of 1837 in the speedy passage of a bill to prevent the theft of literary property, and suggesting whether a similar confidence felt by the literary men to-day may not be misplaced. But the reader must be careful not to miss the significance of the record. The very consideration which seems to imply the hopelessness of the cause is indeed the fortress of its strength. Fifty years of steadfast adherence to the demand of their predecessors is a star of the first magnitude in the crown of American men of letters. Their hands, surely, are clean: the robbery of their fellow-writers of other countries is not of their procuring; the incidental robbery of themselves is not by their consent. They have never been remiss in protest against both, but with singular unanimity have borne their testimony for the national honor even against its official custodians, and still the protest goes on. Were this sense of outrage dulled by years, were the voice of the protestant less clear or constant, there would indeed be reason to despair of the result. As it is, Time but the impression stronger makes, Besides the solidarity and the wide-spreading influence of American authors, there are other reasons for thinking that we are not far from a settlement of the question. Within five years, through the agitation of official organizations, the movement for a just law has acquired a momentum which has carried a copyright bill through one house of Congress and past a committee of the other. That it did not wholly succeed was due, not to the will of the House of Representatives, but to an extraordinary abuse of the rules of the House, an event not to be foreseen, nor, if foreseen, prevented. On the eve of the renewal of the struggle, it is well to rehearse briefly the story of the past year the most eventful and successful in the course of the agitation. On more than one occasion when copyright legislation was sought at the hands of Congress, senators replied to the entreaties of the supporters of different bills: "This is a subject remote from our experience. Go home and agree among yourselves upon a copyright law and we will support it." After repeated attempts to make progress along separate lines, this is exactly what the reformers, by weeks of negotiation in committees, succeeded in doing. The result was of course a compromise measure, not wholly acceptable to most but cordially supported by all, the greatest sacrifices being made by the authors, most of whom would prefer a pure and simple copyright, free from conditions. This bill Mr. Jonathan Chace had the honor to introduce in the Senate, Mr. W. C. P. Breckinridge in the House of Representatives. To the support of the measure the joint committees of the American [Authors'] Copyright League and the American Publishers' Copy. right League gave unremitting and exhausting efforts, assisted by official representatives of the printers' unions. The bill was successfully urged before committees of each house, and the personal solicitation of members was patient and thorough. Realizing that the chief point was to secure the attention of legislators, a series of readings by prominent American authors was given at Washington in April last, being the third series organized by the Authors' League in aid of the cause. On the 9th of May, after a considerable debate, Mr. Chace succeeded in obtaining in the Senate a vote on the bill, which was as follows: yeas 34, nays 10. Much has been said, and justly, about the supineness of our lawmakers on this subject, but it must be remembered that no copyright bill has ever been rejected by them-in fact, if we mistake not, this was the first direct vote upon the merits of an international copyright bill ever taken in the American Congress. The names of the senators voting in favor of the bill deserve to be recorded. They were: The preponderance of the affirmative vote greatly inspirited the friends of the measure and their efforts were redoubled among the Representatives. Many measures -chiefly the Mills tariff bill-combined to postpone the consideration of the bill, and it was not till the 6th of February that an opportunity offered to call it up. It was agreed that on this day a vote should be taken on the motion to suspend the rules and fix a day for its final consideration. It was feared by the opponents of the bill (whom a careful canvass of the House showed to be largely in the minority) that an effort would be made to suspend the rules and pass the bill without debate. This programme, however, was never entertained by the friends of the bill; and assurance to that effect being given, a number of its opponents agreed to vote for its consideration. It was now thought beyond question that the motion would prevail by the required two-thirds, and that with the advantage of the open debate the bill could be passed a few days later by a majority vote. But a new kind of opposition now presented itself-the opposition of the filibuster. This weapon, heretofore employed only to protest against the