report of the Managing _ Committee, and those candidates obtaining the most votes + at the General Meeting shall be elected to serve on the *) Pension Fund Committee.” Tn case any member should desire to refer to the “| List of Members, a copy complete, with the excep- tion of those members referred to in the note at | the beginning, can be obtained at the Society’s | Office. It would be as well, therefore, should any of the members desire to put forward candidates, to take the matter within their immediate consideration. The General Meeting of the Society has usually been held towards the end of February or the 83 beginning of March. It is essential that all nominations should be in the hands of the Secretary before the 31st of January. —_——1—_—- Sir Walter Besant Memorial Fund. THE amount standing to the credit of this account in the Bank is......... £330 8 6 There are a few promised subscriptions still outstanding. The total of these is, roughly, about £4, The subscriptions received from July 1st to the date of issue are given below :— Patterson, A. . : ‘ : fl 1 0 Salwey, Reginald E. : : : 010 0 Gidley, Miss E. C. : : 010 0 Nixon, Prof. J. E. 0% 6 Dill, Miss Bessie 0. 5.0 Moore, Henry Charles 0 5 6 ———————_1——______ FROM THE COMMITTEE. tt HE Committee held the last meeting in 1902 on Monday, the 1st of December. They proceeded to the election of members. The list of those elected is set forth below. The post- age of magazines was one of the questions discussed. The Chamber of Commerce is dealing with the matter and the Committee are supporting its action. Two disputes were up for discussion. In the one negotiations are being carried forward, and in the other it was decided, if it was possible to obtain the support of the member concerned, to take the matter into Court. As the point under discussion is one of principle, and concerns a very common clause in authors’ agreements, it is hoped that the matter may be tried in Court in order that a test case may be put forward. During the past month one case has been tried in the County Court. The debt and costs were paid. The Secretary has forwarded four claims against American magazines for money due to the Society’s American agent. The Committee hope that they will terminate satisfactorily. With the sanction of the Chairman asmall County Court case was taken in hand. It was placed with the solicitors of the Society, but before the summons was issued the debt was paid. The Secretary during the past month has dealt with ten cases. Five refer to the rendering of accounts, three to claims for money due, and two deal with the return of MSS. Five of the cases have been satisfactorily concluded, two for money 84 due and three for accounts. The County Court case referred to must be reckoned as one of the five. There is every hope that the balance will terminate to the advantage of the authors without calling in the aid of the law. pee Election, December, 1902. The following members and associates were elected on December Ist, 1902. Burke, Arthur M. . 2, Carlyle Gardens, Cheyne Row, S.W. Carlile, Rey. John C. Davidson, Miss Lillias Graemsdyke, Cranes- Campbell water Park, Southsea. Foster, Arnold R. 38, Yew Tree Road, Withington, Lancs. Hextable, Swanley, Kent. Calle de Buenos Aires, Las Palmas, Canary Islands. Stanhope, The Hon. and Byford Rectory, Here- Rey. Berkeley ford. Nye, George . Meyer, Charles a BOOK AND PLAY TALK. ——$+—<—¢— IR ROBERT BALL is at present engaged on a treatise on “Spherical Astronomy.” His latest work, ‘‘ The Earth’s Beginning,” was practically an account of a recent course of lectures given by him at the Royal Institution. It has been published here by Messrs. Cassell. There is also an American edition ; and quite recently Sir Robert Ball received a copy of a Dutch translation, with the title “ Het Onstaan der Aarde,” trans- lated by Dr. B. C. Goudsmit. Edna Lyall’s new book, “The Burgess Letters,” just published by Messrs. Longmans, Green & Co. at 2s. 6d., is a record of child-life in the sixties. It is not fiction, but is a genuine record of this popular authoress’s own childhood. This interest- ing record has a coloured frontispiece, and eight full-page illustrations by Walter S. Stacey. Edna Lyall is just beginning to write a novel, the scene of which is laid partly in Italy and partly in England. It will be remembered that in the spring of 1902 this writer published through Messrs. Longmans a short story called “The Hinderers,” which upholds the Quaker view as to the unlawfulness of war. We must not expect anything from Miss Annabel Gray at present, as she is recovering from a most dangerous illness. THE AUTHOR. Lord Avebury’s “The Use of Life” has bee translated into Gujerathi and Urdu, and, like “The Pleasures of Life,” into Mahratti. The translation into Mahratti has an interesting preface by the translator, who states that his principal object was. to show that Englishmen had a cheerful view of life, while his countrymen’s view of life was just the reverse. Mr. Mackenzie Bell’s religious lyric, “ Lord Teach us to Pray,” which is set to music as am anthem by Herr Georg Liebling, has been trans- lated into German verse by the Rev. Professor Carl Glebe, of Westphalia, for use throughout Germany. The second edition of the anthem, just published in London by Dr. Charles Vincent, has both the English and the German words. Mr. Harold Begbie’s latest book, “ Bundy in the Greenwood” (Isbister, 5s.), is illustrated by Gordon Browne. It is Mr. Begbie’s first venture into the nursery, and it was only published after he had amended the MS. according to the criticism of his eldest daughter, rising six. This writer has just begun a series of ‘‘ Master Workers” in the Pall Mall Magazine. The first article dealt with the Bishop of London; the second with Sir William Crookes ; and the next two will deal with psychic research and the mys- tery of the subliminal consciousness. The object of the series is to convince the ordinary man that there is a vast amount of work proceeding in the modern world of which he knows very little. Austin Clare’s new north-country novel, “The Tideway,” will be published immediately by Messrs. Chatto and Windus. ‘“‘The Cardinal’s Dawn,” the serial finishing in the January issue of Macmillan’s Magazine, is by & new writer, H. L. Montgomery. The novel is placed in Italy in the imquecento, and is based on the intrigues for and against Bianca Capelli. Mr. Austin Dobson has undertaken to write @ life of ‘‘ Fanny Burney ” for Messrs. Macmillan’s “English Men of Letters,” and Mr. Edmund Gosse is at work on a life of “Jeremy Taylor” for the same series. Mr. Dobson’s “Side-walk Studies,” recently issued by Messrs. Chatto and Windus, is an enter- taining book. ‘There is an informing chapter on “Mrs. Woffington”; another on “The Vicar of Wakefield and its Illustrators ” ; there is “‘ A Walk from Fulham to Chiswick” ; and perhaps the most fascinating of all, “Dr. Johnson’s Haunts and ~ Habitations.” From Mr. Dobson’s “Samuel Richardson’ (Macmillan’s “English Men of Letters” Series) we should like to quote at length, but space permits only an extract or two. Referring to the recently-  THE AUTHOR. «ie raised question of Richardson’s indebtedness to self Marivaux’s “ Vie de Marianne,” he says :— Es “That there are superficial affinities between Richardson _ (@ and Marivanx may at once be conceded. Both hit upon s4) the novel of analysis, and in this connection, no doubt, -js;1f Marivaux precedes Richardson. Their manners of writing +o» -were also similar in some respects ; and when Crébillon the voy younger, describing Marivaux, affirms that his characters jon not only say everything that they have done, and every- ogid) thing that they have thought, but everything that they ».uo® would have liked to think but did not—he almost seems | 91 to be describing Richardson as well. .. . ie “There is not, as far as we are aware, a particle of evidence «/) that Richardson ever saw the earlier volumes of this version jo) (of ‘Vie de Marianne’). In fact, the only discoverable 455 aeference he makes to Marivaux is contained in the post- (8. script to ‘ Clarissa,’ and that occurs in a quotation from a «4 French critic (translated) taken from the Gentleman's voll Magazine for August, 1749. That he knew no French is -. “ef demonstrable, and he could not therefore have studied sl Marivaux in the original, Moreover, he was not in any sass sense a novel reader ; and in‘ Pamela.’ the idea of which bad had been in his mind twenty years before he wrote it, he vif aimed at a moral work rather than a story. “ Richardson has given so circumstantial and reasonable ean account of the independent origin and development of 04 ed) the book, that it seems superfluous to go outside it in order 6) to establish his obligation to a French author, however fis gifted, of whom, when he first sat down to write the ias% * Familiar Letters’ to which ‘ Pamela’ owed its birth, he «; bee had probably never even heard the name.” 1 In the last chapter, entitled ‘Last Years and oo) General Estimate,” there is an admirable bit of summing-up :— * His popularity is certain with the few—with those who, | like Horace Walpole, either read what nobody else does, or, | like Edward Fitzgerald and Dr. Jowett, read only what } takes theirfancy. He must always find readers, too, with ‘the students of literature. He was the pioneer of a new ‘movement ; the first certificated practitioner of sentiment ; 4 the English Columbus of the analytical novel of ordinary i life. Before him, no one had essayed in this field to describe the birth and growth of a new impression, to show the ebb and flow of emotion in a mind distraught, to follow the progress of a passion, to dive so deeply into the human ieee heart, as to leave—in Scott’s expressive words—‘ neither : noe head, bay, nor inlet behind him until he had traced its ‘92 soundings, and laid it downin his chart, with all its minute 00a sinuosities, its depths and shallows.’ ” “ The Splendid Idle Forties,” by Gertrude Ather- ton (Macmillan & Co.), is a revised and enlarged © edition of her former book, “ Before the Gringos #2 Came.” The tales give a vivid and striking | picture of old Californian life before and during | the American conquest, of the beauty, grace, and passion of the Spanish women, and their fierce resentment against their country’s invaders. Mr. Stephen Gwynne has an interesting article ‘on “Celtic Sagas” in the December number of Macmillan’s Magazine. He seeks to illustrate, by the method of resemblance and difference, the ancient poetry of Ireland, as represented by Lady Charlotte Guest’s famous version of ‘The Mabinogion.” Miss Henriette Corkran’s “‘ Celebrities aud I,” published a short while ago by Messrs. Hutchinson 85 & Co., is a handsome volume brim full of enter- taining gossip and amusing anecdotes. Miss Corkran, who is a painter by profession, gives us her crisply-written impressions of the many celebrities she has known and met. Of Thackeray, kind friend of her childhood, we hear a good deal. ‘Then there are interesting anecdotes about the Brownings, Tennyson, W. G. Wills, the dramatist, Sir Frederick Leighton, etc., etc. ; and last and latest, we are given an impres- sionist sketch of Mr. Richard Whiteing, the famous author of “ No. 5, John Street.”’ “ Celebrities and I” has been widely reviewed, and it ought to do very well. Mr. Andrew Lang’s “ The Disentanglers” is a series of stories, of more or less fantastic adven- ture, under one cover. (Longmans, 6s.) The interest which holds them together is supplied by the connection of some of the characters with an agency for the disentangling of matrimonial diffi- culties. We have, among others, “ Adventure of the Rich Uncle,” “Adventure of the Office Screen,” “ Adventure of the Exemplary Earl,” and “ Adven- ture of the Miserly Marquis.” It is an amusing book. Mr. Anthony Hope delivered a_ lecture last month in Edinburgh, before the Philosophical Society. He said (we quote from the Daily Chronicle) ‘‘the average man viewed his own sphere of life as normal ; he viewed as real what he saw existing among his neighbours, and regarded as real what was before him in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred. The ninety-nine he called real, and the one case in the hundred he viewed as unreal. “The average man had little adventure; his time was marked down for him, and he saw little hope of becoming other than what he was. The lot of the labouring classes was the most common, but the man who wrote about this class was marked down by the wealthy classes as a cynic. In a true and deep picture the novelist could not leave out the physical side of a man, for often his physical pleasure was his only pleasure, and in his pleasurable excesses often lay the man’s deepest temptation. “The notions of the man in the street were generally cousin once removed to truth. He had small sympathies with the parent who wrote to the newspapers that he liked to feel safe in handing a book to his girl to read. It did not do to have the truth told in all circumstances, but there was generally in a book a message for someone. The words romance and realism were too often the catchwords of criticism. Realism widened their views and broadened their sympathies.” We have received a dainty paper-covered booklet of selections from the works of John Greenleaf Whittier, entitled “ A Whittier Treasury.” The selections have been made by the Countess of Portsmouth. Mr. Percy White’s latest novel, “The New Christians,” has gone into a second edition. So has Mr. Morley Roberts’ “Immortal Youth.” Both these novels well deserve their undoubted SUCCESS. ?  86 Mrs. Edward Kennard’s “ The Motor Maniac” is a capital story somewhat on the lines of her successful ‘ The Golf Lunatic.” Lieut.