[Copy. Translation.] German Embassy, London, April 28, 1898. My LORD,-In your note of the 23rd ult., Your Excellency asked for information on certain doubtful points in connection with the legal position of English authors as regards their right to protection against the reprinting or reproduction of their works, under the laws now in force in Germany. Your Excellency observed, in particular, that when the old Conventions ceased to have force in England, the same protection was continued there to German works as they had enjoyed while those conventions were in force. Similarly, in Germany properly acquired rights are protected quite as effectively, although in a different manner. For English works which, until Dec. 16 last, were protected in Germany under the old Conventions, have since enjoyed the protection given by the Agreement of Berne and the Supplementary Act of Paris. As the provisions of the new Conventions referred to are in some respects much more favourable, English interests are not in any way injured by this arrangement. Germany does not ask English authors or their heirs to go through any formalities in order to have the protection of their works continued. The Imperial Decree of Nov. 29, 1897, and the notice in the Central-Blatt of 1898, page 85, only contain transitional provisions intended to protect the legitimate interests of German tradesmen against the retrospective force of the Agreement of Berne; they are based on the same principle as the reservation made in sect. 6 of the International Copyright Act, 1886: ("Provided that, where any person has before the date of the publication of an Order in Council lawfully produce any work in the United Kingdom," &c.) I have the honour to communicate these explanations to Your Excellency in accordance with instructions received, and I beg to refer you, for information in detail, to the enclosed paper of replies to the questions contained in the enclosure to your note of the 23rd ult. My Government trust that these explanations will completely remove all the doubts which, as Your Excellency states, have arisen from the form of our withdrawal from the Copyright Conventions between Germany and England. I have, &c. (Signed) P. HATZFELDT. The Marquis of Salisbury, K.G., &c. [Copy. Translation.] Replies to the Questions of Her Majesty's Government. 1. In Germany English authors who have hitherto been protected in accordance with the Conventions no longer in force are now protected in accordance with the Agreement of Berne. For, according to Article 14 and No. 4 of the Final Protocol, that Agreement is applicable to all works which have not yet become common property in their country of origin. The protection of English works is not in any way diminished by the circumstance that the Agreement of Berne has taken the place of the old Conventions; on the contrary, the Agreement of Berne is in some respects more favourable to English works. In particular, the authors of the older English works also will in future be protected against translations under Article 1, sect. 3, of the Paris Supplementary Act of May 4, 1896. It follows from what is stated above that, in consequence of the termination of the Convensome respects tions, English works have in obtained a protection in Germany which they did not enjoy before. This circumstance made transition regulations necessary, for which No. 4. paragraph 3 of the Final Protocol of the Agreement of Berne was taken as a basis. It is possible that some one in Germany may, while the old Conventions were in force, have made use of, or been about to make use of, an English work for purposes of gain, quite legally, because, as the law then stood, there was no prohibition. One case is of practical importance. A certain English work which was not protected, or was no longer protected, against translation in Germany, was translated without the sanction of the author or his representative. According to general principles, which are followed in Great Britain as well as in other countries, a change in the law, that is in this case the newly introduced protection of English works against translation, must not have the effect of preventing interested parties in Germany from benefiting by arrangements lawfully made by them. Steps have, therefore, been taken to make it lawful within certain limits for the parties concerned to do certain things which it was lawful for them to do until the termination of the Conventions, but which, if special regulations had not been made, would have been an infringement of the rights of English authors. In particular, it was necessary, in view of the extension of the protection against translations, to give permission for the distribution of translations of old English works which were lawfully made to continue. The sole object of the Imperial Decree of November 29, 1897 (Imperial Gazette, No. 787) and the Notice of February3, 1898 (Central-Blatt, No. 85) was to meet these cases. 2. According to the regulations referred to above, the distribution and sale of impressions of an English work lawfully made are allowed, although the work now enjoys in Germany the protection of the Agreement of Berne, in consequence of the termination of the Conventions. The copies must, however, have been stamped before March 31 of this year. If this condition has not been complied with the distribution of the copies is illegal; if the rule is infringed the copies are confiscated, and the persons responsible are punished if the infraction is wilful or the result of carelessness. Similarly, the employment of moulds, plates,, &c., which were in existence before the termination of the Conventions will be considered to be a reprinting or illegal reproduction of the protected English work, unless such moulds, plates, &c., have been stamped before March 31 of this year. The authors of works which have already obtained protection in Germany under the Conventions which are no longer in force enjoy the rights conferred by the Agreement of Berne. The date (Dec. 31, 1901) mentioned in section 3 of the notice of Feb. 3, 1898, has nothing to do with such cases; that date cannot affect any works except such as were not protected at all in Germany by the old Conventions. In cases in which works of this kind have now obtained protection the protection is limited, under section 1, No. 1, of the Imperial Decree of Nov. 29, 1897, but this limitation comes to an end on Dec. 31, 1901. 