612 Literary Property. [JuNnE, 
always be another with which all protection, not carried to a compara- 
tively remote period: will be utterly worthless. The Esprit des Lois of 
Montesquieu is an apt illustration of this; and we refer to it because it 
gives us occasion to quote the observation made by D’Alembert in 
tracing its history, which in one short but brilliant passage, admirably 
depicts the gradual process by which all the great works written for the 
instruction of mankind arrive at their ultimate renown. “ I] fallut que 
les véritables juges eussent eu le temps de lire: bientét ils ramenérent 
la multitude toujours prompte 4 changer d’avis. La partie du public 
qui enseigne dicta a la partie qui écoute ce qu’elle devoit penser et dire ; 
et les suffrages des hommes éclairés, joint aux échos qui le répéterent, ne 
forma de plus qu’une voix dans toute Europe.” Still, we have no 
occasion to go for proof to foreign countries. The fate of our own 
Milton’s Paradise Lost is well known ; and Hume’s History, to use Mr. 
Maugham’s phrase, “ fell still-born from the press.” 
When Lope de Vega, the Spanish dramatist, was twitted by the 
critics for the boldness with which he set all the Aristotelian rules of 
criticism at defiance, he made a reply, which has been translated into 
French :— 
** Le peuple est mon maitre ; il faut bien lui servir, 
« 4 oer ae ? 
I] faut pour son argent dui donner ce qu'il aime. 
It happened, in this particular case, that the taste of the multitude was 
better than that of the critics ; but the people, in general, rather require 
to be taught by their writers, than to direct the character of their 
writings. Yet, unfortunately, the existing state of the law, as far as 
any state of the law can operate, has the additional objection of tending 
to contravene these the best interests of society :— 
“* Authors,” says Mr. Maughan, “ are at present discouraged from executing 
works of a standard nature, because such works demand the labour of a life. 
It is evident that talent may be more profitably employed in the attention to 
works of temporary excitement. The fashion of a particular age or season is 
consulted, instead of the general and enduring interest of the community. 
The question with an author who is about to select the sphere of his literary 
labour, is not determined by any opinion of what will be beneficial to man- 
kind at large, or ultimately ensure his own reputation, but what will sell the 
best in the literary market.” p. 192. 
The whole principle on which the library tax is justified is very suc- 
cessfully attacked by Mr. Maugham :— 
« But the law,” says he, “ is said to be beneficial to general literature, by 
affording to men of literary talents and industry the means of information, and 
enabling them to accomplish works of the highest merit and utility. 
“This is too barefaced an excuse for injustice: it is robbing Peter, not to 
pay Paul, but to enable him dishonestly to live at the expense of Peter. The 
men of ‘ literary talents and industry, who have accomplished works of merit 
and ability, are to be deprived of a large part of their profit, where any exists, 
in order that others may avail themselves of the results of their industry gra- 
tuitously. Surely, the fellows of these learned Universities, who favour the 
world with their collegiate lucubrations, and who set their own price upon 
them, should stand on the same footing as other literary men, and purchase 
the materials which they require in the course of their labours. It may be 
very convenient, but it cannot be just, that by the aid of these Universities a 
writer should possess himself of the property of his predecessors, for which 
no remuneration whateyer has been made. And, after all, there is not the plea 