-Colonel E. Gunter (late East Lanes. Regi- ment) has published, through Messrs. Wm. Clowes & Sons, Ltd., 23, Cockspur Street, Charing Cross, a sixth edition of his well-known “ Officer’s Field Note and Sketch Book and Reconnaissance Aide- Mémoire.” “Harvest Home”? is the title of the latter-day poems of Mr. Thomas Winter Wood (Vanguard), of Plymouth. “ Harvest Home” contains poems which must appeal to many minds, and we refer our readers to the volume that they may taste for themselves. Messrs. Simpkin, Marshall are the publishers; the price is 3s. 6d. net. A volume of poems has been published by Ernest Western through Thomas Burleigh, 376, Strand. It is called ‘“ Creeds, Crosses, and Cre- denda,” and may be commended to those who care for pleasant verse. Messrs. Kegan Paul have published a new poem by Mr. Ernest A. Tietkens, author of ‘The Heavenly Link,” entitled “The Loves of the Flowers: a Spiritual Dream.” It is 2s. 6d. net. Mrs. Harcourt Roe, who has paid a six months’ visit to New Brunswick, purposes writing some articles on New Brunswick and the very primitive condition of parts of the country there. Copies of those excellent and quite indispensable publications, ““Who’s Who” and ‘“ The English- woman’s Year Book for 1903” have been received at our office. a re PARIS NOTES. —+— FTER the Balzac statue comes the Balzac Orphanage. It seems that Madame Barbier, in whose house Balzac lived for some years, has founded a home for twenty orphan girls in memory of the great novelist. She is now seventy-five years of age, and she still owns the house in the Rue Raynouard ‘in which Balzac wrote so many of his books from 1840 to 1847, the year of his marriage. Until last year Madame Barbier lived in this house. She and her daughter have given up their entire fortune in order to found this orphanage, and in spite of all the sacrifices they have made they will be short of two thousand francs to make up this year the thirty-two thousand of their expenses. M. de Braisne, an influential member of the Société des Gens de Lettres, has written a most touching account of Madame Barbier’s efforts and sacrifices, hoping that any admirers of the author of the THE AUTHOR. “ Comédie Humaine” may come forward and offe their contributions to the Balzac Orphanage. The new novel by Anatole France, “ Histoir Comique,” commences with a tragedy. It is now appearing in serial form in the Revue de Paris, an will afterwards be published with illustrations ag an édition de luxe. It is a decidedly up-to-dai novel, and the story opens in the dressing-room 0 an actress. “La Statue ensevelie,”’ by Ivan Strannik, i well worth reading. It is a novel with remarkabl little plot, and the whole interest of the sti centres in the état d’dme of the heroine. She is” one of the unfortunate women with an artisti temperament, and an obtuse, egotistical husband She naturally, under these circumstances, finds marriage a failure, and so takes refuge in art an in the friendship of a devoted cousin. There is nothing particularly original in the story itself, but the heroine is Russian, and the intense prid sullenness, and passion of the Russian temperament make the novel an interesting psychological study. “Sur la Branche” is the title of the new novel by Pierre de Coulevain, the author of “ Eye Victorieuse.” In the latter book we had a study of the American society woman at home and abroad, her faults and her qualities being compared with those of the French woman in the same rank of life. In this new novel the author gives us his candid opinion about England and the English. The general verdict of the English critics after reading “Eve Victorieuse” was that Pierre deCoule- vain thoroughly understood Americans. It will be interesting to read the opinion of the same critics after the publication of “Sur la Branche.” The last chapters of this novel are not yet written, but it is probable that the volume will be published early in the year. “TL Argent del’Autre,” by M. Charles de Rouvre, is an excellent novel. It is the story of a man who has no fortune of his own, and who falls desperately in love with a wealthy young widow, whom he eventually marries. His torment begins soon after this event. The idea of owing every thing to his wife humiliates him, particularly as the wealth she now owns comes to her from he first husband. The story is cleverly worked out, so that the reader enters thoroughly into th sufferings of the husband, and realizes all th humiliation of his position in the home. M. Waldeck Rousseau has just published a book entitled “ L’Action républicaine et sociale,” treat- ing of all the reforms that have been accomplished from 1899 to 1902. The French Society of Dramatic Authors he been fortunate in discovering a most capable ma as successor to M. Roger, whose death occurred some two or three months ago. M. Robe  te: Gangnat, who has been elected Agent-Général_ of 2 of the Society, is an advocate by profession. He 2 -s% was secretary to M. Pichon, the present French iil/ Minister in Tunis, and attaché under M. Bourgeois, sail! Minister of the Interior and Minister of Foreign tit ® Affairs. al In 1898, M. Gangnat joined the staff of the Wl Matin as dramatic critic, and from 1891 to 1894 sy of he was President of the dramatic society known es, as “Les Escholiers,” a society which stages the «toy works of unknown but talented authors. M. ae} Gangnat is therefore well known in the theatrical » 109 world, whilst his legal knowledge and experience . {lis will be invaluable to the Society he now represents. ae Things theatrical seem to be of the greatest ja importance, judging from the amount of literature duc published this season on subjects concerning the _ ed: theatre in France and in other countries. *__ A volume by M. Jules Claretie entitled “ Profils of de Théatre’’ is interesting from the first line to ' 94 the last. M. Claretie, as director of the Théatre _voa9 Francais, has exceptional opportunities for writing ot aa book of this kind. He has the good fortune, * 90, too, to possess an excellent memory, so that the “fo volume, with its anecdotes of artistes living and ssi dead, is like an album of photographs. M. Claretie » (fs tells us of Dejazet refusing to act in “‘ La Dame “ui aux Camélias ” and of Frédéric Lemaitre’s pride in 1 sit his “ Robert Macaire.” He tells us, too, interesting ine! details about Got, Reichenberg and Monnet Sully. ‘As a kind of postscript to this book of M. sf Claretie’s comes a volume by M. Adrien Bern- igt heim, entitled “Trente Ans de Théatre.” The 19g) author gives us details about the working and the sigh statistics of the four state theatres of France. ve 9) He also, like M. Claretie, gives us the benefit of ei his souvenirs, and finishes the volume with an ©59; account of the Society called the “'Trente Ans de , $901 Théatre,” in which he is so deeply interested, and iy which was originally started as a kind of relief tie fund for artistes. -°4 Notcontent with giving us so much information «od, about the French stage, M. Georges Bourdon has $e been studying in England all things connected i dig with the English theatre, and as a result he has q published a volume entitled “Les Théatres Anglais.” M. Jusserand, too, has taken up the subject, and has just published a most interesting article on “The London Theatres in the time of Shakespeare.” It appears that the first permanent theatre was built in Paris in 1548, and that the first one in London dated from 1576. ay The two great successes of this season, so far, . 84 are undoubtedly the “ Resurrection” at the Odéon, and “La Chatelaine” at the Renaissance. “Le Joug,”’ which Madame Réjane has been playing since her return to Paris, has not been ‘enthusiastically received. It is no doubt a clever THE AUTHOR. 87 piece, and the dialogue is bright and witty, but the French public is getting tired of this kind of play. “Le Cadre” is another play of the same stamp. It was well received as it was admirably put on, but the public soon tired of this, too. Byron’s “ Manfred” was M. Lugne Poe’s latest venture, but it must be confessed that most people were disappointed with this play on the stage. At the Opéra Comique, “La Carmélite,” by M. Catulle Mendés, has been the great event of the season in the musical world. The theme of this opera has given rise to much discussion, as the more devoted Catholics strongly objected to the taking of the veil being employed as a stage effect. M. Paul Hervieu is the fortunate dramatic author who has produced a new play for Madame Sarah Bernhardt. M. Hervieu has had this piece on hand for about a year. The International Theatre is making great headway here. “Infedele,” by Roberto Bracco, and “Di Notte,” by Sabatino Lopez, are the two pieces now being given, and M. Bour has scored an immense success with both of them. The latter is a most curious play, and shows up the striking difference between the Italian and French theatres. The piece is full of surprises, unexpected incidents seem to be tacked on to the drama, and in one or two instances the tragedy borders on comedy. M. Bauer is excellent in his réle, and M. Bour’s acting is. as finished as in his famous “Alleluia.” “ Infedele”’ is a comedy in three acts, and is admirably put on. M. Bour, Mlle. Mylo d’Arcylle, and M. Bourny have the three chief parts. The play is an Italian variation on the “eternal theme,” so dear to French dramatic authors. The dialogue is witty, but most daring, and the piece demands extremely clever and finished acting. Attys HALLARD. ———__1——_e—___—_—_- LITERARY, DRAMATIC, AND MUSICAL PROPERTY. oe eS ie Kipling +, Putnam. UDYARD KIPLING’S suit for $25,000 damages against George Haven Putnam and Irving Putnam, constituting the pub- lishing firm of G. P. Putnam’s Sons, for infringe- ment of copyright and trademark, came up again for argument before the United States Circuit Court of Appeals on Kipling’s appeal from Judge Lacombe’s decision against him,  88 John L. Hill, in arguing for Mr. Kipling, said that at the time the critical sickness of the author in New York and the death of his little girl were exciting intense interest in him and his works, the defendants decided “ to shake the tree and get all the apples they could,” and that the Brushwood edition followed. He believed the intention was to forestall the sale of the “Outward Bound” edition, the authorized edition. ; Stephen H. Olin, for the Putnams, said the publishers had attempted no deceit whatever, and that only fifteen sets had borne the elephant’s head and autograph, which the plaintiff says were used to give the edition the colour of an authorised edition. The Court reserved decision. — + Literary Property and Copyright in the United States. Ix 1890 an American publisher entered into a contract with an English author, having in pre- paration a novel to be published serially in an English magazine, by which he agreed to pay £20 “in return for the sole and exclusive use of advance sheets of said novel in the United States and Dominion of Canada”; the price to be paid “on publication of the novel in America.” The author agreed to deliver to the publisher a complete copy of the work, either in advance sheets or manuscript, at least two months prior to the com- pletion of its serial publication in England. Prior to the publication of the work in America, in October, 1891, the greater portion of it had been published serially in England. Until July Ist, 1891, there was no statute in the United States under which a copyright could be secured on a work by a foreign author. Held that, construing the contract in the light of such facts, it conferred no rights of proprietorship in the manuscript of the work which entitled the American publisher to copyright the same in the United States, but only the right to the exclusive use of the advance sheets to enable him to publish the work in America coincidently with or in advance of its publication in England. The bill charges that Mr. Barrie, the author of “The Little Minister,” a novel to be issued serially in the year 1891 in the magazine Good Words, published in London, on May 8th, 1890, entered into a contract with John W. Lovell as follows : “This contract entered into and made this eighth day of May, 1890, between J. M. Barrie, of London, and John W. Lovell, of New York, witnesseth: (1) In consideration of the premises, the said J. M. Barrie hereby grants and assigns to THER AUTHOR. the said John W. Lovell the sule and exclusive right to publish from advance sheets in the United — States and Dominion of Canada,.a novel by him to be issued serially in a magazine, known as Good — Words, during the year 1891. And. the said — J. M. Barrie agrees to deliver to the said John W. Lovell a complete copy of such work, either in the form of advance sheets or MS., at least two calendar months prior to the serial completion of such work in England ; and in the event of his — failure to do so, this contract, at the option of the said John W. Lovell, shall become inoperative and — void. (2) The said John W. Lovell agrees in return for the sole and exclusive use of advance sheets of the said novel in the United States and the Dominion of Canada to pay the said J. M,. Barrie £20 on publication of the novel in America,” Lovell assigned this contract to the United States Book Company, which company, on June 19th, ~ 1891, deposited with the Librarian of Congress at. — Washington a printed copy of the title of the book, and on October 14th, 1891, deposited two copies of the book in that office. The publication of the novel was begun in the January, 1891, number of the monthly periodical Good Words, in London. and continued throughout that year. Thirty-eight. chapters had been thus published prior to the publication of the completed book by the United States Book Company in America, and prior to the deposit of the copies with the librarian; the remaining seven chapters of the book being — published in the London magazine subsequently, The book, as. published in the United States by the United States Book Company, contained the notice in form required by the law of copyright, and the bill charges full compliance: with the requirements of law with respect to copyrights, whereby, as it is claimed, the United States Book Company became the sole owner of the copyrigh of the book in the United States of America, On May 29th, 1900, the complainant became the owner of the rights of the United States Book Company under the contract between Barrie and Lovell, and of the copyright, if any, secured’ by that company. It is further charged that Mr, Barrie, in 1897, without the consent of Lovell o any of his successors in interest, dramatised the novel “The Little Minister,” and secured it production and performance upon the stage within the United States under contract with th defendant Frohman ; that such dramatisation is in four acts, of which acts 3 and 4 are founded in plot, incident and characters upon, and much 0 its language is contained in chapters 39 to 4 inclusive, of the novel, and such acts are importan: parts of the dramatisation ; that the defendants Yack and Hards are managers or actors in the theatrical company associated with Frohman, an  wen BD 3 op ox. 9 od Shs Fa! ES ca GR ee ee THE AUTHOR. 89 were about to produce the play and perform therein at certain places stated in the bill, within the jurisdiction of the court. The bill sought an Injunction restraining the performance of the drama. Yack and Hards demurred to the bill upon the grounds (1) that at the date of the contract the laws of the United States did not authorise a copyright in favour of the works of a foreign author; (2) that the story was first to be published in the English magazine, before any right of publication in the United States ; (3) that the right granted by the contract was merely a licence granting the exclusive right to publish the novel from advance sheets after publication thereof by the author ; (4) that the United States Book Company never became the proprietor of the book, and had no authority to procure a copyright ; (5) laches by the complainant in the assertion of his alleged right. On May Ist, 1901, the court sustained the demurrer and dismissed the amended bill for want of equity (105 Fed., 787), and on October 29th, 1901, an appeal was allowed to this ‘court. Millard R. Powers for appellant; George A. Dupuy for appellees. JENKINS, Circuit Judge (after stating the facts as above).