This, however, is not the case with the unfortunate author, on whom nearly the whole of the loss falls undivided.  The same writers have also maintained, that the profit is fixed at the rate mentioned, in order to enable the bookseller to sustain losses, unavoidably incurred in the purchase and retail of other books.  This is the weakest of all arguments.  It would be equally just that a merchant should charge an extravagant commission for an undertaking unaccompanied with any risk, in order to repay himself for the losses which his own want of skill might lead to in his other mercantile transactions.

395.  That the profit in retailing books is really too large, is proved by several circumstances:  First, that the same nominal rate of profit has existed in the bookselling trade for a long series of years, notwithstanding the great fluctuations in the rate of profit on capital invested in every other business.  Secondly, that, until very lately, a multitude of booksellers, in all parts of London, were content with a much smaller profit, and were willing to sell for ready money, or at short credit, to persons of undoubted character, at a profit of only ten per cent, and in some instances even at a still smaller percentage, instead of that of twenty-five per cent on the published prices.  Thirdly, that they are unable to maintain this rate of profit except by a combination, the object of which is to put down all competition.

396.  Some time ago a small number of the large London booksellers entered into such a combination.  One of their objects was to prevent any bookseller from selling books for less than ten per cent under the published prices; and in order to enforce this principle, they refuse to sell books, except at the publishing price, to any bookseller who declines signing an agreement to that effect.  By degrees, many were prevailed upon to join this combination; and the effect of the exclusion it inflicted, left the small capitalist no option between signing or having his business destroyed.  Ultimately, nearly the whole trade, comprising about two thousand four hundred persons, have been compelled to sign the agreement.

As might be naturally expected from a compact so injurious to many of the parties to it, disputes have arisen; several booksellers have been placed under the ban of the combination, who allege that they have not violated its rules, and who accuse the opposite party of using spies, etc., to entrap them.(3*)

397.  The origin of this combination has been explained by Mr Pickering, of Chancery Lane, himself a publisher, in a printed statement, entitled, ‘Booksellers’ Monopoly’ and the following list of booksellers, who form the committee for conducting this combination, is copied from that printed at the head of each of the cases published by Mr Pickering: