Oxford, a body tenacious enough of their rights; the other, of Bishop Burnet's heirs, whose circumstances were such as made them very sensible of any diminution of their inheritance. * 17. It is observable, that both these abridgements last mentioned, with many others that might be produced, were made when the act of parliament for securing the property of copies was in force, and which, if that property was injured, afforded an easy redress: what then can be inferred from the silence and forbearance of the proprietors, but that they thought an epitome of a book no violation of the right of the proprietor? 18. That their opinion, so contrary to their own interest, was founded in reason, will appear from the nature and end of an abridgement. 19. The design of an abridgement is, to benefit mankind by facilitating the attainment of knowledge, and by contracting arguments, relations, or descriptions, into a narrow compass; to convey instruction in the easiest method, without fatiguing the attention, burdening the memory, or impairing the health of the student. 20. By this method the original author becomes, perhaps, of less value, and the proprietor's profits are diminished; but these inconveniences give way to the advantage received by mankind from the easier propagation of knowledge; for as an incorrect book is lawfully criticised, and false assertions justly confuted, because it is more the interest of mankind that error should be detected and truth discovered, than that the proprietors of a particular book should enjoy their profits undiminished; so a tedious volume may no less lawfully be abridged, because it is better that the proprietors should suffer some damage, than that the acquisition of knowledge should be obstructed with unnecessary difficulties, and the valuable hours of thousands thrown away. 21. Therefore, as he that buys the copy of a of a book, buys it under this condition, that it is liable to be confuted if it is false, however his property may be affected by such a confutation; so he buys it likewise liable to be abridged if it be tedious, however his property may suffer by the abridgement. 22. To abridge a book, therefore, is no violation of the right of the proprietor, because to be subject to the hazard of an abridgement was an original condition of the property. 23. Thus we see the right of abridging authors established both by reason and the customs of trade. But, perhaps, the necessity of this practice may appear more evident, from a consideration of the consequences that must probably follow from the prohibition of it. 24. If abridgements be condemned as injurious to the proprietor of the copy, where will this argument end? Must not confutations be likewise prohibited for the same reason? or, in writings of entertainment, will not criticisms at least be entirely suppressed, as equally hurtful to the proprietor, and certainly not more necessary to the public? 25. Will not authors who write for pay, and who are rewarded commonly according to the bulk of their work, be tempted to fill their works with superflui ties and digressions, when the dread of an abridgement is taken away, as doubtless more negligenees would be committed, and more falsehoods published, if men were not restrained by the fear of censure and confutation? 26. How many useful works will the busy, the indolent, and the less wealthy part of mankind be deprived of? How few will read or purchase fortyfour large volumes of the Transactions of the Royal Society, which, in abridgement, are generally read, to the great improvement of philosophy ? 27. How must general systems of sciences be written, which are nothing more than epitomes of those authors who have written on particular branches, and those works are made less necessary by such collections? Can he that destroys the profit of many copies be less criminal than he that lessens the sale of one? 28. Even to confute an erroneous book will become more difficult, since it has always been a custom to abridge the author whose assertions are examined, and sometimes to transcribe all the essential parts of his book. Must an enquirer after truth be debarred from the benefit of such confutations, unless he purchases the book, however useless, that occasion to the answer? gave 29. Having thus endeavoured to prove the legality of abridgements from custom, and the necessity of continuing that custom from reason, it remains only, that we shew that we have not printed the complainant's copy, but abridged it. 30. This will need no proof, since it will appear, upon comparing the two books, that we have reduced thirty-seven pages to thirteen of the same print. 31. Our design is, to give our readers a short view of the present controversy; and we require that one of these two positions be proved, either that we have no right to exhibit such a view, or that we can exhibit it without epitomizing the writers of each party. LETTER ON FIRE-WORKS.* MR. URBAN, AMONG the principal topics of conversation which now furnish the places of assembly with amusement, may be justly numbered the FIRE-WORKS, which are advancing, by such slow degrees, and with such costly preparation. The first reflection that naturally arises is upon the inequality of the effect to the cause. Here are vast sums expended, many hands, and some heads employed, from day to day, and from month to month, and the whole nation is filled with expectations, by delineations and narratives. And in what is all this to end? in a building that is to attract the admiration of ages? in a bridge, which may facilitate the commerce of future generations? in a work of any kind which may stand as the model of beauty, or the pattern of virtue ? To shew the blessings of the late change of our state † by any monument of these kinds, were a project worthy not only of wealth, and power, and greatness, but of learning, wisdom, and virtue. But nothing of this kind is designed; nothing more is projected, than a crowd, a shout, and a blaze: the mighty work of artifice and contrivance is to be set on fire for no other * Inserted in the Gentleman's Mazagine, Jan. 1749. |