—The office of all construction and interpretation of contracts is to ascertain the inten- tion of the parties, and the meaning of the words they have used—their real design as disclosed by the whole contract. For that purpose we may resort to surrounding circumstances and the condi- tion of the parties at the time, not to ascertain what they may have secretly intended, but to resolve doubtful expressions and to ascertain the true meaning of the agreement, And this is to be judged, not from any separate provision or dis- connected expression in the writing, but taking it in its entirety. It is insisted for the appellant that the right acquired by Lovell to the manuscript of “The Little Minister,” so far at least as concerns the United States of America and Canada, was that of proprietor, and that, therefore, he had under the Jaw the right of copyright. At the date of this contract, May 8th, 1890, copyright was not authorised in this country in favour of foreign authors (Rey. St., sect. 4952); nor, as it would ‘seem, could a foreign author assign or transfer to a citizen his manuscript or common law right of property therein, so that the latter could have copyright protection within the United States (Yuengling v. Schile, C. C., 12 Fed. Rep., 97, 102- 107). The international copyright law granting copyright to foreign authors was passed March 3rd, 1891, and went into effect July 1st, 1891 (26 stat., 1106-1110, chap. 565). It thus appears that the contract in question was entered into nearly ten months prior to the passage of this law. At its date Mr. Barrie had no right to acquire copyright within the United States, and could grant no such right. Nor could an assignee of his manuscript and common law right therein acquire such copy- right. It is, therefore, manifest that it was not, and could not have been, within the contemplation of the contracting parties to grant or to acquire a right to that which did not exist and was not the subject of a grant. Unless, therefore, by the agreement in question Lovell became the owner and the proprietor of the manuscript, to the exclusion of Mr, Barrie’s right therein, and could avail himself, with respect to that work, of the privilege conferred by subsequent legislation, he has no right to copyright of the work. The parties at the execution of the contract were thus circum- stanced: Mr. Barrie was engaged in writing a novel for serial publication in an English magazine, to be therein published monthly, com- mencing with the January number, 1891. By the agreement, Mr. Barrie granted and assigned to Mr. Lovell “the sole and exclusive right to publish from advance sheets, in the United States and Dominion of Canada,” the work to be published serially in the English magazine during the year 1891, and agreed to deliver to Lovell a complete copy of the work, either in the form of advance sheets or MS., at least two calendar months prior to the serial completion of such work in England.’ In consideration thereof, Lovell agreed to pay “for the sole and exclusive use of advance sheets of the said novel in the United States and the Dominion of Canada” £20 upon its publication in America. It may be doubted whether the contract contemplated the serial publication of the work in America, as it provides for the delivery of the advance sheets or manuscript at least two calendar months prior to the serial completion of the work in England; and we are not informed by the bill concerning the fact of serial publication here, so that we can judge of the practical construction placed upon the contract by the parties. If Mr. Barrie was not bound to furnish any advance sheets or any portion of the manuscript until two months prior to the com- pletion of the serial publication in England then it is clear that as to the parts published ia England before the filing of copies of the book with the Librarian of Congress, namely, the first thirty- eight chapters, there was no possible right of copyright under the international copyright law (Holmes v. Hurst, 174 U.S., 82, 19 Sup. Ct. 606, 43 L. Ed., 904 ; Same v. Donohue, C. C., 77 Fed., 179). The story contained forty-five chapters, and was completed in England in the December number of the magazine, and all but seven chapters were published in England prior to the deposit of  90 the book in the office of the Librarian of Congress. At the most, therefore, copyright could only com- prehend the last seven chapters of the work. Bearing in mind that upon publication in England of the work or parts of the work, there could be no copyright in the United States under the inter- national copyright law of the parts thus published, and that at the time of the contract there was no international copyright law, the meaning of the contract would seem tobe clear. Mr. Barrie could only secure any sum for publication of the work in America by granting the use of his manuscript in advance of its publication in England, for any American publisher could after such publication issue it here without liability to Mr. Barrie or to Mr. Lovell. It could be reproduced with impunity. An American publisher could only be first upon the market here by publishing it simultaneously with or in advance of its publication in England, and that could only be accomplished by obtaining advance sheets of the manuscript before the appearance of the story or any of its parts in the English magazine. It is clear to us that the purpose of the contract was to accomplish this simultaneous publication. Mr. Barrie did not sell his manuscript, or dispose of his common law right thereto. He merely agreed to furnish advance sheets, and gave to Lovell the exclusive right to publish them either simultaneously with, or within a short time before, the completion of the serial publication in England. Lovell agreed to pay £20, not for the work, not to become pro- prietor of the work, but “for the sole and exclusive use of the advance sheets” of the novel in the United States. ‘This is a mere licence to Lovell, giving him the advantage of the use of advance sheets. That use, it is true, was to be exclusive ; that is to say, Mr. Barrie agreed on his part that he would not furnish advance sheets to another. Lovell only acquired a qualified interest. He did not become the absolute owner. One of the qualities of absolute ownership in a work is that the author has the right to withhold it from publication if he so desire. Lovell could not do that. Under this contract he was bound to publish it, for the consideration expressed in the contract was not payable until publication. This construction of the instrument is fortified also by the amount of the consideration. As the author had no right of copyright, and as upon publication in England any one had right to publish it in America, the author could receive nothing for the work published here, except such as he might be able to obtain by allowing its publication here simultaneously with or in advance of its publica- tion in England. That accounts for the trifling consideration in the contract, and speaks the intent of the parties. It is inconceivable that a THE AUTHOR. distinguished author would have disposed of pro- prietorship in his manuscript for so inconsiderable. asum. We are of opinion that the contract con- ferred no rights of proprietorship in the manuscript but only the right of publication coincidently with or in advance of the publication of the work in England. The decree is affirmed. [Reprinted by kind permission of The Times.] Moul v. Boosey. THIS was an action for alleged libel. The defen- dant relied on the defence of fair comment on a matter of public interest. Mr. Lush, K.C., and Mr. 8. O. Henn Collins were for the plaintiff; Mr. Avory, K.C., and Mr, P. Rose-Innes for the defendant. It appeared that the plaintiff, Mr. Alfred Moul, was the chairman of the Alhambra, and had been a composer of musical works, and was the agent for the British Empire of the Société des Auteurs, Compositeurs, et Editeurs de Musique de France. The defendant, Mr. William Boosey, was now managing director of Chappell & Co. (Limited), music publishers. The plaintiff alleged that before the Copyright (Musical Compositions) Act, 1888, one Harry Wall had taken an active part in the institution of proceedings for penalties for the unauthorized performance of musical compositions, and that he had acted dishonourably and oppres- sively in the institution of these proceedings. The defendant, on March 18, 1902, had written a letter to the Daily Mail, saying that “ Mr. Alfred Moul, who protests in your columns against justice being done to English composers, publishers, and music- sellers, is the same gentleman who has for years been unsuccessfully attempting to persuade English music publishers to follow the example of French music publishers, and to demand from the public a performing fee for all the minor works in their catalogues. The piecemeal copyright legislation that Mr. Moul complains of is, no doubt, the Copy- right Act of 1882, which was a short Act passed as a matter of urgency by Parliament to assist the public in their dealings with a gentleman who was in Mr. Moul’s own line of business.”” The Act of 1882 required the proprietor of the copyright, if he desired to retain the right of performance, to notify the same on each copy. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant meant the Act of 1888, that it was passed in consequence of actions for penalties brought by Wall, and that these words meant that the plaintiff conducted his business as agent of the above-mentioned society oppressively and dis-  THE AUTHOR. 91 honourably. The defendant also wrote to the Referee a letter, which appeared on March 21, 1902, asking that paper to strain every nerve in their protest against a system of legalized highway robbery. This letter went on to say of the plain- tiff:—‘ He is neither composer, publisher, nor music-seller. He is not even a street pirate. He is merely the English representative of a society of French composers and publishers, who levy a tax upon the British public for the performance of waltzes, songs, and other small works in their catalogues. It is in the interest of these clients that Mr. Moul complains of our piecemeal legisla- tion—the said piecemeal legislation consisting of the Copyright Acts of 1882 and 1888, which, while admittedly very imperfect, at all events served their purpose to a certain extent.” The plaintiff alleged that this letter meant that he was dis- honestly representing himself to be acting in the interests of English composers, and that he carried on his business in a discreditable manner. The plaintiff stated that he had never brought an action for penalties, as distinguished from fees, for performance, and these fees his society divided with the publishers ; but the theory of many pub- lishers was that it would be better to do away with the right to fees for performance, as they thought they would sell more copies under such a system. Mr. W. M. Tilson stated that it was general knowledge that the Act of 1888 (which gave the Judge a discretion as to the amount of penalties for the performance of musical copyright works, instead of 40s. per performance, as under 3 & 4 Wm. IV., c. 15), was passed in consequence of Wall’s suing for penalties in a great many cases. Mr. John Hollingshead said that he took the last words in the letter to the Daily Mail to refer to Wall, who did not carry on an honourable busi- ness. Mr. Moul’s business was the perfectly honourable one of collecting fees for his French clients ; but Wall sued for penalties for the benefit of his own pocket after performances had been given by people who did not know that they were making themselves liable to penalties. Corrohorative evidence having been given for the plaintiff, letters were read for the defence wbiols had been written to the papers by Mr. Moul, calling the music publishers pirates, and complaining of the copyright legislation as being piecemeal and in the interests of the music publishers, and it was said that the alleged libels were fair comment on a matter of public interest, as giving reasons why the plaintiff was not a proper person to inter- fere in the discussion, as he was really doing in a modified form what Wall had been doing before. The defendant, Mr. William Boosey, a music publisher, of New Bond Street, said that when he wrote the letters complained of he knew that Wall had used his rights in an oppressive manner, and that the Acts of 1882 and 1888 had been passed to limit those rights. By “line of business” he meant the collection of fees in respect of minor pieces of music ; and his objection was that, as Mr. Moul could not publish a list, the public had either to subscribe to his society or to run the risk of being sued, There was no ground for suggest- ing that he was hostile to the plaintiff. He did not intend to suggest that the plaintiff carried on a dishonourable business. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for £150. Judgment accordingly. Photographic Copyright. A CASE of some interest has been tried during the last month before Mr. Justice Ridley and a common jury, entitled Boucas v. Cooke and Others. The defendant Cooke is known, we believe, as “The Boy Preacher.” He went to the plaintiff and asked him to execute the photograph for the purpose of advertising his meetings, and, it appears, promised to purchase the negative if he was satis- tied with the photograph. When the photograph was made, defendant took it to one of the other defendants who was a party to the action, and the second defendant had a number of copies printed off, which were distributed at the meetings. The plaintiff registered the copyright of the photograph and then claimed the right of reproduction. The second defendant registered the copyright of his print from the original photograph, and sub- sequent to the date of the plaintiff’s registration sold several thousand copies. The question was whether the employment of the photographer was such an employment as to come under the first section of the Copyright Act, 1862, the words of which run as follows :— “ Provided that when the negative of any photograph shall be made or executed for or on behalf of any other person for a good or valuable consideration,” &c. If the photograph had been made on these terms the right of reproduction would have belonged to the defendant. The judge, in summing up, came to the con- clusion that the copyright in the negative was the property of the plaintiff, and the jury assessed the damages at £20. a  92 PUBLISHERS’ PROFITS ON NETT BOOKS. ee HE question of the nett book has been a6 agitating the minds of the publishers and booksellers for some time. In the United States the system was begun tentatively, and has taken firm hold. At first applied only to certain kinds of books, at certain prices, its success was so assured that it is probable the nett book will become universal, or nearly so. Mr. Charles Scribner, the president of the Pub- lishers’ Association of the United States, explained the whole case in Zhe Author of April. A similar evolution is gradually taking place in the English book trade. Here also it seems not unlikely that the nett book system, as its advan- tages become evident, will by slow degrees cover the whole market. What is the reason of this? What are its charms ? Why was it started ? Originally books were sold at full price. Then