political oppression of majorities, was now used to postpone the redress of a form of oppression the most indefensible. Against the will of the House, which was at the mercy of one member, Mr. Lewis E. Payson of Illinois, the bill could not be reached, and thus died without a vote. It has been urged in defense of the action of Judge Payson, that his opposition was directed against other measures, which it was feared might be considered on that day. It is to be hoped that this is the fact. If so, there will be abundant opportunity to demonstrate it at the coming session. For, that the contest will be continued on the part of those who advocate a just and honorable national policy is a matter of course. The traditions of the Senate may be depended upon for the passage of the bill by that body; and so intelligent have Representatives become, that, in our opinion, nothing but filibustering can defeat the bill in the next Congress, as certainly nothing else could have defeated it in the last. It is only a question of time when the judgment of legislators will be convinced to the point of making odious any attempt to defeat the will of Congress by that unfair and un-American device. What a series of paradoxes does the copyright question reveal! Intensely "American" country papers countenancing the defeat of the will of the majority of the House for the privilege of spreading without compensation English sentiments and opinions! A government based on the equality of all men before the law invoked to defend the robbery of foreigners! Members of Congress, sworn to defend the Constitution, virtually nullifying the clause providing for the encouragement of literature and the fine arts! And, chief of all, the works of foreign authors considered so valuable to the country, not that they must be paid for, but — that they must be stolen ! The history of the American agitation for international copyright is, in the words of Æneas to Dido, "a long and intricate tale of wrong," and the next Congress owes it to itself and the country to bring the disgraceful record to an honorable conclusion. OPEN LETTERS. International Copyright: a Literary Montezuma. AR away in the barren and sunlit land of New FAR Mexico, and on that ancient and wonderful road the Santa Fe trail, stands the old Pecos church. Every morning, just as the king of day sends forth the rays which announce his coming, the poor, patient priest leaves his half-ruined quarters and, with a pathetic faith, undaunted even by protracted and crushing disappointment, looks to the east, as have his predecessors for ages, for the coming of Montezuma, the Great Deliverer, the beneficent father of his people. Just so in these times of what Mr. Lowell calls "reckless and swaggering prosperity" do certain sanguine and optimistic souls watch for the dole of a small measure of justice to the literary brotherhood. Does any one suppose that this earnest desire, this eager anticipation, are recent things? On the contrary, I read on the stained and faded editorial page, now before me, of the “Knickerbocker Magazine" for February, 1837,-more than fifty-two years ago,― as follows: INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.-The advocates of this measure, we are glad to see, have begun to bestir themselves, not only with the political laity, but with the delegated priesthood of Congress. This is well. We look now to behold the steady advancement and profitable discussion of the matter. There are stores of argument in reserve that can be produced with wonderful effect in disquisitions on the question. Fifty-two years of disappointment! In that halfcentury every material interest in this country has been mightily fostered and developed; a great war has been fought; the threatened disruption of the Union has been averted; slavery is dead- and international copyright, the literary Montezuma, still cometh not. The poor watchers were hopeful in 1837; they are hopeful in 1889; how will it be in 1937? A. A. Hayes. Free Kindergartens in New York. ONE of the peculiarities of the philanthropy of the present time is the emphasis it gives to the value of preventive work. Never before has so much attention been given to childhood or so much importance been attached to the formative period of life. VOL. XXXIX.