International Copyright is altogether a modern idea. The conception appears to have been formed, or at least matured, about twenty years ago, when the subject of a revision of the law of copyright was before the British Parliament.* At that

period, the leading authors of Great Britain combined to obtain an extension of the privileges of authorship. In the course of the discussion, it was suggested that authors had an absolute right to the use and behoof of the products of their labor--and consequently that British authors might claim copyright, not only in Great Britain, but in all other countries. Having observed that the American market absorbed a very large amount of popular English literature, an eager desire sprang up among the principal British writers to annex the United States to Great Britain in this matter of copyright. Accordingly, a general act was passed by Parliament, to the effect that the privileges of the copyright laws in the Three Kingdoms should be granted to all countries which should extend to Great Britain the privileges of their copyright laws. In this state of things, Mr. Dickens came to America to consummate an international arrangement on this subject. His writings being exceedingly popular here, it was deemed that we could hardly resist a demand, regarded as reasonable in itself, and urged by a universal favorite, who might add to the requisitions of justice the argument and the feeling of personal gratitude to himself.

As you are aware, Mr. Dickens's mission proved abortive, and he took bis revenge upon us by his Notes on America, in which he plucked out the feathers of the American Eagle, and then called it a very unclean bird. It is quite as easy to explain his failure as his anger. The demand of International Copyright was suddenly made and rudely enforced. Mr. Dickens brought with him letters and petitions to individuals, to Congress, and to the American people--from eminent British authors, some of them couched in offensive terms, and demanding copyright on the principle of absolute justice. In order to carry the point at a blow, the whole British press burst upon us with the cry of thief, robber, pirate, because we did precisely what was then, and had been done everywhere--we reprinted books not protected by copyright! We resemble our ancestors, and do not like to be bullied. The first effect, therefore, of this demand thus urged,

was resentment;* to this, reflection added apprehension. About this time there was a Convention in Boston of persons interested in the production of books: booksellers, printers, paper-makers, type-founders, book-binders, and others connected with the book manufacture. Their chief object was to petition Congress for a modification of the tariff--a reconstruction of the entire tariff system being then under consideration--so as to afford additional protection to their various interests; but, alarmed at the demand of the British authors, they took the occasion to remonstrate, earnestly, against this proposed international compact.

Discussion of course followed, and has been continued to the present time. Authors in the United States have generally favored the measure; booksellers and publishers resisted it for a time, but many of them now favor it. The manufacturing interests connected with the book-trade have generally opposed it.

So far as the people at large are concerned, I believe that a great majority also take an unfavorable view of the scheme.

Now, where is the right of this question? "What ought we to do? What ought our government to do?

If, as has been, and is asserted, the abstract right of the author to the fruit of his labor is absolute, and if governments recognize the obligation to protect all abstract rights, then the question is settled: justice, morality, conscience, and usage require us to give what is asked. In this state of the case, we Lave no right to consider what is convenient or expedient; we must yield, whatever may be the consequence, to a claim which rests upon such foundations.

Let us then inquire, first, is this abstract claim of absolute right, on the part of authors, well founded; and, second, do governments recognize the obligation to protect and enforce all such abstract rights?

It is indisputable that the author has just as good, and in fact the same right, to the use and behoof of the fruit of his labor, as the farmer and the mechanic. In general, it may he said, that what a man makes is his, and that if it is valuable to him and useful to the community, he is entitled to protection in the possession of it. The farmer produces corn, the cabinet-maker a chair, the wheelwright a cart. The right of the producers of these things to use them, sell them, to control them, absolutely, according to their will and pleasure, is so familiar to the mind as to seem self-evident.

The author asks to be put upon the same footing. He writes a book; in its first stage it is in manuscript. To this his claim is undeniable; but it is a barren right, for in this condition it is unproductive of value. It consists of material signs--letters, words, sentences--conveying ideas. It is susceptible of being copied and multiplied by print, and these copies can be sold, and a reward for the author's labor may be thus realized. The value of the author's work, therefore--that is, the means of obtaining compensation for his labor--lies in selling copies of it;

and what he claims is the right, and the exclusive right, thus to copy his book--or, in other words, copyright. The commodity of the author, as well as the method of recompense, are different from those of the farmer, but his claim to the fruit of his labor rests on the same principle. The farmer's commodity is his corn, and he claims the right to control it; the author's commodity is copyright, and he claims the right to control it. The farmer's property is corporeal, the author's, incorporeal; but the right to the one is the same as that to the other. No ingenuity has been able to show any distinction whatever between the principle on which the author's copyright is founded, and that on which the farmer's right to his crop is founded.*

This is clear, but now comes the other question, does government hold itself bound to secure every abstract right? In general, it may be said that civilized governments protect property: to do this is in fact one of the chief functions of government. What, then, is property?