some enterprising bookseller discovered that he could still make sufficient profit for himself and undersell his rival by giving his customers a discount. This process of underselling continued till the public received five-and-twenty per cent. discount, but the small bookseller was no longer able to make a living profit. Then his voice was raised in the land, and the reaction set in. Butas there are always either those who, owing to the power given into their hands by a large capital, or those who, having no capital, are unscrupulous on the point of extravagant trading, it became necessary that some combination of the trade should be formed sufficiently powerful to enforce an equitable plan upon all, the willing and the unwilling. Such a combination was at hand in the Publishers’ Association. It is not for the author to look upon these universal trading laws with indifference, nor to cover himself with the warm cloak of his artistic temperament, imagining that the temperature is mild and the sun is shining when the bitter cold of competition is over all the land. For other- wise he may be overcome with that sleep which will surely assist in bringing his career to a close. In plain words, it is most important for the author that he should carefully watch the methods of distribution of his wares ; that he should study with interest trade currents and trade evolution, and should give his help where and when he is able, to assist the trade for his own preferment. He should, at the same time, keep a watchful eye that the trade does not assist itself at his expense. Many will say that all this careful watching is mean and sordid. But this view of the case should - THE AUTHOR. still be kept in mind by the writer, that in his profession all this meanness and sordidness—if such it is—may be an incident, but is not the ultimate object, the ideal; whereas in trade it is ‘the be-all and the end-all.” Further, it is the highest interest not of the author alone but also of literature that the circumstances under which the general public can buy should be thoroughly understood. But enough. There need be no question of meanness or sordidness on either side. The Publishers’ Association set itself the task of enforcing certain terms on the bookselling trade, with the full consent of all the most responsible booksellers. ‘To the publishers, as to the authors, — it was just as important that the great distributing medium should not be wiped out. It may be candidly stated that, except so far as the improve- ment of the bookseller was an advantage to the publisher, there was not a sign that the great middleman at that time had any other aim before him. Was this, however, the case ? It is the object of this article to show that not only did the booksellers benefit, but the publishers also—the former certainly to a greater extent than the latter. The author and the printer gained no advantage, and the public—the ultimate arbiter in all cases of trade—had to pay for the advancement. So long as the public is prepared to pay, the other parties must fight the fight between them- selves. The author, then, has this matter for considera- tion. He was quite willing to acquiesce in the nett system in order to benefit the distributing agent, the man who really ought, if he traded successfully, to be the only person on whom he need rely for a public appreciation of his efforts. But is he willing to give a further profit to the publisher? Ought he not to demand some share of the increase obtained from the consumer ? Certainly he ought. The publisher has always been affirming that the nett book is for the benefit of the bookseller only. The following example will demonstrate that this is not the case, and will show the difference in the returns of the publisher and the bookseller in which the author ought to share. The 6s. book does not, at present, fall within the nett system, For convenience sake a book costing 12s. 6d. has been taken. Judging by the book lists it is a common price for books above 6s. Perhaps owing to the fact that it is exactly 150d. The figures and prices following are taken from an existing case—a sound and average example— and can be relied upon as correct. It would not be necessary to state this, if the figures in The Author had not so constantly been contradicted.  THE AUTHOR. It is not essential to go into the details for this article, but the figures may be verified by any member. Let it be supposed that an edition of 1,050 copies with binding and advertising costs £170, and that the author receives 10 per cent. on the published price. This is a low percentage, but so long as the figure is constant in both examples it will not interfere with the deduction — namely, the difference between the publisher’s and _book- seller’s profit. In the first instance the book is sold at 12s. 6d. nett. The whole 1,050 copies will in no case be sold. Under the Copyright Act six copies go to the public libraries, the author usually receives some presentation copies, and a considerable number are sent to the Press for review. If 100 copies are reckoned for these purposes the allowance will be liberal, for it must be remembered that the book is 12s. 6d. nett—an expensive book. The basis of calculation, therefore, must be the sale of 1,050 — 100 copies = 950 copies. As these copies alone bring in a return, the cost of pro- duction must be divided amongst them. The amount paid for a single copy of the book by the purchaser is the sum of four different amounts. 1. The amount per copy of the cost of production. 2. The royalty per copy paid to the author. 3. The amount of the publisher's profit on each copy. 4. The amount of the book- seller’s profit per copy. Let W = cost of production. X = the author’s royalty. Y = the publisher’s profit. Z = the bookseller’s profit. In each case on a single copy. Thus W +X%+Y+2Z = 12s. 6d. = 150d. Going back to the sale of 950 copies, the cost of production of a single copy must be ascertained. Thus— ‘ £170 _ 40,800d. ee ae = 42°94d, 950 We can now write 42°94 ++ X + Y¥ + Z = 150 X+Y+2Z = 107°06. That is to say, that the sum to be divided between the author, the publisher, and the book- seller is— 107:06d. = 8s. 11:06d. 93 Next the author’s royalty per copy must be ascertained. On a nett book the author usually receives his royalty on every copy sold. He is not compelled to count thirteen as twelve, a pernicious custom that has crept in for the publisher’s benefit, sanctioned, we regret to say, by authors’ agents, The royalty is always paid on the published price. 10 per cent upon 12s. 6d. or 150d. = 15d. The author receives ls. 3d. per copy. Then substituting 15d.— X + Y + Z = 107-06. 165+Y+2Z2=10706. Y+2Z = 92°06. It is necessary now to solve the question of Y + Z, the publisher’s and_ the bookseller’s profit. Here the problem is complicated, owing to the fact that the publishers sell the book to different booksellers at different prices. It is interesting to note the following point not in relation to the present subject, but in order to show the faultiness of publishers’ methods. In those agreements where the author’s remuneration depends wholly or in part on the nett amounts received from the trade by the publishers, the words, ‘‘the usual trade terms,” are taken to express the sale to the trade, and in the accounts the price is generally rendered as uniform, and that—it is perhaps unnecessary to remark—not the highest price received. This is a trade method. “— The paragraph is an obiter dictum. What are these prices? What is the truth ? 1. The bookseller who takes a single copy has it at 2d. in the shilling less than the nett price. If the book is expensive, a large number of sales. are made at this figure. 2. If the bookseller takes thirteen copies, he has. them at the price of twelve. 3. Certain houses and all export houses demand a further discount of 10 per cent. 4, One house pays only two-thirds of the nett. price, minus 10 per cent. If an average of these four prices is taken the result is as follows :— 1. The single copy . 10s. 5d. - 2. 13 as 12, per copy 9s. 7°38d. 3. Export, per copy . 8s. 785d. 4. Lowestterms, percopy 7s. 6d. 36s. 2°23d. 8, 2°23d. : Average = we i. = 9s. 0°557d, Thus the average exceeds 9s. 04d. by a small fraction, and is based on the assumption that the  94 publisher sells at_least one-quarter of the copies at the lowest price. By assuming the price to be 9s. 1d., a small advantage would be given to the publisher. But the publisher is always in dread lest, his profits should be over-stated, so to calm his mind, and in order to leave no door of escape open, 98. shall be the figure he receives from the trade. It follows, then, that the bookseller buying at 9s. and selling at 12s. 6d., makes 3s. 6d. on each copy. Repeating the formula :— W+x+Y+2Z=150 42°94 +15 + Y + 42 = 150 , Y = 50°06 All the four quantities are now ascertained. 42°94 +15 + 50:06 + 42 = 150 The proportions of profit will be made more clear by stating them in percentages. Thus— 28°63 + 10 + 33°37 + 28 = 100 The same process of reasoning must now be applied to the discount book. In this case the work is sold to the public at a discount of 25 per cent., or 3d. in the shilling. The purchaser pays 9s. 44d. or 112°5d. The cost of production is constant, and the number of copies available for sale is constant. Therefore again— Wi X35 Y 4751125, 42°94 4% +7947 = 1125, X+Y+2Z= 69°56. That is to say, the sum to be divided between the author, the publisher, and the bookseller is 5s. 9°56d. A trifle more than 5s. 94d. The author’s royalties are nominally the same, that is 10 per cent., but in the case of the discount book the author has to allow thirteen copies to reckon as twelve. This never used to be the case in old days, but the author’s agent weakened in the bargains of important authors who could demand the full amount, and the smaller fry had in consequence to yield also. The royalty per copy is therefore— 12 180 —— 5 — ——. 13% 15d. = 13 The equation now stands— X+Y+2Z= 69°56. 13°84 + Y + Z= 69°56. . Y + Z = 55°72. It only remains to discover how the publisher and booksellers divide the remainder. As with the Nett book, so with the Discount =13°84, “Sy, THE AUTHOR. book: the publishers sell to the bookseller at various prices. The following is a statement of the prices for a pook published at 12s. 6d. and sold subject to discoant :— For a subscribed book one-third less than the published price— 13 as 12 at 8s. 4d. and 5 count = 7s. 4d. Single copies at 8s. 4d. and 5 per cent. dis- count = 7s. 11d. After subscription— 13 as 12 at 9s. and 5 per cent. discount = 7s. 10d. Single copies at 9s. and 5 per cent. dis- count = 8s. 7d. If, then, the average is taken of these four prices —presuming by this that the publisher sells half the edition on subscription— per cent. dis- —— = 7s, 11d. = 95d. Then the bookseller buys at an average price of 7s. 11d., and sells at 9s. 4$d., therefore— '.L=1s. 54d. = 175d. Then Y + 175 = 55°72d. Y = 38:22a, All the four quantities are now ascertained— 42°94 + 13°84 + 38°22 + 17°5 = 1125. If expressed in percentages— 38°17 + 12°3 + 33°97 + 15°56 = 100. If these figures are correct, and on this point we are clear—although the fact is sure to be denied by the other side—this very instructive result is clear, that the publishers’ and booksellers’ profits stand out as follows— Publisher. Bookseller. Nett Book ...... 4s. 2°06d.......88. 6d. Discount Book... .3s. 2°22d....... 1s. 54d. The bookseller benefits to the extent of 2s. 04d., and the publisher to the extent of 11°84d., or almost a shilling. Speaking roughly, a ratio of two to one. The profit to the bookseller, we are told, must be left with him in order to enable him to live, but the publisher can already live and flourish. It might be rightly claimed, then, that the extra shilling should belong entirely to the author. At any rate, he ought to gain something. ‘Again, according to the publisher's statement the following ought to be the figures :— Publisher. Bookseller, Discount Book....3s. 2°22d....... ls, 54d. Nett Book ...... $5. O°22d.. 75... 4s. 8°84d. Either way the profit is not unreasonable, but it  _ i is less in comparison for the publisher, who, in bbe addition to office and other expenses, places his ye9 eapital out with the printers and binders. The bookseller risks nothing. ,/_ A close study of the figures and percentages has bel led to an interesting result. In another paper it o 1) is hoped to put forward some further matters for a9 consideration. 4 A MUSICAL AGREEMENT. — HE samples of perfect Agreements issued by the Publishers Association and approved, : so we must take it, by all those time honoured oe houses which the public have been accustomed to ‘0! look upon as the kindly protectors of the.profession, »7e— gave the members of the Society a powerful insight ia into the equitable mind of the trade. ‘Nothing could have been said if it had been *¢- openly avowed that they represented the extreme ‘ei¥ view of the publishers, but this was not the case. af As readers of The Author may remember, they fy were put forward as equitable between party and Ts. party. by We refrain from argument. They bring their own condemnation. Again, the worn-out formulas put forward to per- su. suade some authors to give their signature, firstly, sq that the agreement is reliable, ‘it has been approved ? v by King’s Counsel,” or, secondly, that “it isa form fl ib all my authors sign,” may deceive the one-book * man and secure to his publisher a temporary advantage, but can hardly affect those who care- fully peruse these pages. oe Yet in spite of all warning for barefaced com- ® 98 mercial impudence the following—a common form 209 among the still unrepentant musical publishers— will take the first prize against all comers, It has come before the Society from three different houses. In ordinary business the seller usually submits terms and gains the advantage, if any, but in publishing, the process is reversed. IN CONSIDERATION of a royalty of pence per copy, seven copies to count as six, the first two hundred to be free of said royalty—paid to me, the undersigned author, by the music publishers, the receipt whereof I do hereby acknowledge, I do hereby sell and assign absolutely to the said publishers all my copyright and interest of whatever kind for Great Britain, Ireland, the Colonies, “amd every other country, of and in the music and _ words of * And also the sole and exclusive right and liberty of representing or performing the same, and causing or per- mitting the same to be represented or performed, and also the copyright and theright of representation or performing, a THE AUTHOR. 