— 23. Statistics show that the country is producing more ones, than it produced twenty-five years ago, and the criminals in proportion to the population, and younger cause of this alarming state of things is found to be in the neglect of childhood. It is seen that the tendencies of infancy, whether for good or for evil, crystallize into the character of maturity, and the philanthropist, weary of fruitless efforts at reforming, is seeking for means of forming wisely and well. The home is the proper place for beginning, but in many cases there are practical difficulties in the way, mission kindergarten, which, whether regarded from and thoughtful people are turning with hope to the the standpoint of the educator, the social reformer, or the Christian teacher, contains possibilities of prevenable agency. tion and upbuilding not to be found in any other avail It is adapted to children of three years of age, thus meeting the demand that in some way the years below school age shall be utilized for the highest educational purposes. The training of the kindergarten includes the whole child. For his hands there is delightful occupation, through which he learns to love work and to respect himself as a producer of that which is useful and beautiful; there is well-directed activity for the busy brain; and, above all, the higher faculties of love, joy, sympathy, and reverence are brought into constant and healthy exercise. During the last decade interest in the mission kindergarten has been growing, until there is now in the country scarcely a city that has not one or more such institutions. More than ten years ago Mrs. Quincy Shaw began the work in Boston by establishing in the worst quarters of the city about twenty kindergartens, into which the children of the lowest classes were gathered. Well-trained teachers were employed, and the whole enterprise was under the wise and efficient superintendence of two kindergartners. It is the testimony of the police that the moral aspect of whole neighborhoods has been improved by these institutions. That the system is believed to have a high educational value is proved by the fact that after so thorough a trial it was last year adopted as a part of the publicschool system of that city. In Philadelphia, a few years since, a similar movement was started as a result of the thorough work of the Society for the Organization of Charity. It was found that, in the homes and haunts of the pauper and criminal classes, children were growing up in appalling conditions of ignorance, idleness, and vice. As it was felt that the only radical remedy for existing evils and the only hope for the future lay in vigorous preventive work, kindergartens were established in every ward of the city, and the satisfaction they gave led to their adoption as a sub-primary department of the public schools. In San Francisco, mission kindergartens, established as an offset to the hoodlumism which threatened the safety of society, are now the most popular of all the philanthropies. In Chicago, St. Paul, Cincinnati, and Brooklyn there are efficient associations of this kind, and in St. Louis the kindergarten has for several years been a part of the school system. New York has many of these missions; but with a tenement-house population of 1,100,000, of whom more than 142,000 are under five years of age, and with a constant influx of the lowest class of foreigners, it is felt that this is a time of emergency to meet which extraordinary efforts are necessary, and a movement has been started looking to the establishment of kindergartens throughout the city. Angeline Brooks. "The Use of Oil to Still the Waves." READERS of the article under the above title in this magazine for March, and of the Open Letter on the same subject in the August number, will be interested in the following extract from the log of the steamship Chatta hoochee, from Savannah to New York, April 7, 1889: At 5 A. M. gale (from northeast) burst upon us with velocity of eighty miles per hour- the sea and wind something terrible; at six a sea came over the bows. end on, doing considerable damage, knocking in pilot-house windows and flooding same; ten to twelve began to board us on port-quarter, knocking in saloon and flooding same; at eleven I had oil bags put in port and starboard waterclosets forward, and port one aft. When they were in working order I reluctantly stopped the engines, and, to my heartfelt desire, the ship fell off to southeast by south and took a position of her own, and was as comfortable as could be reasonably expected, shipping little or no water to speak of, so that the crew could work with the utmost safety in repairing damages. This all done in the middle of one of the worst gales I ever encountered in thirty-three years' experience at sea. Every ship should have oil for an emergency. It is all it is recommended to be. The action of oil upon the water is upon the crest of the wave: the oil forming a slick upon the surface breaks the crest, in which is all the danger. It has no effect upon the great undulating motion of the ocean during a gale. The quantity used in this case was about forty-five gallons in eleven hours; it took about five gallons to start each bag, and about eight quarts per hour to feed the three bags. From 5 A. M. to noon ship drifted about three miles per hour to the southeast; from noon to II P. M. three per hour to south. Ship's position at noon, by d. reckoning, latitude 36° 38', longitude 74° 41'. At 8 P. M. gale began to moderate. Oil used, five gallons raw linseed oil, ten gallons lard, thirty gallons cotton-seed. Used separately - no mixture. [A similar instance is recorded in the case of the Norwegian bark Alsylvia, from Perth Amboy, Sep tember 3, 