test of our common success.”  The philosopher accepted it as a substitute for that “friendship or favour of princes, of which he could not boast.”  The same opinion was held by JOHNSON.  Yet, looking on the present state of English literature, the most profuse perhaps in Europe, we cannot refrain from thinking that the “patronage of booksellers” is frequently injurious to the great interests of literature.

[Footnote A:  The agreement made with Simmons, the publisher, was 5_l_. down, and 5_l_. more when 1500 copies were sold, the same sum to be paid for the second and third editions, each of the same number of copies.  Milton only lived during the publication of two editions, and his widow parted with all her right in the work to the same bookseller for eight pounds.  Her autograph receipt was in the possession of the late Dawson Turner.—­ED.]

The dealers in enormous speculative purchases are only subservient to the spirit of the times.  If they are the purveyors, they are also the panders of public taste; and their vaunted patronage only extends to popular subjects; while their urgent demands are sure to produce hasty manufactures.  A precious work on a recondite subject, which may have consumed the life of its author, no bookseller can patronise; and whenever such a work is published, the author has rarely survived the long season of the public’s neglect.  While popular works, after some few years of celebrity, have at length been discovered not worth the repairs nor the renewal of their lease of fame, the neglected work of a nobler design rises in value and rarity.  The literary work which requires the greatest skill and difficulty, and the longest labour, is not commercially valued with that hasty, spurious novelty; for which the taste of the public is craving, from the strength of its disease rather than of its appetite.  ROUSSEAU observed, that his musical opera, the work of five or six weeks, brought him as much money as he had received for his “Emile,” which had cost him twenty years of meditation, and three years of composition.  This single fact represents a hundred.  So fallacious are public opinion and the patronage of booksellers!

Such, then, is the inadequate remuneration of a life devoted to literature; and notwithstanding the more general interest excited by its productions within the last century, it has not essentially altered their situation in society; for who is deceived by the trivial exultation of the gay sparkling scribbler who lately assured us that authors now dip their pens in silver ink-standishes, and have a valet for an amanuensis?  Fashionable writers must necessarily get out of fashion; it is the inevitable fate of the material and the manufacturer.  An eleemosynary fund can provide no permanent relief for the age and sorrows of the unhappy men of science and literature; and an author may even have composed a work which shall be read by the next generation as well as the present, and