95) or causing or permitting the same to be represented or performed, in every foreign state in which such copyright or other rights aforesaid, or any of them, now exist or may hereafter be obtained. And I do hereby agree that the said publishers shall be entitled to arrange, use, and publish the said work, musie and words or any portion thereof, in any other separate form free from any other consideration in respect of such use and publication. And I, the undersigned, warrant and declare to the said publishers, that I am solely and absolutely entitled to the premises expressed to be hereby assigned and that free from incumbrances. Further, only half the above royalty pay- able on copies sold in the United States of America, : Witness my hand, this day of , in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred Z Tt is not intended to put forward a useful Author’s Agreement, but merely to comment on the extraordinary form in which this document is drafted, and to explain some of the more extrava- gant points. On the same principle that it takes two to make a quarrel, it has always been looked upon as necessary to have two parties to an agreement. But the Musical Publisher is above such con- siderations. He is a law unto himself, and appa- rently to the composer also. It is pitiful to consider that for years uncounted, ever since music was a property, composers, without a murmur, without a sigh, have been willing to resign their rights with such a childlike trust. Even now there are leading members of the profession who do not think that there is any need for an organisation to withstand this wholesale abandonment of valuable property. After consideration of the parties, or rather party—for, as we have pointed out, there is only one party who signs this estimable agreement—it is necessary to consider what the composer is conveying. He conveys all his copyright and interest in the piece for all the world, and the sole and exclusive right and liberty of performing the same. He is paid, it will be noticed, a certain sum on the sale of every copy—it is needless to say that the sum is inadequate in comparison with the cost of produc- tion, that the copies are reckoned seven as six, and two hundred given away free for advertising purposes—but on the performing rights he is paid nothing. : The publisher may say that on performing rights in England no money is paid. ‘This is not absolutely true. Take for example, musical operas, songs sung in music halls, and the many other forms of musical composition the performing rights of which are valuable. At no distant date a com- bination may be formed which will enable the composer to demand a certain sum for every public performance. This right in France is very valuable, simply because French composers and those who  96 publish French compositions have banded them- selves together in order to obtain a fall reward for the property they create. To assign these per- forming rights, therefore, is altogether inadvisable. Quite apart from the monetary side of the question it may be justly argued that the composer, under certain circumstances, would object to perform- ances at certain times or in certain places. He could not, however, stop them under the present arrangement. In addition, as the publisher holds the right of performance in foreign countries, the work might be performed in France, where these rights are exceedingly valuable. In that case the publisher would obtain a substantial return, in which the composer would have no share whatever. So far it agreement. But worse is to follow. The publisher not only has all copyright and performing right, put he also receives the right to arrange, use, and publish the said work in any other separate form free from any other consideration 1n respect of such publication. So that if, as not infrequently happens, a song runs pleasantly in waltz time, it would be possible for the publisher to adapt the air to a waltz with a new setting, publish it, and sell thousands of copies. seems impossible to imagine a worse There are many other methods of re-arranging an air. With these the publisher has every right to deal according to his agreement, and on the sale of this new arrangement nothing will return to the composer. Take one further instance. How many quad- rilles, polkas, and other dance music are there that are merely variants of the popular airs of the day ? The composer receives half royalty on copies sold to America. There might be some slight reason for a small reduction, but why a reduction of fifty per cent.? We should be glad if the publishers would furnish figures. Lastly, a few remarks must be made before the question is closed, concerning the remuneration that composers receive for their labours. It is the custom to pay exceedingly small royalties on a song or other musical composition. The royalty in all cases must be finally determined by the amount of capital invested by the publisher, and the return the publisher obtains over and above the sum invested. Compare for one instant the cost of production of a book beside that of a song. Any book from the pen of a popular author, which is sold at 2s. nett will bear a royalty of 2d. in the 1s.; but the cost of production of a book excluding advertising is more than twice as large as the cost of production of a song excluding THE AUTHOR. advertising. It will cost perhaps 15/. to produce — 2,000 copies of a song which will sell at 2s. nett, the advertising, of course, coming outside this amount. Say 307. are spent on advertising, and 500 copies — of the song given away for all purposes, this leaves 1,500 copies to be sold at, say, 1s. 2d. per copy. The return is therefore 87/. 10s. If from this the cost. of production is deducted, 42/. 10s. is left to be divided between author and publisher. Fourpence per copy royalty will, therefore, give the publisher a handsome profit, and the author a reasonable return. If the sales exceed 1,500, then the reproduction is in every way cheaper and the return to the author larger. It should be remarked also that the cost of pro- duction and advertisement, and number of free copies is reckoned on a very liberal scale. In many cases 30/. is an outside price for the advertise- ment of one song and less than 500 copies are usedi as gratis copies. Musical composers position. should reconsider their THE R. D. BLACKMORE MEMORIAL. —-—— + — MEETING of the Blackmore Memorial Committee was held at Stationers’ Hall on ~ Wednesday, November 26th, Mr. James — Baker in the chair. Mr. R. B. Marston, the hon. © treasurer, announced that the subscriptions received amounted to over £200, the total promised to date — being £223 1és. Designs from the sculptor, Mr. — Harry Hems, were submitted showing a medallion portrait on marble slab. Various suggestions were made, and it was decided to close the subscription om December 9th, and at the next committee meeting — to make final arrangements for putting the work in hand. Amongst those present were Professor Raphael Meldola, Mr. Mackenzie Bell, Mr. Herbert A. Morrah, Mr. James Baker, Miss Pinto Leite, and Mr. G. E. N. Ryan. On December 10th a further meeting of the — committee was held. Mr. Hems, the sculptor, produced a fresh design, which was unanimously approved. Mr. Hems stated that the work would — be completed and ready for erection early in April next.  THE AUTHOR. 97 GENERAL MEMORANDA. Ae 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: C1.) Not to sign any agreement in which the cost of pro- duciion 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.” IVY. 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 :— (1.) 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. eg ge ee WARNINGS TO DRAMATIC AUTHORS. a 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 :— (@.) SALE OUTRIGHT OF THE PERFORMING RIGHT, This is unsatisfactory. An author who enters into 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. (2.) 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. (e.) SALE OF PERFORMING RIGHT OR OF A LICENCE TO PERFORM ON THE BASIS OF ROYALTIES (i.¢., 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 (0.) 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 anyevent. 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 excced- ingly valuable. ‘They 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, eg HOW TO USE THE SOCIETY. — i 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.  98 2. Remember that questions connected with copyright and publishers’ agreements do not generally fall within the experience of ordinary solicitors. Therefore, do not scruple 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 contract 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. —_1-——+—_ 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. +> NOTICES. Sa 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 EpITorR on all subjects connected with literature, but on no other subjects whatever. Every effort will be made to return articles which cannot be accepted. —— 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. rVNVHE case of Aflalo & Cook v. Lawrence & Bullen, which has been supported by the Society throughout, was heard on Appeal before Lord Justice Vaughan Williams, Lord Justice Romer, and Lord Justice Stirling, on Thursday, the 18th of December. Readers of Zhe Author may remember that judgment in the first instance was given in the favour of the plaintiffs, with costs. Against this. judgment the defendants appealed. The Appeal has been dismissed with costs. Lord Justice Romer and Lord Justice Stirling decided against the appellants, Lord Justice Vaughan Williams dissenting. The case is one of considerable importance, as it. deals with the interpretation of the 18th section of the Copyright Act. It has already been pointed out in the pages of The Author that this section is perhaps one of the worst sections that has ever been drafted in an Act of Parliament, and is difficult of interpretation and complicated. Every case, therefore, that tends to make it more explicit must be of importance to those: interested in literary property. It is hoped that in the next number of 7'he Author it will be possible to give a full statement of the judgment. We understand that King Oscar, one of the few royal authors, has been contributing an article to the magazine of the Swedish Authors’ Union.  THE AUTHOR. 99 Though it is the privilege of every crowned head to be egotistical—the subject of the paper was his own writings in fiction and poetry—yet he dealt some very frank criticism on his work. He used, he said, to be very proud of his lyrical productions, but doesn’t consider them now to be first class. The poem he considers his best is ‘The Baltic.” He trusts that his readers’ opinions will coincide with his own. No sooner has King Oscar finished criticising his own works than another royal personage comes before the public as an author. “La Carriére d’un Navigateur” is the title of a work by Albert I., Prince of Monaco, and, like King Oscar, in his own line he proves himself an author of no mean capacity. The book is full of the love of the sea. It is imaginative and, in places, poetical. The work is published in Paris. Under “ Literary, Dramatic, and Musical Pro- perty,” we have, with the kind permission of the Editor of The Times, reprinted the case of Jfoul vy. Boosey, dealing with the performing rights of musical pieces. We desire again to bring this point before those composers who are members of the Society, and again to call their attention to the fact that owing to a strong combination of French composers the property in performing rights has become exceed- ingly valuable. In Germany and France, we believe that a royalty agreement on the sale of a song or musical composition is almost unknown, and the composers make their money from their performing rights. In England the reverse holds good. There is no reason, however, why both rights should not become a valuable property, and bring in a considerable income. The fact that a certain Mr. Wall in former years took advantage of the unsatisfactory state of the law to levy contributions from illegal per- formances, is no reason why the performing rights should therefore be allowed to run to waste. We trust that musical composers will give the matter their serious consideration. Various friends of the late Mr. J. T. Nettleship, the well-known animal painter, are desirous of placing a tablet to his memory in the fine old church of Kettering, his native town, to be supplemented, if practicable, by some small memorial in London. Besides being noteworthy as an artist, Mr. Nettleship was an accomplished writer, his ingenious essays, on the poetry of Robert Browning, first published as far back as the “sixties,” having done much to promote: a more general appreciation of the poet’s work. Mr. Alfred East, A.R.A., Mr. Alfred Parsons, A.R.A., Mr. T. C. Gotch and Mr. William Toynbee have undertaken to organise a fund in London, and subscriptions may be sent to Mr. Toynbee, Hon, Treasurer, at 4N, Portman Mansions, W. John Kendrick Bangs—so states the American Author—agrees with Jules Verne that the novel is passing, and that in a hundred years from now there will be no such form of literature, or, at least, not as we knew it. “If wireless telegraphy, why not bookless romances, typeless novels, page- less poems? We already have jokeless comic papers. These things are surely coming, and I foresee the day when without novels, poetry or drama the public will be surfeited with romances and tales of the most stirring character, poems of stately measure and uplifting concept; psycho- logical studies of the deepest dye; and dramas that will take the soul of man and twist it until it fairly shrieks for mercy—and all of these things. men and women will get while they sleep. a A LITERARY ACADEMY. —1+~< L. AM so little instructed in the theory of literary I academies that it is only after reading the clever letters published on the subject in The Author by such authorities as Messrs. Herbert Trench, H. G. Wells and Morley Roberts, and Lucas Malet, that I feel emboldened to form a hasty opinion, entirely on the reading of the aforesaid letters. My blood boils, as does that of us all, including Mr. Herbert Trench, at the prevalence amongst us of what I will call the “ tub-novelist.” But would the establishment of an Academy of Letters in this country exercise any control over this variety of literary caterer? Would he not adapt his chair to the same purpose as he did his tub, and wave his academic crown to the tune of so much per thow’ as before ? Mr. Zangwill’s blunt, or rather pointed, allusion to the ‘“ vulgarity of the epoch’ seems to sum up the case for me, only I would substitute for vulgarity the adjective ‘“non- critical.” Weare, as a nation, non-critical—thank goodness we are, as a nation, creative. The French are both, the latter perhaps in a lesser degree. But in France, though there is a  100 tremendous fertility in rubbish, as with us, Litera- ture proper completely ignores the out-put. The books one reads to soothe the toothache, or to ameliorate a railway journey, are not the books one criticises. : The three unmentionable “ Claudines” that have had such a vogue over there were read with ‘more or less amusement and cast aside—never considered seriously for one moment. But the English counterparts to ‘laudine—Heaven forbid that I should name them !