3. So far as English works have already been. protected in Germany under the Agreement of Berne, no change has taken place. The new Regulations only deal with the application of the Agreement of Berne to English works which have obtained the protection of the Agreement only in consequence of the termination of the old Conventions. 4. As stated under 1, the Agreement of Berne is now applied automatically in the case of all English works which were protected in Germany under the late treaties; its retrospective force is only limited by the transition provisions referred to above. 5. As appears from what has gone before, stamping is not a condition on which the protection of English works in Germany is made to depend. On the contrary, it is only prescribed for cases where, in accordance with the transition provisions, persons wish to continue to make use of old copies or plates, &c., without the sanction of those who possess the authors' rights over the English works concerned. Accordingly, the stamping was not to be carried out by the English authors or their heirs, but by the Germans interested. Under these circumstances it does not appear how the English parties would benefit by an extension of the period allowed for stamping. 6. Stamping is provided for in the case of copies and plates, &c., which are in the possession of Germans, and it was therefore laid down that it was to be carried out in Germany. The measure does not extend to copies and plates, &c., which have been produced in Great Britain by persons who have authors' rights over English works. There could therefore be no question of sending the objects from England to Germany and back. II. THE COST OF PRODUCTION. The book in question contains 24 sheets at 16 pages the sheet, or 384 pages in all, including 8 pages of preliminary matter and about 40 illustrations in text. The type is pica-320 words to a page. The binding is quite plain cloth. The estimates obtained were from three town houses and one country house. The variations were very great. Thus the composition was estimated at 42s., 398., 248., and 198. respectively. The printing for 2000 copies was estimated at 178. 6d., 30s. o3d., and 18s. respectively, and by the fourth house, for 1000 copies, at 108. The paper for 2000 copies, 178., 12s. 6d., 78. 7d., and 8s. 6d. a sheet. The binding-crown 8vo. was put at 6d. and 6d. The cost finally arrived at was 6d. There were certain notes and preliminary matter in different type, and there were many illustrations in the text, which ran up the price of the book. Without the illustrations the 2000 copies were bound to cost as nearly as possible £150, or is. 6d. a copy-without advertising. In this case there are circumstances which required that the expense of advertising should be very little in other words, the announcement of the book could be made by other channels than those of the journals and newspapers. The "Cost of Production" (see p. 47) gives the following figures : Composition, 24 sheets at £1 98. Printing, 24 sheets (per 1000 copies), L. 8. d. 34 16 18 040 66 The toasts of the evening were limited to four: The Queen," "The Society," "The Guests," and "The Chairman." After the Bishop had proposed the health of the Queen he proposed the prosperity of the Society of Authors in a very apt and amusing speech. He stated that he thought that the use of after-dinner speeches was merely to give the people in the room something to talk about. He stated that authors, in spite of all that had been said about them, were a very harmless class of the community. To show that that truth was permeating the youthful mind his lordship told a little story of a boy who wished to enter the Navy. When the lad heard his father speak of the risks of the present war he assumed a pensive air and said he did not think he would go into the Navy after all. He would be a poet-it was less dangerous. There was a little moral in all this, as you would expect. In nothing had the harmlessness of authors been more displayed, until recent times, than in their very slight efforts towards unity for their own interests. had long been content to accept what might be offered them. They had, however, found defenders, and authors owed a debt of gratitude to Sir Martin Conway and Sir Walter Besant for their efforts on behalf of the craft. (Cheers.) A society which had for its object the securing of due remuneration for labour was one which would command the sympathy of all Englishmen. The Society had done good in this direction, and also in the giving of good advice to literary aspirants. It was this function of the Society which was specially valuable to the community. The business of the Society had been They con ducted with a practical spirit which would; do credit to the Stock Exchange. (Hear, hear.) The time might come when publishers would compete for the productions of authors and be willing to pay any price for them, but until that happy period arrived all literary aspirants would do well to avail themselves of the services of the Society. (Cheers.) Sir Martin Conway, Chairman of the Society for the current year, then made a speech in reply. He regretted that Lord Roberts was