MR. HUNT TO M. N.

"I see we must speak by the card when we write to Miss Wont-understand.

"This then, is what I wished to say in my last clear and felicitous

epistle.

"Of course your book cannot be published till the articles I propose

to print in the A. M. have appeared there. This is what I meant by

postponing the issue of the volume. I wished to say that, B. & H.

would print your book, certainly, but the time when must at present

be unsettled for the reason above given. I have read the articles now

and like them hugely. They are capital stuff for a book, full of all

readable qualities....

"I will not eat you if you call in here when you come to town, but you

must have your own way."

All the confidence, and all the respect for the house of Brummell &

Hunt, which these letters indicate, I not only admit, but I introduced

my case by avowing that I thought them the head and front of all

publishing houses.

With regard to the exemption of fifteen hundred as the first edition of

"City Lights," Mr. Parry said that the word edition meant nothing as

to number. It meant simply a single issue. In reply to a question, he

said he did not know what was the usage of publishers in this regard.

They had sometimes exempted as many as two thousand, and had known

cases in which five thousand had been exempted, and, I understood

him to say, had done it themselves. One thousand, he said, was the

usual number. Being asked what would be his own understanding of an

edition, if nothing were specified, he said he would frankly admit that

he should suppose it meant one thousand; that when any larger number

than a thousand was exempted, it was their custom always to specify

the number; that he did not know why it was not done now, and presumed

this was the only time they had exempted more than a thousand without

specifying the number. The reason of this large exemption was that

there was so much risk in publishing a new book, and that this book was

published in a style that was unusually expensive. It cost a great deal

more than any other on their list; that there was no prescribed usage

in such matters, and they could have exempted more, but had no desire

to do so. I had said that if it were to cost more, they should have

told me.[11] They had letters of mine showing that I did know it cost

more, but that I was so desirous to have it printed in this way, that,

in my own language, which Mr. Markman read and Mr. Hunt repeated with

an air which showed that whatever literature had gained, the stage lost

its chief ornament when Mr. Hunt went into the book trade, "I went

down on my knees to you to have it like Sir Thomas Browne."

In my original statement I had said, "When the first book was to be

published, Mr. Hunt asked me what style I should like, and suggested

that of the 'City Curate.' I preferred 'Sir Thomas Browne.' He made no

objection, nor even hinted that it was more expensive than the other.

[Then came the quotations.] "I do not recollect that anything was said

about it afterwards. The following books were simply published in

uniform style with the first." This is my recollection of the matter,

which is simple and commonplace enough.

From my letters at the time, however, the firm of Brummell & Hunt infer

a thrilling dramatic scene in which Mr. Hunt was the obdurate autocrat,

or the wise and thrifty guardian, as the case may be, who, like Mrs.

John Gilpin, though on publishing bent, had a frugal mind; but was at

length moved by me,

"Languendo, gemendo

Et genuflectendo,"

to lay aside prudence and launch out into a style of publication

which could be met only by some extraordinary sacrifice on my part, I

professing to be until this late disclosure ignorant both of style and

sacrifice.

I give the correspondence, inserting Mr. Hunt's letters to throw light

on mine--the latter only appearing in Mr. Parry's defense.

Let it be remembered that the book was published September 18, 1762.

A Battle of the Books, recorded by an unknown writer for the use of authors and publishers To the first for doctrine, to the second for reproof, to both for correction and for instruction in righteousness · 第 116 / 129 题