—are on every decent table, and are gloated over by discreet K.C.’s and M.P.’s and discussed seriously in would-be literary salons. We do not distinguish. In France, the garcon de café, the demoiselle de comptoir read their Anatole France, their Huysmans, and are able to criticise and discuss him. ‘The French literary man varies from his ‘English prototype just as much as his audience does. The labour of a French author has an absurdly unnecessary concomitant. He takes pains __jmmense pains. He does not, as a rule, have the tendency which Lucas Malet deplores in some -of his English confréres. He does not regard letters as a means, but as an end. He does not -aspire to rise from author to “ minister,” and he never hopes to have time for society. M. Pierre D’Alheim, the author of “La Passion de Maitre Fran¢éis Villon,” spent fifteen years over the pro- duction of this masterly study of the Middle Ages. And it is one of a trilogy, of which the other two are still to be written! M. Huysmans lives the ‘life of a hermit—a genial one, par example ; he does not hate his fellow creatures, he simply has not time for them. It is my humble opinion that until we have a few more authors of this stamp in England, it is of no use arranging an Academy for them. The few truly earnest labourers in the literary field that we do possess would be obliged to double their parts and crown themselves. There are so few of them. And even then the enlightened critical public who should haste to acclaim the judgment ‘would be wanting ! VioteT Hunt. — II. On the subject of a Literary Academy Mrs. ‘Clifford writes as follows :— «J would gladly contribute to the discussion on an Academy of Letters, but I am too busy, too tired to think out even what I feel on the subject— though I feel a good deal.” She continues : ““My views so far are in entire agreement with those expressed by Mr. Herbert Trench. I think the only criticism I have to make upon his article touches the constitution of the committee, which -seems to me to be hardly far-reaching enough.” She THE AUTHOR. gives the names of a few gentlemen whom she would recommend as members, other than those mentioned by Mr. Trench. Under any circumstances; the selection of a committee of this kind would be difficult, and might lead to a considerable amount of heart- burning on the part of some and disgust on the part of others; but Mrs. Clifford proceeds: “A committee of this sort should be composed of the lovers of all kinds of literature, but above all, it should be composed of those who love it for its own sake, of those to whom it would be impossible to think of reward or advertisement, of pushing forward or holding back for personal reasons. In short, of men who have no axes to grind, except the one for which the Academy was instituted, that of immortalising good literature.” Surely it is not possible that any one can quarrel with Mrs. Clifford’s definition of the real Academician. oS II. I entirely agree with all that Mr. Arthur C. Benson says in his admirable article in favour of an Academy of Letters. Is it not the education of the masses which is in some way responsible for the down-hill road litera- ture is taking, and do not writers of the present day instinctively lower their standard of composition to a level which can be appreciated by the larger public ? If an Academy could influence this great _com- munity, and could inspire it with the desire to read only what is best, by holding before it high examples, its work would indeed gain a glorious crown, and we might hope before long to see the death of such debasing fiction as appears in our halfpenny newspapers. With things remaining as they are at present, with no powerful, saving hand held out to check this downward tendency in letters, the future state of affairs is not a happy one to contemplate. But we ought to strive to make it a happy one, and an Academy might be just the new force in the world of literature capable of doing it. To educate a great crowd of human beings is one thing ; this assists it in its active walk of life, but if we allow its leisure moments to be degraded by the perusal of the vitiating, worthless reading which pours forth from the press of cheap journals and elsewhere, the whole ideal of education is shattered. Let an Academy of Letters come to the rescue, and let it inspire both our authors and our public with the aim of crushing out of exist- ence all that is of bad quality in literature. | Then the author will produce the best that is in him, and the public will read it. F, I. W1nzott. i= we ele Eee  iy THE AUTHOR. IV. [With kind permission of the Editor of the Morning Leader. | One ought to have an opinion on the often- mooted proposal for establishing a British Academy of Literature; and by the time I have finished this article it is possible that an opinion may have taken root in my mind. Bat as yet I am unable to work up any conviction either for or against the proposal. Mr. Herbert Trench and the distinguished novelist who chooses to be known as “Lucas Malet” have written to The Author—the trade paper of the literary class —strongly recommending an Academy as a pos- sible, and even probable, remedy for the miserable decline into which English literature has fallen. “The present state of affairs,” says Mr. Trench, “jis nothing less than the merest tumultuous anarchy. . . . Every year our people, as a whole, like those of the United States, seem to be marching steadily, slumberously, into new and vaster Dark Ages; Dark Ages, not of mere ignorance, but of the wildest positive error. The weltering Anglo-Saxon peoples have no intel- lectual standards, no thought centre, no axis.” The flippant might be tempted to reply that the academician - saviours heralded by Mr. Trench would have too many axes—to grind. But flip- pancy is out of place in this grave debate. I repent the untimely levity, and pass on. ‘‘ Lucas Malet’s” view of the situation is not much more cheerful than Mr. Trench’s. ‘“ English literature,” she writes, ‘in its higher and more distinguished expression, is sick, almost sick unto death.” “ It is,” she continues, “over-prolific and under-vitalised. The right of private judgment has run mad, thanks to a grafting of so-called modern ideas upon the old Protestant stock.” Wherefore “‘some of us,” she says, “hail the idea of an English Academy of Letters, regarding it as a possible remedial agency.” Now, before we can hail the remedy with any ardour of conviction, it behoves us to be certain that we have rightly diagnosed the disease. Is English literature in such a desperate case as Mr. Trench and “Lucas Malet” would have us think ? I have touched on the question before in this column, and have pointed out how Macaulay, writing in the very heyday of that Victorian period to which we now look back as to an age of giants, adopted exactly the same tone of despondency. Still more aptly did Mr. Gosse remind us, in his speech at the “ Encyclopeedia Britannica” dinner, that Montaigne in France, and Ben Jonson in England, each believed himself to be living in an age of hopeless literary decadence. I admit, how- ever, that there isa great difference between assert- ing the probability, and proving the fact, of illusion. 101 A great deal may be said, no doubt, in favour of Mr. Trench’s view of the present situation. While every age has had its loudly-applauded and extra- vagantly advertised charlatans—its Robert Mont- gomerys and Martin Tuppers—it must be owned that the present age is particularly prolific of these gentlefolks, and that they are “boomed” with a hitherto unexampled impudence of puffery. But does not the very word I have employed suggest the explanation of the phenomenon ? The modern literary “boom” is more deafening than the similar manias of bygone generations because the half- educated reading public is now so much larger.. But in that there is no great harm ; the mischief would be if we found the manias of the half- educated public infecting the judgment of the educated public. Of this I confess I see no indication. When Thackeray was asked by an American, “ What do you, in England, think of: Tupper?” his reply was, “ We don’t think of Tupper.” With the same promptitude and con- viction all educated Englishmen of to-day might reply to a similar question, ‘We don’t think of What’s-his-name or Thingumbob.” There may be certain writers on the borderlands of literature whom some educated people discuss too seriously ;. but these are precisely the men who, one fears,. would worm themselves into an Academy. As for the tendency of mediocrity—as distinguished from. sheer blatant incompetence—to swamp command- ing talent, does not that arise from the fact that our mediocrity is really entitled to rank much. higher than the mediocrity of fifty years ago? If we have fewer writers of the very first rank (and. even that may be an illusion), have we not a great many more writers—not only absolutely, but in proportion—whose work attains a more than respectable standard of intellectual merit ? And if this be the case, can it be said that literature is altogether going to the dogs ? Let us assume, however, that our pessimists are: right in their diagnosis of the disease, and inquire a little into the further question, whether the: remedy they prescribe is likely to “ touch the spot ”” —if so unacademic an expression may be forgiven.. On this point ‘‘ Lucas Malet ” writes :— “ Ts it too much to hope that a recognised central autho- rity—-to which the elect among themselves may presently belong—an association of the most distinguished and enlightened minds of our day, might provoke in the rank and file a finer ambition and higher conception of the dignity of their calling, a sounder scholarship, a greater humanity and love of beauty, a greater self-forgetfulness in. work ?”’ ‘ Mr. Trench takes a somewhat less ideal view. He would have us look upon the Academy as a. sort of accredited advertising agency, which should, ‘in order to guide the public, confer titles of merit.  102. or excellence at the end of each year on works of worth.” In this way, he thinks, an Academy would have brought Fitzgerald’s “ Omar Khayyam” into its due prominence at once, instead of leaving +t to be “discovered” after the lapse of a genera- tion. ‘ What qualified person,” he asks, “believes that the poetry of Matthew Arnold—so pure, so salutary for our time—yet occupies its just place in the minds of the multitude, who still acclaim Tennyson as a demi-god ?” The example does not seem to be very happily chosen, for it is scarcely conceivable that any academic laurels could have made Matthew Arnold popular with “ the multi- tude.” Arnold seems to me to have been entirely successful in seeking out his elective affinities. An Academy could at best have hastened the process a little. I would rather say that perhaps such a poet as Coventry Patmore, or, in our days, Mr.. Robert Bridges or Mr. Francis Thompson, might be enabled, by academic recognition, to reach a larger public. Again, Mr. Trench thinks that the existence of “some such Society of the Spirit” would attract to literature “men of powerful talent, now absorbed by the Bar and commerce. Those men would be induced to speak who now stand aloof and silent, in overwhelming disgust.” This argument, I confess, appeals to me but little. I do not believe in the existence of the man who, having anything to say, and any power of saying it, is deterred by his despair of finding an audience worthy of his genius. I don’t doubt fora moment ‘that there are men who, in their own esteem, -oceupy this pinnacle of intellectual superiority ; but I think the chances are that the pinnacle would prove as barren after as before the establishment of an Academy. Let us remember, however, that a case may be a very good one, though the arguments brought forward in support of it are individually insufficient. ‘The worst of our national habits, to my thinking, is that of seizing on any plausible objection to a proposed reform and making it an excuse for sitting still and doing nothing. Mr. Trench very justly insists that “it is weak to plead that an Academy would be a prey to wire-pullers and intriguers. Any dignified human society that is worth framing must undergo, and can weather, such dangers.” Mr. H. G. Wells fears that the Academy will be swamped by “ well-bred influential amateurs ” such as Lord Rosebery and Mr. Balfour. This possibility has no terrors for me. I think a British Academy which excluded such a man as Lord Rosebery would be ridiculous. In sum, I am .-so far with the supporters of the proposal that I think its opponents have wholly failed to show that it could do any harm ; and since many people think it would do good, why not try it ? Winiuram ARCHER. THE AUTHOR. Vv. A few words more are asked for on the subject of an Academy of Letters. It must be difficult for any distinguished. man of letters to advance and say, “ Come let us form a society to save literature from the public dis- esteem into which it has fallen.” Yet I believe that were Tennyson, Browning, and Arnold living, they would have been willing to come forward. The natural inertia and shamefacedness of the Englishman would not have overcome them. The might well have made, and we should all have responded to, such an appeal. Tt seems to me that a public institution is required which shall image, symbolize, and stand for excel- lence in literature. For this reason I am gratefal to famous novelists like Lucas Malet, and to such admirable writers as Mr. Arthur Christopher Benson, Mrs. W. K. Clifford, Mr. Benjamin Swift, and Mr. William Archer, who have in these pages openly expressed sympathy not only with the aims in view, but with the means proposed. It is idle to say that such a society would wield no influence. Well could it safeguard its own dignity. ‘True; writers like Mr. Meredith would probably find no leisure for criticism, but, as Mr, Benson has suggested, the society could devolve its judgments and awards to a carefully-chosen critical committee. Andin what respect could an Academy do harm? The recurrent elections of its members, the merits of their work, might conceivably indeed elbow from the topics of the dinner tables some turf scandal or fashionable divorce. Intellectual and beautiful achievement would in fact stand some chance of their proportionate share of public attention. Directly or indirectly the Academy would become the main organ of English criticism, an elucidator of our chaos, a simplifier, an orderer, a guide to judgment. Why is this neglected field so important? Be- cause, surely, art, and in chief the art of literature, live by the sympathy, and increase the sympathetic intelligence, of all classes. Art tends to unify society and makes for solidarity. The novel, play, poem, are the village greens of the nation. In art the out-wearied master-printer, with brain exhausted by the technicalities and intense com- petitions of his trade, who now at his day’s end relapses faute de mieux on the mushroom romances of the boudoir, may learn to share interests with his foreman (chief reader of the. future), who, attending all day to the intricate, steady spinning of some comprehensive machine, returns home at night less fatigued than his master, and soon will be less easily satisfied. Art in letters is the reve- lation of themselves to the young, the invisible trysting-place of the sexes, the common ground of  THE AUTHOR. 