In looking at learned authorities, we find two distinct definitions: one regards property as a certain inherent, abstract right; the other--the legal interpretation--a possession secured by law. This is, in fact, the general notion of property: it is ownership--the right to possess, enjoy, and control a thing, according to law. It has been asserted that property, even in this sense, rests upon an abstract right, and that the principle of this is, that what a man produces is his own. And yet, when, we come to look at property, as it is distributed around us, we shall see that by far the larger portion of it, throughout the world, is not in the hands of the producers.* The present distribution of land, in all countries, has been made to a great extent by violence, by conquest, usurpation, robbery. The foundations of the great estates throughout Europe, is that of might and not of right. And hence it is impossible to base the idea of property, which government actually does protect, on abstract right. Indeed, in looking at the great authorities on this subject--Cicero, Seneca, Grotius, Montesquieu, Blackstone--the idea is traceable through them all, that property is a possession according to law. They all admit that there is such a thing as abstract right, natural right, and insist upon it, and upon this they base what is called

common law; but yet no one lays down the principle that abstract, right or natural right is either a complete and perfect right, in itself, or that it is essential to the idea of property.

Such is authority, as we find it, with the conservatives; there is a new school which denies this individual right, and claims every thing for society. Bentham lends some countenance to this: he denies altogether the doctrine of abstract right as the foundation of property, and insists that in its principle it is the gift of law. What the law gives a man is his: nothing else. Proudhon goes further, and declares that "property is robbery"--in other words, not only is the present distribution of property the result of artifice, fraud, violence, but, in the nature of things, property belongs to the community, and not to individuals. According .to him, a man who appropriates a thing to his own use and behoof, robs society of what belongs to them.*

Thus vague, confused, and contradictory are the ideas which attach to the principle of property, even among the learned. The fact certainly is, that in its distribution very little respect has been paid to abstract rights. Nearly all laws, by all governments, from the Romans downward, have been based upon considerations of policy, or what they call the public good. Some deference has no doubt been paid to the common instincts of men, and as justice is one of these, the theory of abstract rights has been recognized; but yet how rarely have kings, and princes, and potentates molded their laws or their acts in obedience to the rights of man.*

If we look at the history of copyright, we shall see that authors have been, from the beginning, treated according to these principles of government--which shape all things with a primary and controlling regard to policy or the public good. Knowledge is power, and this was as well understood by the despotisms of the middle ages as it is by those of the present day. They sought therefore to keep it in their own hands. When the art of printing was discovered, some four centuries ago, and threatened to diffuse knowledge among the masses of mankind, the governments became alarmed, and immediately subjected it to supervision and restraint.

Hitherto the right of copy had been worthless to the author; his works could only be reproduced by the pen, and writing for publication was never practiced. Now a mighty change in his position had taken place: the press multiplied his works as by magic. A new idea, a new interest, was thus created. Mankind had already learned to prize books: a copy of the Bible would command the price of a farm. The power to multiply and vend copies of books, was seen at once to be a mighty power. This was naturally claimed by the printer as to old works, and as to new ones, by the author. Thus arose the notion of copyright--the direct result of the discovery of the art of printing. Yet it does not appear that this natural, abstract, absolute right of authors was at all regarded. They were, in fact, looked "upon with suspicion; the press was deemed by governments as well as the people, a device of the devil. Kings, princes, and potentates, therefore, immediately seized upon it, not as a thing to be encouraged, but to be dreaded, watched, restrained. They suppressed whatever was offensive, and licensed only what was approved. This license was a grant of the sovereign, and it was the first form of actual copyright. It was founded on privilege alone. The licenses granted were during the lifetime of the author, or in perpetuity, according to the

good pleasure of the king. These were deemed property, and were bought and sold as such. Thus copyright, in its origin, was the gift of government, or in other words, of the law.

This was the practice of all civilized governments. In France, the ordinance of Moulins, in 1566, a decree of Charles IX., in 1571, and a patent of Henry III., constituted the ancient law on this subject. The king always regarded himself as at liberty to grant or refuse the license, and to impose such conditions, and restrictions as he pleased. Generally the right of the author was perpetual, unless he assigned it to a bookseller, in which case it was thrown open to the public at his death.

The early history of copyright was similar to this, in England. It was illegal to print a book without the government imprimatur. This continued to be the law until the time of Queen Anne, when a general law--1710--was passed, giving the author an interest of twenty-one years in his work.

Thus it appears that for nearly three hundred years after the origin of printing, copyright rested upon privilege granted by the crown. During the latter part of this period it had become familiar to the mind that the farmer and the mechanic were entitled to the use and behoof of the fruits of their labor. These held their right at common law; but no such right was accorded to the author, nor was he permitted to print and sell his book, but by license, by privilege. Even so late as 1774, and long after the passage of a general act on this subject, the House of Lords, upon solemn adjudication, decided that the right of an author to his copy was the gift of the statute, and not one flowing from principles of justice. This doctrine has been substantially affirmed by the recent decision in England--that of the House of Lords reversing Lord Campbell's opinion.

And one thing more is to be regarded, that when more liberal ideas had begun to prevail--when the author was emancipated from the censorship, and his claims were based on a general law, and not on privilege--the perpetual right of copy was taken away, and it was limited to twenty-one years! Since that time the

number of authors has increased, and the press has risen into a mighty interest, and yet, to this day, in no country on the face of the globe, is the author placed on the footing of the farmer and the mechanic: these enjoy, by the common law, and the acknowledged principles of justice, the absolute right to their products, while the author has only a limited protection, dependent entirely upon the statute. The present copyright laws of all civilized governments are nearly the same; except in Great Britain, the United States, and a few other countries, the press is under a censorship, the governments suppressing what they choose: the protection given is generally for about forty-two years, after which time, the works of authors are thrown open to the public.

