1829. ] Literary Property. 613 
of necessity in favour of the injustice ; for it is the common practice of an 
author who is engaged in a work, in the preparation of which he has occasion 
to refer to a variety of books, to obtain them from his publisher ; and it is 
part of the understanding between them, that all the books which are neces- 
sary shall be lent him. Of course there is, of all others, the least difficulty 
in supplying the modern publications. And, we presume, no one who is 
tolerably acquainted with the history and circumstances of literature, can 
believe that it has been, or is likely to be, benefited or improved by the 
doctrine, for the first time laid down in 1812, that the Universities are entitled 
to copies of every publication. We may venture to say, that if not the besé 
authors of the present age, at least, as good as any others, are unconnected 
with the Universities, and derive no advantage whatever from the accumula- 
tions which have been made in their libraries, either since 1812, when every 
book has been supplied, or prior to that time, when the registered books only 
were delivered. Indeed, it is absurd to suppose that the intellect of the 
country is to be advanced by such paltry means, and the true friends of acade- 
mical learning are, no doubt, as much ashamed of the folly of such an argu- 
ment, as of the dishonesty of such a principle. 
“< Supposing, however, all these considerations set aside, let us inquire what 
is really the use of the single copy given to any one University? In general, 
the books are of no use whatever to any one in any of the colleges. Of the 
far greater portion, not a single page is ever read. It either is utterly use- 
less, or is so considered for all collegiate purposes. Indeed, how can it be 
otherwise, when the libraries indiscriminately demand their copies of every 
publication—of all the trash, folly, and obscenity, which find their way out 
of the press? 
« But suppose the work to be really valuable, either for its profound philo- 
sophy or learning, or for the popularity of the subject and the talent it indi- 
cates ; then every one becomes desirous to read it. Thousands of students 
apply for it; and what is the consequence ? As but few can possibly obtain 
it, the work is either purchased or borrowed from the common circulating 
libraries, and the copy in each of the eleven libraries has precisely the effect 
of preventing purchases from the author, for the sole benefit of a few indi- 
viduals, who can either do without the book, or afford to pay for it.” p.p. 199, 
200. 
With respect to the indiscriminate demand of the libraries, we suppose 
Mr. Maugham will be met with this stale apology, that they are willing 
to return the books which are not deemed, on examination, to be 
appropriate for their shelves. The value of this apology is, however, 
just nothing. Booksellers are not less keen-witted than other men in 
looking after their interests, yet they do not avail themselves of the 
offer ; and the fact that they do not is the proof that the rejected books 
are not of the class on which the tax is felt; at least not to so great a 
degree as to make it worth while to incur the trouble and cost of reclaiming 
them. But when people pretend to be liberal, it is well to take the 
guage of their liberality. Hear then, as far as the Bodleian at least 
is concerned, the evidence of one of the curators before the committee 
of 1818 :— 
“What proportion do you suppose the number rejected bears to the 
number deposited ?—A very small proportion ; not perhaps one in a hundred, 
or less peiaig. 
“Speaking generally, what do you suppose to be the value of the books 
rejected in the course of a year >— £3 or £4, not more.”* 
Mr. Maugham exposes, with equal success, what we may call the 
advertisement fallacy :— 
* Rey. Thomas Gaisford, Minutes of Evidence, p. 105. 