103. the specialists, who, with theramifying of knowledge, tend to become ever remoter and mutually more unintelligible. Art is the only speech preserved in our Tower of Babel. It behoves greatly, therefore, that we guard this sympathetic art of literature ; see that it falls not into emptiness and dishonour, and that for the State’s own sake some honest endeavour is made to distinguish and reward those who practise this art with signal excellence. But let us take account of objectors. An “ Academy” must be “academic,” says Mr. Morley Roberts, foisting on us, with a smile, a play upon words. “The appeal of literature is individual, is personal. A bedy of men is a lower organism,” says Mr. Roberts. But it is from the rabble, from the chance of crowds, and the tender mercies of journalistic judgment, that I would save writers above the average. Let us give them a revising body, an enduring Court of Appeal, less tardy than that of Time, a court where the deciduous sentences of the daily papers are replaced by words of steadier attention. Nothing in Nature is more sure than that works of genius die and perish utterly unknown. Genius bears no sovereign amulet against mischance, and the majestic stupidity of numbers. Common sense alone can by organiza- tion set human barriers and safeguards for our great men against ill destiny and oblivion. ‘ Conven- tion,” “monotony,” “aridity,” “conservatism,” - sighs Mr. Morley Roberts apprehensively. ‘Masters of literature, if once publicly recognized, become fossils,” gently implies Mr. Max Beerbohm. But, “Tam compelled to ask, “Is there anything more conventional than the range of ideas in the Old Kent Road?” Intellectual civilization is free. It is the savage societies, and the clichés forced now on us in the guise of novels, that are, above all, arid and monotonous. We have no men, says (I think) Mr. Zangwill. What! We have still Mr. Swinburne, Mr. John Morley, Mr. Robert Bridges, Mr. Meredith, Mr. Pinero, Mr. Hardy, Mr. Yeats, Mr. Joseph Conrad, Mr. Shorthouse, Mr. Bury, Mr. Bryce, Mr. A. E. Housman. Are not these a brave beginning ? The truth is that, as Lucas Malet forcibly puts it, a central standard of taste is increasingly required in the double combat to be waged against the taste of the mob, and the influence of the millionaire (whom we have always with us). We must not look for help from the “ upper classes.” The French courtiers of the seventeenth century salons, the eighteenth century groups of English country gentlemen round Pope and Addison, round Johnson and Burke, were recruited from educated aristocracies. It was these gentlemen who formed noble libraries, and paid for splendid editions. They had gone on the “grand tour” to France, Italy, and Greece, to the older and wiser civilizations, and so had improved a naturally good eye for the taste- ful and the humane. But the modern grand tour is to the United States for a rich wife. Or our young aristocrat, if more wholesomely disposed, returns with the imperfect tastes of frontier peoples. Our young barbarian becomes accom- plished in Rhodesia or the Klondyke. He returns, perhaps, no worse a man than were the sons of Halifax, Temple, Fox, Walpole or Chesterfield. But as a judge of letters he is probably less complete. In our quandary no help is to be expected of him. No help, either, from our mob-deity the millionaire, who may found libraries till every Sheffield has its British Museum, yet cannot provide a living for literature. No! The writers of England, if they are to restore the dignity of their craft, must do it themselves. Their task, owing to the vast augmen- tation of the reading populace, and the all-perva- siveness of vulgar wealth, is harder far than it was for any French king or English aristocracy. But, on the other hand, is not that task tenfold better worth the doing? Its result may be the gradual ennoblement, not of clique in a capital, but of an entire nation. No idea of his function can be pitched too high for the weal of the artist. Priest of the mind and heart, he is the chief truth-teller left to humanity. “Treasure words,” said Gogol; “they are the noblest gift of God.” And the object I have in writing these lines is boldly to ask those who have the honour of English letters at heart to form themselves into a “ Guild of Literature,” as did the craftsmen painters of Flanders and Italy—a guild open to any fairly-accredited writer to join. From this guild should be elected, chiefly (1 think) by writers themselves, a number of leaders—Masters of the Craft—to protect it, to represent it, and do it honour. Such a public association of the distinguished and enlightened would act, as Lucas Malet says, as an immense encouragement to the rank and file of writers, especially those of the younger genera- tion. It would stimulate to steady work—concen- trate attention on noble ambition and pure reward. It would help year-long labour like “ that slow and scientific ” labour of Titian. It would secure for living writers praise and recognition far earlier than now is possible. Why, when we light upona splendid short tale by a living master, like the newly-pub- lished “Youth” of Mr. Joseph Conrad, should the knowledge of its beauty and perfection be confined to the chances of a few Press notices in London? Why should Mr. Conrad not improbably have to wait till he is old before he can enjoy the success he deserves? Why must Mr. George Meredith wait thirty-eight years after the publica- tion of “Richard Feverel” before his existence is acknowledged in the Quarterly Review 2 It must  104 be because England is all lawn or marsh. There is no broad culture among our people. There is no fit organ of letters to honour living artists and. maintain the magnificent tradition of the dead. ‘The English take all things seriously—religion, love-making, family, politics, and commerce—all things, that. is to say, except art and literature. ‘Her young writers, not regarding their craft as all- important, do not give it their best and yet we propose to reform national education—to multiply training colleges! It is in vain. You -cannot multiply wise teachers and simultaneously despise living literature. It is a kind of stupid ‘hypocrisy. Recruited from the intellectual refuse .of Europe, the Churches, nominal custodians of -education, are soulless and decaying. The brains are out, the man must die. From them we may -get chicane in Houses of Lords, but we shall not -get light in the minds of the people. We must look to Art and Science to bear on the Torches ‘relinquished by Religion. Let us therefore found this new Society of the Spirit—this new Guild of ‘Literature—to spur and inspirit workers, and to ‘strengthen them by fellowship. But the chief -yalue of such a Guild would be not so much its -substantive as its symbolic value. HERBERT TRENCH. Oi AMERICAN NOTES. —-—~>+ — LTHOUGH at the time we write our infor- mation is not so complete as to enable us to give definite figures, everything points to the conclusion that the output of books during ‘the fall of 1902 has been almost unprecedented. “The bulk of this was, of course, made up of new ‘fiction ; but other departments of literature, with the exception of verse, were not inadequately ‘represented. Greater attention than ever has been paid to the «make-up and illustration of new works. Whether ‘there has been a corresponding advance in the -quality of the contents may be more open to - question. One thing is noticeable as a sign of the times. It is this: that the success of a book by a popular author no longer helps the sale of his previously ‘stocked works to anything like the extent which it used to do. The American public will have everything brand-new nowadays. As the book of the day, Winston Churchill’s “Crisis” has been displaced by Owen Wister’s “The Virginian.” This breezy romance of the “West, which holds its own against all newcomers, THE AUTHOR. is especially remarkable for its description of the lynching of the cattle-thieves. The book would undoubtedly have won its way to popularity on its own merits; but the dedication to President Roosevelt, and the curiosity excited by the allusion to the page which his delicate humanity caused to be rewritten, probably helped it not a little. One of the most notable productions of the early autumn was “ New France and New England,” the last of the late John Fiske’s historical writings. Unfortunately the author only lived to give final form to the first two chapters, which deal with the early history of what is now Canada; the rest consists of his unrevised lectures worked up by another hand. The motif of the whole is to show the effect on the development of New England of the French conquests and losses on the North American continent. Mr. J. N. Larned, of the Buffalo Public Library, has, in his “Literature of American History,” made some attempt at the bibliography of an enormous subject. Although his biblio- graphical guide gives an annotated list of four thousand titles, and is brought down to the year 1900, one is not surprised to discover that it is by no means exhaustive. Meanwhile President Woodrow Wilson, of Princeton, has just finished for Harper and Brothers his “ History of the American People,” which is contained in five volumes, and comes down to the accession of Mr. Roosevelt. It is being offered on the monthly instalment system, the total sum to be paid amounting to twenty-five dollars. It is a great achievement. A work of still greater magnitude is “ The New International Encyclopedia,” published by Messrs. Dodd, Mead & Co., and edited by Dr. Daniel Coit Gilman, Dr. Harry Thurston Peck, and Dr. Frank Moore Colby. An especial feature is the substitution for the signed article of most European encyclo- pedias of contributions supplied originally by experts, but modified by the criticism of others, and finally issued by the editors in a form which is judged to combine the virtues of original individual research and those of co-operative criticism. This is a highly-interesting departure, and can hardly fail to work well in its application to scientific matters, whatever may be its weak points when employed in departments where the personal equation has a more legitimate field of action. A great effort has also been made to get rid of the traditional encyclopedic style, and thus to present in the attractive manner of Larousse matter which has been prepared on lines suggested by a study of the best German methods. The same publishers have issued a kind of poetical epitome of the world’s history under the 3 THE AUTHOR. title of ‘Every Day in the Year.” This compilation, the work of James L. Ford and Mary K. Ford, contains some eight hundred English poems com- memorative of great historical events. Anyone who is desirous of studying the making of the American army officer should read Mr. Hu. Irving Hancock’s ‘“ Life at West Point,” which is the work of a thoroughly competent observer. Those whose interests lie in the direction of the religious world will find much that is worthy of notice in Dr. Cuyler’s “ Recollections of a Long Life.’ While far from strong on the literary side, the book contains records of the writer’s acquaint- ance, not ouly with preachers and divines such as Spurgeon, Dean Stanley, and Henry Ward Beecher, but also with poets of the rank of Wordsworth and Whittier, and statesmen like Lincoln. Another biographical work which should not be passed by is the “ Men and Memories ” of the late John Russell Young, editor of the New York Tribune, which his widow has seen through the press. In the course of a public life of nearly half a century, Young came into contact with such diverse celebrities as President Lincoln, Horace Greeley, Henry George, Charles Dickens, and Walt Whitman, so that his recollections can hardly fail to be worth glancing at. Mr. Charles E. Benton, in the personal experiences of the Civil War, which Messrs. Putnam have published under the title, “As Seen from the Ranks,” contests Stephen C rane’s views as to the state of mind produced by warfare on the mind of the combatants. He himself was a member of a regimental band, but was often under fire when called upon, in the usual course, to do hospital duty. The numerous lives of Edgar Allan Poe have now been followed by an elaborate edition in seventeen volumes of his complete works, edited by Professor James A. Harrison. Besides the inevitable fresh life, there are some new letters. First editions of the most imaginative of American wrilers have realised fabulous prices of late years. An unpublished essay of Thoreau has been unearthed by Mr. F. B. Sanborn and printed by Goodspeed, of Boston. It is entitled, “The Service.” An ardently enthusiastic biographical study, “ The Hermit of Walden,” has come from the pen of Annie Russell Marble. : Among recent biographies of other American classical writers there is Professor Woodberry’s “Hawthorne,” showing the author of “The Scarlet Letter” “ shaking the dust of his native place from his feet, and frankly taking upon himself the character of the unappreciated genius”; and Colonel Higginson’s “ Longfellow,” yielding some new light upon the poet’s early married life and his career as Harvard professor. 