It is thus obvious that from the beginning to the present time, the fundamental idea of copyright in all countries has been and is, that protection in the enjoyment of it is the gift of statute law--of an enactment of government. Nowhere does it rest on abstract right; in no country is the doctrine recognized that an author has the same right to the fruit of his labor, as has the farmer or the mechanic to the fruit of his. Material property everywhere is protected by common law: everywhere is literary property the gift of statute law.

And yet, International Copyright is urged by its advocates, upon principles of abstract justice, principles of common law, principles rejected in the practice of every civilized government on the face of the globe!

It is, I think, one of the great misfortunes of this question, that it has been thus placed on a false basis, and for this obvious reason, that where a claim rests on principles of justice, the denial of it implies moral obliquity. In such a case, hard names, harsh epithets, bitter feelings, are likely to be engendered: irritation rather than conviction is the result. Whatever may be the abstract right of the matter, the fact is, that all governments have hitherto founded local copyright on policy alone. "When, therefore, the people of Great Britain ask us to

enter into a partnership of international copyright, we very naturally test the question by the principles which govern them, as well as other civilized nations, in dealing with local copyright. If they call us pirates, because we reprint books not secured by copyright, it is inevitable that we retort by saying that they do the same. If they say, we are holier than thou, because we offer you international copyright, we are tempted to reply, that in the mean time your attitude is no better than this: you say to us--" "We will stop stealing when you do, and not before!" If they insist that we are robbers in not giving copyright to Mr. Dickens, because no law protects him at the distance of three thousand miles--we reply that you are robbers, because you give no copyright to the heirs of Dryden, or Pope, or Swift, or Scott, or Chalmers, nor do you give copyright to anybody after a lapse of about forty-two years.

All this we have said, and with some show of reason, and yet I think, if the subject be fairly considered, it still leaves us in a false position. Though, it may be, and no doubt is, true that all governments have denied the claim of the author to an absolute and perpetual right of copy, still no civilized government has assumed that he has no claim. All such governments have in fast given him a limited protection, and this has been gradually extended, with the increase of light and justice among mankind. If we scrutinize the motives of governments in the more recent legislation on this subject, we are at no loss to discover that these consist of two considerations: one is, that the author, like every other laborer, is worthy of his hire; as he contributes to the public amusement and instruction, he is entitled to compensation; and the other is, that it is for the public good to encourage those who thus promote the happiness of society. Here, then, the right of the author to the fruit of his toil, is at least partially recognized; society admits it, but in undertaking to protect him in this right, society assumes the liberty of prescribing certain conditions in view of the public good. As it might tend to limit the beneficent influence of genius, and to

restrain the full light of literature in after-times, to entail upon the author and upon his heirs, forever, the exclusive control of his works, it has been deemed best to limit that control to a period of about forty-two years.

This is, I think, the theory of local copyright law, among the most enlightened nations of the present day. Now, let us Americans consider our position in relation to living British authors. Their books come among us; they are published and circulated among us. You and I and everybody read them, and profit by them. And do we pay the author any thing for all this? Not a farthing; nay, when he asks us for compensation, we say to him, you live three thousand miles off, and the laws of honesty and morality do not extend so far!

Now, is that an honorable position? Is it an extenuation to say that other people do this? Does it not enhance the unfairness of our conduct to consider that the British government stands ready to remedy this wrong?

Let us suppose that two farmers live on opposite banks of a river; and it occasionally happens that their flocks and herds cross this stream, and stray into the neighboring grounds. What is the true principle of conduct between these two parties: is it that each shall confiscate to his own use the property that thus strays into his premises? That certainly is a barbarous practice. But suppose one says to the other, "I am satisfied this is wrong--let us come to an understanding: if you will restore to me such of my flocks and herds as stray into your grounds, I will do the same to you, and thus peace and justice will be established between us." And let us suppose that the other refuses this reasonable proposition, and says, "No; we have both been accustomed to this kind of stealing, and I am determined to continue it." Is not this farmer in the wrong?

And in our refusal to make British authors any compensation, are we not in the precise attitude of this ungenerous farmer?

The truth undoubtedly is, that in refusing International Copyright altogether, we are wrong: we cannot vindicate ourselves

by saying that we follow the example of governments in their local copyright law, for although, as I have shown, these do not recognise the absolute and perpetual claim of authors to the right of copy, yet all allow that they have a right to some compensation for their works. Our wrong lies in this, that we deny all compensation. This, if it is voluntary, is not very far from robbery. Now I do not believe the people of the United States are to be charged with this willful wrong: I am persuaded that the subject has not been well, understood. It has appeared to them that a questionable right has been urged, as the means of forcing us into an unreasonable bargain. The general idea of the proposed international copyright, has been a mutual extension of the local copyright laws to the authors of the two countries; that is to say, the British author shall avail himself of our copyright law, and the American author shall avail himself of the British copyright law. In this sense, the two countries would be thrown into one market, available on the same terms to the authors, publishers, and booksellers of each.