not discharg ing the duty which fell to his lot. He made an official statement with regard to the business that the Society had been carrying on through the current year, and mentioned the fact that two Copyright Bills were at present before Parlia ment. He, however, remarked that neither of them, he was afraid, would be likely to pass at present, but the justice which they were designed to work would, he hoped, be before long realised. Mr. Sidney Lee, the editor of the Dictionary of National Biography, in a very apt speech then proposed the health of the guests, mentioning them in turn, especially referring to the American Ambassador, who was present that evening not only as representing seventy millions of English readers, but as also representing the literature of a great country. The toast was coupled with the name of Lord Welby, who made an appropriate reply. Mr. Anthony Hope Hawkins proposed the health of the Chairman, and, after the Bishop's reply, the company adjourned to another room, where a conversazione was held until a late hour. MR. BRYCE ON THE BOOK TRADE. MR R. JAMES BRYCE, M.P., presided at the annual dinner in connection with the Booksellers' Provident Institution, held in the Holborn Restaurant on May 7, and proposed the toast of "Literature." Many ways, he said, were suggested by which the booksellers might be saved, and one was that the number of books should be curtailed, as there were many which the country did not consume. The literature of a country was the best proof of the position and learning in that country; and the test of the intellectual level of a town was to be found in the number and contents of the shelves of the booksellers' shops. No persons could form so good an idea of what the intellectual condition of the people was as those who distributed the books. Booksellers could thus form a lively and more direct idea of what the people thought and what kind of taste should be addressed to them. He had found no persons who were such capable critics as those who sold books. Booksellers could often influence the taste of their customers by advising what to buy, and selling good books. They were always in a position to impart valuable instruction to those who bought books. The plethora of books was becoming a serious difficulty to booksellers. They did not know what to put in stock, or how to select the books they could recommend. It had been suggested that a penal law should be enacted against the multiplication of books. A difficulty would probably then arise with regard to the respective liability of author and publisher-perhaps only the author should be punished. They must have all remarked how very mild the criticisms had become in our day; perhaps that in a way accounted for the number of books issued. With all this plethora of books they must remember that the publication of newspapers and magazines was going on with increasing vehemence. But people read newspapers in a totally different spirit to what they read books. When they read a newspaper, they picked the thing up and threw it away when it was done with; but they read a book with a view of assimilating the subject with which it dealt, while they gave up the habit of bringing the mind to bear upon what they read in newspapers. This habit reacted upon the way they now regarded a thoughtful book. Was it possible to do anything to stem the tide, and enable books to hold their ground better as against newspapers and magazines? He thought their friends, the publishers, should try publishing books somewhat cheaper. That might be a revolutionary proposition; and they might be told that there was a lion in the path, namely, the circulating library. In his opinion, the circulating library was an enemy to all; and they must try to fight it. The issue of cheap books could not be fairly said to have been tried until some work by a well-known and popular author was taken, and the first edition published in a cheap form. The first generation of authors might be losers, but let the heroic suffer. He ventured to believe that the experiment would succeed, and there would be consolation to the author in knowing that he had more readers than at present. A large proportion of the best books were produced without any idea of profit being derived from them. If they took the best thousand books, very few of them would not have been written, even if the author had known beforehand that he was not going to get more than he actually did. If publishers made books cheaper, they would be bought to be read and kept, and would serve the next generation. This, he believed, would do at great deal for the inextinguishable well-being and the literary level of our country. They would be able to develope and build up the taste of the people. There was, perhaps, too great a tendency in the present day to look after material greatness, and men's minds were led away from literature. They might become proud of their gold, but their was nothing which gold could produce which could furnish them with so much reason for pride as the literature of England. He believed that, in the long run, a nation would be judged by her literature; that alone could produce a strong nation, a high-souled nation, and it was only such a nation that could produce and read a splendid literature. TH HE Duke of Devonshire was the chairman of this year's anniversary dinner (the 108th) of the Royal Literary Fund, which took place on the 17th ult., at the Hôtel Métropole, and was attended by a distinguished company. The Chairman, in giving "Prosperity to the Royal Literary Fund," with which he coupled the name of Lord Crewe, the president of the corporation, made at the outset of his remarks a reference to Mr. Gladstone's connection with the fund: that great man, he said, eminent as an author and still more