105: Before giving our readers a few jottings upon the latest luminaries In the sky of fiction, we would mention in passing one little volume that stands out from among the not too interesting mass of Christ- mas publications. It is “The Book of Joyous Children,” by James Whitcomb Riley. The veteran: verse writer 1s, we may add, well supported by his. illustrator, J. W. Vawter. There is plenty of fun and even a little poetry in the somewhat fancifully- named gift-book. ; Mr. Thomas Bailey Aldrich has brought out an appendix to his complete works in the form of a. volume of short stories entitled, “‘ A Sea Turn and Other Matters.” The latest work of that popular favourite,. Augusta Evans Wilson, “ ‘The Speckled Bird,”’ has been productive of a somewhat sensational literary incident. Nettled at some not over- kind, but so far as we can judge perfectly bond fide, criticism in The Bookman, the novelist sent the editor of the offending paper a reply in) the form of a fable. This the editor decided to print in parallel columns with the reprinted. review ; and we think that the impartial reader will decide that he was not ill-advised in doing s0,. for the errors of taste into which the injured vanity of the author has betrayed her far exceed any surplus captiousness with which the critic— she, too, a fair one—may be justly charged. The curious may be referred to the November number- of the periodical above-mentioned. Mr. Richard Harding Davis has probably added to his reputation by his new novel, “Cap-- tain Macklin”: and the same may be said of Sir Gilbert Parker’s “ Donovan Pasha.” George Barr McCutcheon’s second venture, “ Castle Craney- croft,” is thought by his admirers to be as full of” exciting incident as was “ Graustark,” his first- born. One of them has christened it “ Around the World in Eighty Chapters” ; but the castle itself was, we learn, situated in Luxembourg. One of the great hits of the season has been Mr. F. Hopkinson Smith’s “ Fortunes of Oliver: Horn,” a romance of the south and of artistic life in the New York of the fifties. George Horton’s “ The Long Straight Road ” is of the realistic school, a story of every day family life in Chicago. It is distinctly to be commended, . if only on account of its treatment of the child element. The short stories of Will Payne range round the same region ; but “On Fortune’s Road” is nothing if not humorous. The author of “ Uncle Remus” has written a. very readable complete story, which compares very favourably with the latest efforts of certain other: veterans. ‘Gabriel Tolliver” is the name of his southern reconstruction tale. Mr. Marion Crawford has added another item to his long list. The scene:  106. of his “ Cecilia” is modern Rome, and the treat- ment is such as we are accustomed to expect from this novelist. ' : Perhaps the best piece of fiction produced in America during the present season is Newton Booth Tarkington’s “The Two Vanrevels.” It is a tale of Indiana in the days of President Polk ; love and politics are the main themes. To say that the characterisation shows a distinct advance upon that of “Monsieur Beaucaire ” would be awarding it but faint praise in comparison with its merits. Mr. Tarkington has been much quizzed in some quarters for the modesty of his proposal that the Indiana Legislature should endeavour to pro- mote literature by an annual offer of 500 dollars in prizes. : In conclusion, we must not omit to mention the swansongs of Paul Leicester Ford (‘ Wanted, a Chaperon”) and Bret Harte. “The Condensed Novels ” of the latter master of parody are worthy to rank with Thackeray’s “Novels by Eminent Hands,” and will doubtless afford much enjoyment to their subjects. The chief names in our obituary list are those of Edward Eggleston and Frank Norris. The former will be remembered not less by his successful exertions in the cause of international copyright than by his Hoosier Stories and historical works. The latter was looked upon by many good judges as likely to become the best American novelist of his generation. His first work, “ M’Teague,” was striking, but unpleasant. For ‘‘ The Octopus,” no one had anything but high praise. It was the first of a projected trilogy of wheat, the second part of which will appear early next year as “ The Pit.” The concluding portion had not got beyond its title, “The Wolf,” when the young author died at San Francisco at the early age of thirty-two, a victim to appendicitis. Before “ commencing novelist” he had been to South Africa and China as special correspondent. To the names of Eggleston and Norris we have to add those of Major J. W. Powell, sometime president of the Washington Anthropological Society and of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and at his death Director of the Bureau of American Ethnology and editor of more than one scientific journal; and of William Allen Butler, author of “Nothing to Wear” and “Flora McFlimsey of Madison Square,” poems that once had as much vogue as Bailey’s “ Festus,” and whose names are even now by no means forgotten. THE AUTHOR. THE NOBEL PRIZES. Oe CCORDING to a telegram from Stockholm, this year’s Nobel prizes have been awarded as follows. Literature, Professor Theodor Mommsen, of Berlin. Peace, Professor Friedrich Martens, Pro- fessor of International Law in St. Petersburg. Medicine, Major Ronald Ross, of the School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool. Chemistry, Professor Emil Fischer, of Berlin. Physics, divided between Professors Lorenz and Zeemann, of Holland. All the gentleman named are authors. They have all written books dealing with the subjects to which they have devoted their lives. In fact it is almost impossible nowadays that any man could spend his life on a matter of research for the benetit of all humanity without at one time or another committing himself to a book. Of all the awards, that to Professor Theodor Mommeen will interest members of the Society most. Many will remember his Roman History as the bugbear of their school and college days, and perhaps from the standpoint of the schoolboy or the undergraduate will be ready to join issue with the Swedish Academy on their award. Several candidates were mentioned as probable recipients of the prize. It is evident in the selection of Professor Mommsen that the members of the Academy are giving a wide and generous interpretation to the letter of the document that limits their choice. Professor Mommsen was born on the 30th of November, 1817. He is now, therefore, eighty-five years of age. He was educated in the Gymnasium at Altona, and graduated at the University of Kiel. It is curious that a man who has spent his life in the dry research incidental to the writing of history should have commenced authorship by publishing a book of poetry. This, however, is the case ; the work was issued under the authorship of himself and his brother, Tycho Mommsen, in 1839. In 1848 he obtained a grant from the Government of Denmark, which enabled him to make a journey into Italy, and this, no doubt, was the turning point in his career. From that moment he began his wonderful study of the History of Rome, and the many subjects connected with such a labour. It is on his work as a Roman Historian that his world-wide reputation is based. Between 1854 and 1856 he published three volumes of his history, and at once became famous. It was not so much the great learning and exhaus- tive study shown in the volumes which forced the attention of everyone to his work as the aS —a  if g a ie ¥ 5 ' [ eek - characters of those mighty men of old. THE AUTHOR. insight into the life and character of the nation about whom he wrote and his new reading of the All applauded his methods, though they did not neces- sarily approve his deductions. One remembers his panegyric Augustus. Again, Cicero, whom it is customary to look upon as one of the most important men of letters and the greatest advocate of his times, Mommsen wrote down as a mere journalist, and Pompey he despised as little more than a recruiting sergeant. After the production of the three volumes, he for many years spent his time in studying the old Roman inscriptions, and produced in 1861 the first issue of the “Corpus Inscriptionum,” which was afterwards followed by sixteen other volumes. No man living has ever had such an insight into Roman life, Roman learning, and Roman law. There is no one who can rival his knowledge on any of these subjects. Though he never actually completed his History (it brought him to the fall of the Republic), he has written so many papers and collected so much knowledge that he has provided others with the requisite material. Everyone who has made careful study of his work will agree that he is a worthy recipient of the honour that has been conferred upon him. of Cesar THE REY. JOSEPH PARKER, D.D. Y the death of Dr. Parker London has lost a great personality and a powerful orator. The Society has lost a member who since 1890 has been a constant supporter of its aims and objects. He was born on the 9th of April, 1830, at Hexham-on-Tyne, and privately educated at University College, London. He began his career as a Minister at Banbury, Oxford, in 1869. Over thirty years ago he came to the City Temple, London. He was not a great author, or an author of many works; but from those he wrote and ublished it was clear that he was a man of large mind and generous spirit. His work, the “Pulpit Bible,” has been of great use to all Christian preachers of whatever denomination, but it is not as an author that Dr. Parker will be remembered. It is as preacher and as auto- erat of the City Temple. ——_———_———__+——— —____——_- 107 CORRESPONDENCE. —— BOOK DISTRIBUTION. Srr,— Would it not be possible to extend more generally the privilege accorded to the large buyers of books, of inspection before purchase? There must be a large public who would increase their purchases if their opportunities of selection were enlarged. For example :—Acting upon the only evidence obtainable—the title, the name of author and publisher, the reviews that happen to come my way—l order a certain book. On its arrival I see at the first glance it is not what I expected, or what I want. I would willingly, there and then, accept a small fraction of the price of the book, to be rid of it. It isnot only the wasted money, but the space on the shelves filled by these undesirables, that makes book buying so unpopular. Again, if I want to inspect the recent books upon a given subject, or to choose the most attractive edition of a certain classic, I must conduct the search myself in the British Museum. Surely it would pay the book purveyor to assist the possible buyer, to help him to keep out of his house the undesired books, and to discover for him the desired books ; to encourage him in the forma- tion of a library of works selected and approved by himself. One of the chief factors in the success of the circulating library is the opening of a large book area to inspection ; only a few of the books received are selected for reading ; and there is no accumulation of printed matter in the house. It should be the aim of the publisher to convert the reader from a borrower to a purchaser, by giving him opportunities for inspection with a view to purchase. All recent books, and all older designated books, might be collected in a shop, a fee being charged for examination. Books might also be brought to the reader’s door, or sent him by post, either for an inspection fee, or for a fixed proportion of the price of each book returned. It is the present surprise-packet system, with its inevitable disappointments to the purchaser, that stops business. Norwoop Youne. — 11 —_ MODERN LITERATURE, Sir,—It cannot be denied that the opponents of Sir E. Clarke’s theory regarding the degeneracy of modern English literature have certain case to argue. It is true that in the beginning of the Victorian era, there was an inequality of workman- ship which would not have been possible at its close; and a somewhat indiscriminating public  108 judgment passed this by with too much indulgence. This will account for the success of Sam Warren and Harrison Ainsworth, for the temporary popu- larity of Tupper and the too high estimate of Edgar Allan Poe. On the other hand, these opponents may point to such writers as Hardy and Blackmore, Swinburne, Meredith, and Kipling, as instances of good taste on the part of the more recent public which has duly appreciated these writers. But it will be noticed that their work is more or less of the kind technically known as “light.” Their works are not so likely to endure as classics as those of the earlier writers who undertook to convey to mankind intimations of greater moment. Amongst those will be remem- bered not only the names of Carlyle, and Newman, and Ruskin, but also of Emerson and Lowell; these latter, though Americans, “‘ spoke their American with a strong British accent,” and have been fully welcomed as English writers. Such literary work is perhaps hardly to be expected in the present conditions of our race. Decadent Latin nations are undeveloped ; peoples in the more Eastern regions may produce great craftsmen in arts and letters; but the eutonic races are otherwise engaged. ‘Their invention is shown in adminis- trative problems or in labour-saving machinery ; their eloquence is reserved for diplomatic dis- patches and political harangues. ‘To races so occupied the Muses are compelled to descend from Parnassus and content themselves with the humbler office as instruments for man’s occasional recreation. H. G. KEENE. THE CRITIC. Srr,—In glancing through the columns of the Morning Post the other day (8th December, 1902, p. 6) I came across a brief notice of a new number of the Pilot, a periodical which I understand has recently died and come to life again, and the fol- lowing passages in the review in question attracted my attention. ‘Lovers of good English and sound sense will welcome the reappearance of the Pilot. ... In glancing through the pages, how- ever, we have found the word ‘ relation’ standing in one case at least, and, so far as we can see, in the second also, for ‘relative.’ There is no reason why we should meet with this mode of speech in a journal like the Pilot.” Now, I should have thought (I have no privilege to weight my humble opinions with an editorial “we ”) that there was no reason why the critic of the Morning Post should not have been a little more explicit in his fault-finding, so as to mete out instruction to the ignorant in general as well as THE AUTHOR. blame in particular to the illiterate contributor to the Pilot. The question which the casual reader of such a criticism as this has to ask himself is, “In what possible meaning, out of many which it- is entitled to bear, can ‘relation’ be made to stand, improperly, for ‘ relative’?”’ To read through the Pilot is a possible course open to me which would perhaps supply the information, but it is one to which, perhaps owing to inherent laziness, I decline- to resort. ‘I'o some extent, however, I object to doing so, on principle, as I contend that the critic who apparently makes a charge against another writer of using bad English should do so clearly, so that those who read may understand the precise accusation brought. The obvious common mean- ing of “relation” and “relative” is that of “kinsman.” Does the writer in the Jorning Post refer to this? I am an old-fashioned person myself, so that Dr. Johnson, and the authorities. which he cites, together with what I believe to be universal usage, are good enough for me. There may possibly be some new fad as to the usage of “relation” and “relative” as synonyms for “ kins- man,” which everybody who knows anything ought to know, but with which I am unfortunately not. acquainted. Does the editor of the Morning Post, as the word “we” would suggest, endorse the views of his critic; and, if so, does he forbid “ rela- tion” as a synonym for “relative” in all the columns under his august control? Of course, I may be making an altogether absurd suggestion in even hinting that this could be the meaning of the criticism of the Pilot’s English. In that case I can only repeat what I have said before, that the charge of using bad English should have been made in terms to be understood by the ordinary reader of the daily newspaper in question or else not made at all. An accused person and the jury who are to try him have the right to know exactly what the charge is that is brought against him. EL A. AC AN AMERICAN EXPERIENCE. Dear Srr,—I beg to warn music critics against contributing to the Concert Goer, New York. That estimable organ, after duly appointing me its London correspondent, published articles written by a person whose opinions and methods of expressing’ himself are not the same as mine, signing them. with my name. A London correspondent is, I understand, again, required by the Concert Goer, of New York. GEORGE CECIL. November 18th. BREINER Se uk. 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 04 (January 1903) Subject The topic of the resource <em>The Author</em>, Vol. 13 Issue 04 (January 1903) Type The nature or genre of the resource Publication Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 1903-01-01-The-Author-13-4 publications The Author