For myself, it seems hardly worth while seriously to discuss such a scheme as this, and for the plain reason that it never can be enacted by our government, or if enacted, it would speedily lie repealed by the people. This claim to international copyright, as I have said, has been urged in such a spirit by British writers, that the public mind here has been prejudiced against it. It may be remarked, that the discussion of the subject, by its advocates on this side of the water, has added to this feeling of aversion, a very extended conviction that sound policy forbids such a measure.

The grounds of objection to the scheme thus presented are various, hut the most formidable one is this: if the two countries thus become one market, it will be mainly to the advantage of the British publishers. The British are a nation of sellers, not buyers. They preach free trade to all the world, but when a market is open, they rush in and engross it. It is free trade, but only to them. If we enter into the proposed part-

nership, they will buy few of our copyrights--those only of our first authors, and few books beyond samples. We may perhaps be permitted to purchase some copyrights of them, and publish the works here; but the general course of things will be this: the London publishers, having the control of British copyrights, will send their agents to New York, Boston, and Philadelphia, or they will here form branch establishments. Through these we shall be supplied with Brit[i]sh books from British type, on British paper, and with British binding.

This is the great objection, and if we are permitted to settle the question by a regard to the interests of the country, it is fatal to the scheme. Yet if we examine the case more closely we shall see that the difficulty is not with British authors, but with British publishers; it is net against foreign copyright, but foreign booksellers. We have an immense interest involved in the diversified industries employed in the manufacture of books, embracing thousands of families and millions of dollars. This naturally revolts at a scheme which threatens to paralyze, possibly to ruin it, in many of its branches. But no difficulty of this nature could arise from an arrangement giving copyright to British authors, provided their works be published by American citizens, and be manufactured in the United States. Nay, I think it is easy to suggest a plan of this nature, which would be beneficial to all the interests concerned--those of American authors as well as American book producers.

The scheme I propose is this:

1. An author, being a citizen of Great Britain, shall have copyright in the United States for a period not exceeding fourteen years, on the following conditions:

2. He shall give due notice, in the United States,* of his inten-

tion to secure his copyright in this country, three months before the publication of his book; and this shall be issued in the United States within thirty days after its publication in Great Britain.

3. His work shall be published by an American citizen, who shall lodge a certificate in the office of the clerk of the court of the district where he resides, stating in whose behalf the copyright is taken, and this shall be printed on the back of the titlepage.

4. The work shall be printed on American paper,* and the binding shall be wholly executed in the United States.

5. This privilege shall extend only to books, and not to periodicals.

6. The arrangement thus made in behalf of the British authors in America, to be extended to the American authors in Great Britain, and upon similar conditions.

This is a mere outline of the general principles of the scheme, by no means pretending to be complete in its details, or in the technical form of an enactment. To such a plan I can conceive no serious objections; not only the authors of this country, but the publishers would favor it. I am confident it would meet the feelings, views, and wishes of the country at large. My reasons for these views are briefly as follows:

1. This plan gives us the pledge of one of our own citizens, living among us, and responsible in his person, character, and position, for a faithful conformity to the law. Without meaning to cast invidious reflections, it may he said that it would be a strong temptation to any foreigner, under the circumstances--having various inducements and many facilities for imposing upon

us books manufactured at home--to commit this wrong; it is wise, therefore, to make provision against it. And besides, this plan, securing the publication in the hands of American citizens, will prevent the encouragement of British agencies and branch establishments, so much apprehended among us.

2. A still more important point is this--that, inasmuch as the books will be issued by American publishers, they are likely to conform to American ideas in respect to price. One of the apprehensions of international copyright, as heretofore proposed, has been that, inasmuch as British books would be to a great extent supplied, to us by British publishers--either directly from London or through their agents here--that they would be in expensive and unsuitable forms, and at all events would come to us at exaggerated prices. The plan proposed evidently removes all reasonable grounds for these apprehensions.

3. It is true that British works, thus copyrighted and published in this country, would be somewhat dearer than they are now, without copyright. But how much? The common rate of copyright for an author, in the United States, is ten per cent, on the retail price. Let us double this, and we have twenty per cent, as the increased cost of the English book to the retail purchaser. Thus, instead of paying one dollar for a work by Dickens or Bulwer or Macaulay, we shall pay one dollar and twenty cents--half of this addition going to the author, and half to the publisher.*

4. Will the American reader object to this? Let him consider the reasons for it. In the first place, it is not pleasant, even though it be lawful, to read Mr. Dickens's hook, and refuse to make him any return for the pleasure he has given us. In the absence of any arrangement by which we can render to him this compensation, we may lawfully peruse his works; but when a

plan is proposed to us, and that a reasonable plan, and compatible with the best interests of the country--then such refusal becomes voluntary and designed on our part, and is a willful taking without liberty, which is a plain definition of a very disreputable act. No American can be gratified by such, a state of things; on the contrary, I believe that every truly American heart would rejoice to make ample compensation to British authors, for the privilege of perusing their works. The English language being our mother-tongue, we claim, as our birthright, free access to the great fountain of British literature, that has become the common property of the Anglo-Saxon race; but we will not seek to rob the living author of the fruit of his genius or his toil .