1889, with a cargo of 5300 barrels of paraffine oil for Copenhagen, which encountered a hurricane in latitude 70°, longitude 38°. The account of her rescue by the Clyde steamer Yemassee off the Delaware Breakwater, given in the "New York Times" of September 14, contains this statement, attributed to Captain McKee of the latter vessel: The Yemassee sped to the assistance of the Alsylvia, and then lay to within about one hundred feet of her. Every time the bark made a plunge several barrels of oil were shot out of her hatchways. Oil was oozing all over the vessel, and had covered the surface of the water for quite a distance around. This waste of oil had proved the salvation of the bark's captain and crew. The water if not quiet around was free from breakers, and the boats rode the waves with ease. Had it not been for the oil, ship and boats would have been smashed long before help arrived. As it was, the bulwarks were breaking up. EDITOR.] A Speech of Lincoln's. THE closing paragraphs of the biography of Abraham Lincoln in the August number of THE CENTURY MAGAZINE recall a memorable scene at the White House, which is now given to the public and makes a suitable appendix to the record of “Lincoln and the Churches." It occurred after an anniversary of the United States Christian Commission, which was held at the Capitol in the hall of the House of Representatives, some time in the winter of 1863, in the presence of a great assembly, in which the President was a silent and deeply interested auditor. With characteristic modesty he declined a seat upon the platform, and the only public demonstration that he made during the evening was by a request, penciled on a slip of paper and handed to the presiding officer, that Mr. Philip Phillips, who was one of the sweet singers of the wartime, would sing the hymn entitled "Your Mission," which was a favorite of the President. This request was announced and the piece was sung with wonderful effect. After the anniversary, arrangements were made for a private reception of the delegates by Mr. Lincoln at the White House the next morning, with the distinct understanding that nothing that took place should be made public. This put all persons at their ease and the promise of privacy was well kept. It was a time of great anxiety and of long suspense; one of those critical periods when decisive battles were expected, and when news from the front was scanty, and slow in coming. At the appointed hour the delegates were ushered into the President's office. Soon afterwards Mr. Lincoln came in slowly and looking careworn, sad, and anxious. In brief remarks by men representing the various work of the Christian Commission, he was told that we had no requests to make, no favors to ask, no offices to seek; that we were there only to assure him of our profoundest respect, sympathy, and loyalty to the Government and to himself as its head, and of our intention to carry on the philanthropic and spiritual ministrations of the Commission in the army and navy, with the continued sanction and help of himself and of the military and naval authorities. It was also said that "behind all the political and patriotic forces of the Union there was a vast Christian constituency in the homes and churches of loyal States which would never fail him with their prayers and consecration to the cause for which the Government was contending against armed rebellion in the field of war, and against disloyal opposition in the North.” To these sentiments and assurances Mr. Lincoln listened with closest attention, and he replied, as my vivid recollection serves me, chiefly in these very words: "I thank you, gentlemen, for this interview. Such visits strengthen me. No man who knows what we know here of the state of things can fail to see that a greater than a human hand is controlling the issues of this war. If our great enemy over there," pointing his finger across the Potomac, “could have had his way, he would have had victory long ago. But the Almighty has not thought as he thought. If I could have had my way, I would have had victory long ago. But it is evident that the Almighty has not thought as I thought. I know not how, nor when, nor by whom it shall be accomplished, but I have a firm, unshaken faith that in the end success will crown our arms, and that the Union of these States will be restored and maintained." Then, alluding with kindly appreciation to the remarks of one of the speakers respecting the loyalty of the Christian constituency in the churches of the land, he said: "Whatever differences of opinion may exist concerning the management of the war, it is manifest that the Government must be sustained by the people of the loyal States. For example," said he, with a humorous smile and a twinkle of the eyes that lighted up his grave face for the moment, "if a man wishes to be elected President of the United States, he must sustain the Government in prosecuting this war to a successful end, because if it should not be victorious there will be no