so as a statesman, whose career they all regretted to know was now rapidly approaching its end. They could only express their admiration, respect, and sympathy for that illustrious Englishman, and it would be a melancholy satisfaction if those sentiments could be made known to the dying statesman. Proceeding, the Duke of Devonshire said he could only attribute his being called upon to preside over that dinner to his position as Chancellor of the University of Cambridge and as President of the Council. From that point of view he was tempted to ask the elementary question, Why should the writing of books be encouraged and the demand for modern literature be stimulated? But a clear and broad distinction might be drawn between science on the one hand and art and literature on the other. It might be that modern brains were better than those of old times, but science at least was progressive, and new methods and increased certitude and accuracy had assuredly been obtained. The knowledge of the forces of nature was ever increasing, and the limits of the science of the future could by no forecast be determined. The same thing probably could not be said of literature and art, and it might be that we were no further than the men of 2000 years ago. In charm of style it might be that we were not superior to the writers of antiquity, or even to our immediate predecessors. It might then be asked why we should seek to divert men to a comparatively barren field instead of the more productive one of science. The answer might, perhaps, be found in the sentence that man does not live by bread alone or by knowledge alone. The speculation as to the destinies and life of nations was more interesting, it might be, than any scientific research. We should try to realise what would be the condition of things if men should desist from writing and depend on the mental nutriment supplied by the past. If modern literature did not produce the highest masterpieces, it at least spoke to us in our own language and expressed our own ideas. The age or nation which should cease to produce books would soon lose the faculty of admiration of the past; and the training which enabled us to appreciate would urge to the effort of emulation. It was not in the direction of the extinction of authorship, then, that intellectual excellence was to be obtained. The object of the Society was to secure to authors as a class the benefits which under the old system of private patronage were enjoyed by the few favoured ones of the great. Publishers now to some extent took the place of patrons, and to neither, perhaps, was Byron's gibe applicable that either of them was a Barabbas. Hobbes and Locke might never have been what they were had it not been for the patron. The relation of Lord Shaftesbury and Locke must have led to the increase of political tolerance and liberality of thought. Patronage, however, had gone. It had unquestionably done good work to an author here and there, but it had never given strength and dignity to a profession. This Society, which had to some extent succeeded to that office, might claim to have perpetuated the advantages, and to have avoided the evils of private patronage. 1804 (being then twenty-eight years of age), started business on his own account. He speedily won a reputation "as a safe and steady man of business, not given to flights of fancy, but full of enthusiasm for literature." The first book he published was his own catalogue-the compiling of catalogues was an important part of bookselling in those days, when old books were kept for sale as well as new ones issued. This notice of Mrs. Oliphant's last book has been in type for some time, but pressure upon our limited space has kept it out. The book is remarkable in the first place as showing how a writer, even of the present day, when writers are by no means so dependent on the publisher as they were, may be dominated by a publishing house as by the hand of fate. The distinguished author who wrote this history did so with a certain breathless admiration which is to us inconceivable. Mrs. Oliphant says that the first Blackwood was an enthusiast for literature. Very likely. Most successful publishers are. The more successful, the more enthusiastic. The few who have become bankrupt are not so enthusiastic. The book, however, is also remarkable for certain side lights upon men of letters during the first half of the century. MURRAY AND BLACKWOOD. THE MAGAZINE. In 1811 Blackwood became agent of John Murray. "You have the happiness of making publishing a liberal profession," he wrote to Murray, who was treating with Byron about this time, "and not a mere business of pence. This I consider one of the greatest privileges we have in our business." Again, in a letter the London publisher writes to his Edinburgh representative about the magazine, there is an interesting light upon what was the ideal for a magazine of that day :- "Let us take public estimation by assault, by the irresistible effect of talent employed on subjects that are interesting, and above all, I say to collect information on passing events. Our editors are totally mistaken in thinking that this consists in laborious essays. These are very good as accessories, but the flesh and blood and bones is information. That will make the public eager to get us at the end of every month." Blackwood was able, through the agency of James Ballantyne, to place Scott's "Tales of a Landlord" in the offer of the London publisher. A quarrel arose between the Great Unknown and Blackwood, partly owing to the latter's habit of suggesting improvements upon the later scenes in Scott's work. In 1817 the Edinburgh Monthly Magazine was begun under the joint editorship of Pringle and Cleghorn, but it did not realise Blackwood's expectations, and after No. 6 a c |