5. Besides, we Americans should remember two other things: first, that in consideration of the proposed arrangement in behalf of Mr. Dickens and his brethren of the British quill, our Irvings, Prescotts, Longfellows--the brotherhood of the American quill--would receive a corresponding compensation on the other side of the water. This would be something. Would it not he agreeable to every American thus to certify his gratitude to those of his countrymen who not only bestow upon him his most exalted sources of pleasure and improvement, but eminently contribute to the best interests of society?

But, in the second place, there are considerations infinitely higher than those of a personal nature. Literature is at once a nation's glory and defence.* Without its poets, orators, histo-

rians--the liberty, the arts, the genius of Greece would have perished ages ago. These, being recorded and reflected by its literature, she became immortal--surviving even, conquest and oppression and the lapse of time. Would you that our national glory should be exalted--that our liberty should be vindicated, extended, perpetuated? Would you that arts should arise and flourish among us: that a noble and lofty pitch be given to the national mind, and that a noble and lofty destiny achieved, at last be recorded, reflected, and carried down to after-times? Whoever has these aspirations, thereby pleads for a national literature.

To such I present the consideration that this, like every thing else, must live by encouragement. That literature is encouraged in this country, and, in some respects, as it is encouraged nowhere else, I admit. That we surpass all other nations in our periodical press, in our books for primary education, in the literature of the people, in manuals for the various arts and professions, is undeniable. Nor are we wholly delinquent in the higher forms of literature--science, history, romance, poetry, eloquence. In these things we have made a good beginning, but yet we are only at the threshold of what we can do and should do. In pro-

portion as we love and honor our native land; in proportion as we feel desirous that our country should "be honored by the world--just in that proportion, by every logical consideration, should we feel bound to protect and encourage its literature.

And yet, our actual position is opposed to this. We allow untaxed British authorship to come into this country to the detriment, the discouragement of our own. American authors, in competition with British authors, are in the position that our manufacturers would be, if British merchandise were gratuitously distributed in our markets. The scheme herein proposed remedies these evils; it taxes British literature, and thus--withholding the encouragement it receives from being freely given away--prevents it from being a fatal and discouraging competitor of our own literature.

For these reasons, as well as others which need not be suggested, I believe the proposed scheme, or something resembling it, would be acceptable to the country, If the arrangement is made by treaty, it may be stipulated that it is to be terminated after five years, at the pleasure of either party. In its nature, therefore, it will be provisional and experimental, and may be terminated or modified, as time and experience may dictate. If it be said, either in this country or in Great Britain, that this is not all that may be desired, let us consider whether, as a practical question, it is not as much as it is now possible to obtain. It is to be considered that International Copyright is a modern idea; and it is not altogether unreasonable that in dealing with it--especially in this country, where so many and so important interests are at stake--we should follow the cautious steps of the mother country in granting copyright to her own citizens, which at first was limited to twenty-one years.

Let us go back to the year 1820, and endeavor to estimate the gross amount of this trade in the United States at that period. The following statement, it is supposed, may approach the truth:

Amount of books manufactured and sold in the United States in 1820.

School books ...	$750,000
Classical books ...	250,000
Theological books ...	150,000
Law books ...	200,000
Medical books ...	150,000
All others ...	1,000,000
Gross amount ...	$2,500,000

The space between 1820 and 1830 may be considered as the period in which our national literature was founded; it was the age in which Irving, Cooper, Bryant, Halleck, Paulding, J. R. Drake, John Neal, Brainard, Percival, Hillhouse, and others, redeemed the country from the sneer that nobody read American books. During this period we began to have confidence in American genius, and to dream of literary ambition. The North American Review, already established, kept on its steady way, and other attempts were made in behalf of periodical literature, but with little success.

The Book Manufacture in 1830.

If we take 1830 as a period for estimating the product of the book manufacture, we suppose it may stand thus:

School books ...	$1,100,000
Classical books ...	350,000
Theological books ...	250,000
Law books ...	300,000
Medical books ...	200,000
All others ...	1,300,000
Gross amount ...	$3,500,000

This shows an increase of production of forty per cent, in ten years.

From 1830 to 1840 was an era of great and positive development, and the foundation of a still more active era of progress and expansion in the book trade. It may be considered as the point at which our literature became established in our own confidence, and to some degree, in the respect of the world. During this period, the following names either first appeared or became eminently conspicuous:

In History--Prescott, Sparks, Bancroft, Irving.

In Mathematics--Day, Farrar, and the self-taught Bowditch, whose translation of the Méchanique Celeste of Laplace, is admitted to be superior to the original, by reason of its happy illustrations and added discoveries.

In Philology--Webster, whose quarto Dictionary is now admitted by high British authority to take precedence of all others.

In Theology--Bush, Barnes, Norton, Stuart, Woods, Jenks, Robinson, Spring, A. Alexander, Durbin, Hodge, Bangs, Olin, L. Beecher, Tyng, Thornwell.

In Political Economy, Philosophy, &c.--H. C. Carey, Colton, Lieber, Wayland, Upham, Tucker.

In General Science, Natural History, &c.--Silliman, Henry, Morton, Rogers, Redfield, Espy, Audubon, Olmsted, Dana, Gray, Nuttall, Burritt.