Union for him to preside over ! " Adding a little in this strain and closing with renewed expressions of his gratification in the interview, and of his warm approval of the beneficent work of the Commission, the President greeted each delegate with a hearty handshake and a pleasant parting word. William J. R. Taylor. NEWARK, N. J. "Governor Seymour during the Draft Riots." I WAS one of the "multitude," described by Mr. Wheeler in your July number, who listened to Governor Seymour's address on July 14, 1863. During most of the time of the draft riots the neighborhood of the “Tribune" office was occupied by a turbulent crowd, and an attack on the building was only prevented by the preparations believed to have been made to defend it. If not a crowd of actual rioters, it was distinctly composed of sympathizers, and very many of them were of just the class who were elsewhere active participants in the riot. It was such a crowd, and not "a multitude of persons naturally attracted to the City Hal! by the news that the governor of the State, whose arrival was anxiously expected, had actually come." The whole tenor of his speech was distinctly, and in his usual adroit manner, meant for just such a class, and not for interested but peaceable citizens, and this the extracts given in the Lincoln history show. I was standing with a friend looking on from the outside of the crowd while it was in the square in front of the "Tribune" building when a sudden movement was begun towards the City Hall. I followed, or rather anticipated, the movement as I saw it begin, and when I found it was to be addressed by some one I moved up to within hearing distance, and listened to the speech. That it was an apology for the rioters, who were told that they were unjustly dealt with by the Government, and that if they would abstain from violence the draft would be stopped through the measures that he had taken, was the meaning given to it by the multitude, and no other meaning was thought of then, and for some time afterwards, by any one. The governor had only recently made his great Fourth of July speech in the city when he had arraigned the Administration in the most violent manner, exactly in unison with his speech to the incipient rioters. Miln P. Dayton. NEW YORK CITY. The Methodist Episcopal Church South. IN the August CENTURY the authors of the Lincoln history say, "The Methodist Church in the South had separated from their brethren in the North fifteen years before the war on the question of slavery, and a portion of their clergy and laity when the war broke out naturally engaged in it with their accustomed zeal; but they were by no means unanimous, even within the seceding States, and the organization was virtually wrecked by the war." Church South, with over 400,000 members, impoverThe close of the war found the Methodist Episcopal ished and more or less discouraged; but it was not "wrecked" in any sense that was not true of other churches in the South, and of the whole people. Nor did any part of the Southern people rally more quickly from this fearful blow. The 400,000 with whom this church started in 1866 became 1,101,465 in 1887, and its “organization" was never in more excellent working order than it is to-day. It is one of the great churches of our nation, not more than three or four others outranking it in any element of strength. At the breaking out of the war the individual members of this church were for or against secession according to their individual ways of looking at things. But the church as such made no deliverance upon the subject, considering it to be its mission to preach the gospel to secessionist and unionist alike, and not to promote any special ideas of government. DALLAS, TEXAS. Erratum. John K. Allen. IN the July number of THE CENTURY, in the article "Gentile da Fabriano," an error occurs in the sentence beginning on the 27th line of the second column of page 450, "He was the contemporary," etc. The clause, "not far from the same time as Gentile," should come in after the first "and died" instead of after the second, which would make the sentence read thus: "He was the contemporary of the brothers Van Eyck, the elder of whom, Hubert, was born about 1366, and died not far from the same time as Gentile, in 1426, while John was twenty or thirty years younger, and died probably in 1446." So far as the historical facts go, the article contains the material for the correction of the error. The King's Daughter. BRIC-À-BRAC. (ON FINDING BARNUM IN FULL BLAZE BEFORE HIS DOOR.) My Edmund, lately listening to the tone Praise I gave only to the tuneful Nine, And took no heed of other Pens than thine. But, much it is that thus in soft retreat, But all of Afric's burning heart revealed; Here under thine own vine and fig tree's shade, Indeed, when I reflect on all thou hast, In mood more generous it is joy to know One further thought bids all such baseness flee: English as spoke by thy old "Buccaneer "; THE DE VINNE PRESS, NEW YORK. Charles Henry Webb. |