In Jurisprudence, International Law, &c.--Kent, Story, Wheaton, Duer, Cowen.

In Medicine and Surgery--Dunglison, N. Smith, N. E. Smith, Bigelow, Dewees, Beck, Doane, Wood, Mott, Eberle.

In Travels, Geography, &c.--Schoolcraft, Ruschenberger, Stephens, Farnham.

In Essay and Criticism--Channing, the two Everetts, Emerson.

In Fiction--Cooper, Ware, Simms, Bird, Kennedy, Poe, Miss Sedgwick, Mrs. Child, Miss Leslie, Fay, Hoffman.

In Poetry--Bryant, Sprague, Pierpont, Dana, Willis, Longfellow, Whittier, Mrs. Sigourney, Mellen, Morris, McLellun, Prentice, Benjamin.

In Educational and Church Music--Lowell Mason, probably the most successful author in the United States.

This period is to be noted for the effective labors of W. C. Woodbridge, James G. Carter, Horace Mann, Henry Barnard, and others, in behalf of common-school education, and an immense improvement in school-books, both in literary and mechanical execution, by means of which geography, grammar, and history, very extensively became common school studies. During the same period, history, chemistry, natural philosophy, moral philosophy, rhetoric, geology, were all popularized, and introduced into the public high-schools. The change in school-books during this period amounted to a revolution, and resulted in that amazing expansion in their use and distribution, which now marks the subject of education in the United States. This also was the era of Annuals, which added largely to the amount of the book-trade.

This is the era of the establishment of the Penny Press, which is at once a sign and instrument of progress. Its home is in the midst of business, education, literature--in the very breathing and heart-beating of life and action: and it gives impulse and vigor to all these interests. So powerful an instrument must sometimes seem to produce evil, but on the whole it must be regarded as a great civilizer. We may advert to a single illustration of its expanding influences: the three principal penny papers of New York, at the present day, 1856--the Herald, Tribune, and Times--each of them is a political paper, with political opinions, yet each treats politics as a matter of general information, and publishes the principal doings and documents of all parties. This is not so in any country where the penny press does not exist.

This is also the era in which monthly and semi-monthly Magazines began to live and thrive among us. Among the most noted, are the Knickerbocker, Merchants' Magazine, Graham's, Southern Literary Messenger, all continued to the present time, with others which have ceased to exist.

The Book Manufacture in 1840.

The book production for 1840 may be estimated as follows:*

School books ...	$2,000,000
Classical books ...	550,000
Theological books ...	300,000
Law books ...	400,000
Medical books ...	250,000
All others ...	2,000,000
Gross amount ...	$5,500,000

This calculation shows an increase of about sixty per cent, for ten years.

From 1840 to 1850 was a period of general prosperity in the country, and the full impulse of the preceding period continued through this.

American authorship was more appreciated at home and abroad--a circumstance greatly due to the enlightened and patriotic labors of Dr. Griswold, who may be considered as among the first and most influential of our authors in cultivating a respect for our own literature. New American publications became very numerous during this period; the style of book manufacture was greatly improved; numerous magazines were

founded; the penny press was diffused, and became more elevated in its character and more enlarged in its scope--several of the editors connected with it marking the age by their sagacity, vigor, and largeness of view.

This era is also marked by the production of numerous works richly illustrated by steel and wood engravings. The Harpers entered upon the publication of handsome editions of books in all departments of literature, many of them embellished by fine wood engravings; the Appletons of New York, Butler of Philadelphia, and others, gave to the public those luxurious volumes, successors of the annuals, already alluded to. The success of these rich and costly works signalizes the advance of public taste. Putnam gives us Washington Irving's works in a guise suited to their excellence, and a little later, the Homes of American Authors, also in a style suited to tho subject. About the same time the writers for the Knickerbocker present its veteran editor with a Memorial--an exquisite volume--as much a sign of the public appreciation as their own.

The immense development of the school-book trade is a feature of this era; we now see editions of five, ten, twenty thousand copies of geographies, grammars, spelling-books, readers. Spelling-books count by millions, and geographies by hundreds of thousands. The mechanical character of these works is changed; they have cast their brown-paper slough, and appear in the costly dress of fine paper, fine illustrations, and good binding. Twenty thousand dollars are paid for the getting up of a school geography!

Most of the authors which we have named as belonging to the preceding era, shed their luster upon this. Among those who now first entered the lists, we may name--

In History--Hildreth, Ingersoll, Eliot, Hawks, T. Irving, Frost, Headley, Abbott, Brodhead, Mrs. Willard, Lossing, C. A. Goodrich, and soon after, Motley, who, at the very outset, has attained a high reputation. In political history--Young, Benton.

In Jurisprudence--Greenleaf, George T. Curtis, W. W. Story, and soon after, E. F. Curtis, T. Parsons, Edwards, Dayton, Dean, E. F. Smith, Dunlap, Waterman, Willard.

Mathematics--Pierce, Davies, Courtenay, Millington, Hackley, Loomis.

Philology--Prof. C. A. Goodrich, editor of Webster's Dictionary; Worcester, Pickering.

Political Economy, Philosophy, &c.--E. P. Smith, Mahan, Tappan, Hickok.

Theology--Bushnell, Hawes, Cheever, Wainwright, Wines, Huntington, Spring, Wisner, J. A. Alexander, Taylor, McClintock, E. Beecher, Williams, Stevens, Fisk, Dowling, Cross, Conant, Choules.

Medicine and Surgery--J. C. Warren, Greene, Parker, Bartlett, Clymer, Drake, Pancoast, H. H. Smith, Harris, Carson; and since 1850, Bedford, Watson, Gross, Flint, Lee, Blackman.

General Science, Natural History, Geography, &c.--Agassiz and Guyot--whom we now claim as citizens; with Bartlett, Squiers, Maury, Mitchell, J. D. Dana, Baird, Hall, Emmons, Malian, D. A. Wells, Wood, St. John, Wilkes--the latter giving us a new continent by discovery; Lynch, who has furnished the best account of the Dead Sea and its environs; and, we may add, Com. Perry, who introduces us to Japan.

In Classical Literature--Leverett, Anthon, Andrews, Gould, Brooks, McClintock, Owen, Kendrick, Sophocles, Johnson, Thacher.

Essay and Criticism--Prescott, Chapin, Giles, Sprague, Hague, Charles Sumner, Whipple, Palfrey, Winthrop, Beecher, Cheever, Milburn.

Travels, Geography, &c.--Catlin, Stephens, Curtis, Bayard Taylor, Bartlett, Willis, Southgate, Robinson, Olin, Kendall, Fremont, Kidder, Parkman, Coggshall, Colton.

In light, racy writing, full of life-pictures and luscious fancies--Curtis, Cozzens, Mitchell, Bayard Taylor, Willis, Matthews, Baldwin.

In Miscellaneous Literature--Ticknor, Tuckerman, Longfellow, Griswold, Mrs. Child, Hall, Headley, Mrs. Kirkland, Grace Greenwood, Mrs. Eliot, Mrs. Hale, Seba Smith; and in 1856, E. A. and G. L. Duyckinck.

In Fiction--Melville, Kimball, Mayo, Mrs. Stowe, Miss Mackintosh, Alice Carey, Elizabeth Warner, Mrs. Southworth, Miss Wormley, Mrs. Oakes Smith, Minnie Myrtle.

In Poetry--Holmes, Lowell, Buchanan Read, Bayard Taylor, Saxe, Epes Sargent, W. E. Wallace, T. W. Parsons, Cranch, Fields.

Books of Practical Utility--Miss Catharine Beecher, Miss Leslie, Fanny Fern, G. P. Putnam, J. L. Blake, Downing, Haven, and many others.

It is not possible to give all the names of those who have distinguished themselves in Educational Manuals; among them, however, are the following: Mitchell, Olney, Smith, Morse, Willard, Monteith, McNally, Fitch, Miss Cornell, Mrs. Willard, in School Geographies; in Readers and Spellers, Emerson, Parker, Town, Saunders, Swan, Sargent, Tower, McGuffie, Cobb, Lovell; in Grammars, Kirkham, Clark, Brown, E. C. Smith, Weld, Wells, Dalton, Greene, Pineo; in Arithmetics, Emerson, Davies, Greenleaf, Thomson, Stoddard, R. C. Smith, Adams; in various other works, Hooker, Gallaudet, Comstock, Burritt, Mrs. Phelps, Page, Mansfield, H. N. Day, Boyd, Miss Dwight, Darley, Gillespie; in Maps and Atlases, Mitchell, J. H. Colton. The latter has in progress, and nearly completed, the best General Atlas ever published in any country.

The Book Manufacture in 1850.

The era of 1850 affords the following estimates:

School books ...	$5500,000
Classical books ...	1,000,000
Theological books ...	500,000
Law books ...	700,000
Medical books ...	400,000
All others ...	4,400,000
Gross amount ...	$12,500,000

This shows an advance of one hundred and twenty-five per cent. in ten years.

From 1850 to 1856, the momentum of preceding periods was reinforced by the quickening impulse of a host of female writers, whose success presents a marked phenomenon in the history of our literature at this time.

To this era belongs Mrs. Stowe, who, so far as the sale of her works is concerned, may be considered the most successful woman-writer ever known; Miss Warner, Fanny Fern, Mrs. Stephens, Miss Cummings, Marion Harland (Miss Hawes), and others, produce books of which twenty, thirty, forty, fifty thousand are sold in a year.

About this time is the successful era of monthly magazines, as Harpers', Putnam's, &c. The former outstrips all other works of the kind yet published, issuing one hundred and seventy thousand numbers a month!

The last ten years have been noted for the production of local, state, town, and city histories, as well as genealogical histories. Many of these are of great interest, going back to the lights and shadows of colonial periods. Here are the future resources of historic poetry and romance, of painting and sculpture.

During this period there have also been produced numerous valuable and costly works by the General Government, relating to navigation, geography, &c., and also local, State surveys, under State patronage, of great interest and utility.

During this period, pictorial-sheet literature is brought to a climax in every form, up to the blanket-folio. This is the age of vigorous advertising, by means of which "fifty thousand copies are sold before a book is printed."

This is also the millennial era of Spiritual Literature, which has now its periodicals, its presses, and its libraries.

It is also the climax of the Thrilling, Agonizing Literature, and which, by the way, is thus rather wickedly mocked by the poet of the "Fruit Festival" already alluded to:

"This is the new 'Sensation' Book--
     A work of so much force 
The first edition all blew up,
     And smashed a cart and horse!
A friend who read the manuscript 
     Without sufficient care,
Was torn to rags, although he had 
     "Six cables round his hair!

"'The Eggs of Thought' I'll recommend 
     As very thrilling lays;
Some poets poach--but here is one 
     That all the papers praise.
The school commissioners out West 
     Have ordered seventy tons,
That widely they may be dispersed 
     Among their setting Kins!

"And here's a most Astounding Tale--
     A volume full of fire;
The author's name is known to fame--
     Stupendous Stubbs, Esquire!
And here's 'The Howling Ditch of Crime,'
     By A. Sapphire Stress:
Two hundred men fell dead last night 
     A working at the press!"

The Book Manufacture in 1856.

The amount of the production of our American book-trade at this time--that is, for the year 1856--may be estimated at about sixteen millions of dollars; and the annual increase of this interest at about a million of dollars a year.

This sum may be distributed as follows:

Produced in New York city in the year 1856............... $6,000,000

In other parts of the State--Albany, Schenectady, Utica, Syracuse, Cazenovia, Ithaca, Rochester, Auburn, Buffalo, &c. 600,000

In Boston............................................... 2,500,000

In other New England towns--New Haven, Hartford, Providence, Springfield, Northampton, Salem, Newburyport, Portland, Keene, &c............... 600,000

In Philadelphia................. 3,400,000
[The operations of the book-trade in this city are enormous, but a large amount of the books distributed from this point are manufactured elsewhere. The house of Lippincott, Grambo & Co. does a larger book business than any other in the world. They are very extensive publishers, but they often order whole editions of other houses.]

In Cincinnati............................................ 1,300,000
[This city is less than a century old, from its first log-cabin; yet an excellent authority says: "In 1850 this western city, with a population of 116,000, has twelve publishing houses, which give employment to seven hundred people. The value of books and periodicals published here is $1,550,000 a year. I consider that there is more reading of books in Ohio than in Germany. The chief works in demand are religious and educational."*]

In the Northwestern States--Detroit, Chicago, Milwaukee... 100,000

In the District of Columbia--by the Government........... 75,0,000

The Southern and Southwestern States consume a considerable amount of books, though small in comparison to the rest of the United States. Their production of books and of literature is still less in proportion. Baltimore, Richmond, Charleston, Columbus, Savannah, Macon, Mobile, New Orleans, St. Louis, and Louisville, are considerable markets for the sale of books, and a few works are published in some of these places. In Baltimore and Louisville, the publishing interest is extensive. We may estimate the whole book production in this section at ....... 750,000

Total in the United States......... $16,000,000

You will bear in mind that this estimate, throughout, regards only looks manufactured in the United States; the amount of books imported is probably about a million of dollars a year. If so, the whole consumption of books in this country is probably not far from seventeen millions of dollars annually!

Taking, as before, certain prominent facts as the basis of calculation, we arrive at the following conclusions:

In 1820, the book manufacture of the United States was based upon works of which thirty per cent, was the production of American authors, and seventy per cent, of British authors.

From 1820 to 1830, as we have seen, a considerable impulse was given to American literature, which now began sensibly to diminish the relative proportion of British works among us.

In 1830, the book production of the United States embraced forty per cent, of American works, and sixty per cent, of British works,

From 1830 to 1840, still greater activity prevailed in American authorship, and school-books were extensively multiplied; we shall see, therefore, during this period, a corresponding relative increase of American works.

In 1840, we estimate the proportion of American works to be fifty-five per cent., and that of British works forty-five per cent.

From 1840 to 1850 has been the most thriving era of American literature, and during this ten years we find that the balance has turned, largely in favor of American works.

In 1850, we estimate the proportion of American works to be seventy per cent, and of British works to be thirty per cent.

In 1856, it is probable that the proportion of American works is eighty per cent, and that of British books twenty per cent.

It will be understood that we here speak of all new editions of every kind: of the works of living British authors, the proportion is much less than twenty per-cent.

Some general observations should be made by way of explanation.

1. School-books constitute a very large proportion of the book product of the United States; probably thirty to forty per cent. of the whole. Sixty years ago we used English readers, spelling-books, and arithmetics; forty years ago we used English books adapted to our wants. Now our school-books are superior to those of all other countries, and are wholly by American authors. More than a million of Webster's Spelling-books are published every year. We produce annually more school-books than the whole continent of Europe!

2. The classical works in use, formerly altogether British, are now seven-eighths American.

3. The elementary treatises on law, medicine, theology, and science, are mostly American.

4. The dictionaries in general use are American.

5. The popular reading of the masses is three-fourths American.

6. Three-fourths of the new novels and romances are American.

7. The new foreign literature, reproduced among us, consists mainly of works of science, philosophy, jurisprudence, medicine and surgery, divinity, criticism, and general literature. Thirty per cent. of the works of

these classes--constituting the higher walks of literature generally-- are of foreign origin.--See Note II., p. 552, vol. ii.