The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-01 00:00:00

SUN,

of 25 per cent., leaving no margin for dead stock, bad
debts, &c. The idea was that the retail booksellers merely
received the books, pasted them over the counter, re-
ceived the money, and that there' the transaction ended.
If such were the fact, 10 or 15 per cent. allowance or
discount would be a fair remuneration. He contended
that the association had been defeated by immoral and
unjust conduct, under the guise of a patriotism and zeal
for the public interest. It was analogous to the case of
the celebrated highwayman, who
pillaged one set of
persons for the benefit of another class. This system
had obtained from the time of Dick Turpin down to the
Religious Tract Society.—(Great laughter.) It seemed
to him to be an impossibility to carry on another associa-
tion on the same principles. They must consider the
multiform allowance now made to schools, clergymen, '
and it would be for any committee to determine whether
they could increase their profits by curtailing credit—
(Hear)—doing without stock—(Laughter)—and with-
drawing the allowances which they had made heretofore.
Mr. BELL seconded the resolution.
Mr. GLADDING thought the committee had acted most
honourably in all their transactions. He wished they
had made more known the case they had to deal with
in respect to Mr. Chapman, who had never made his
case known to the public.
Mr. J. CLIAPMAN said he had great pleasure in ac-
ceding to the motion which had been made. He con-
sidered that the committee had acted with vigour, and
moat conscientiously; and it wits not that be differed
-from them as to their objects or motivess bat he differed
from them on principle. In his own case he had given
the-whole details in the Westminster Review. As an im-
porter of American books, he had considered that the
sale had been much increased by the retail prices hav-
ing been much redpced. The speaker then entered into
various details connected with the trade, and he was
called to order by
Mr. TRELAWNY SAUNDERS, Who thought that the
speeches should be strictly limited to the resolution
before them.
Mr. BIGG claimed a patient hearing for Mr. Chap-
man, as be was their opponent.
Mr. CHAPMAN merely wished to call attention to the
idea of the re-forming this associaton.
Mr. Baca said that the question of the dissolution of
this association, or of not dissolving it, would come be-
fore the meeting, and he hoped Mr. Chapman would
confine himself to explanation.
After a few words from Mr. Maberley and the Chair-
Man, the resolution was carried unanimously.
Mr. SEELEY said that the committee had devolved
upon him the duty of returning thanks; but it was im-
possible for him not to offer some observations on the
events which had occurred in the last month or two. He
thanked the meeting cordially for the approbation which
they were pleased to convey on their conduct, trd. he
confessed he roes to address them with some degree of
feeling mixed. with shame and indignation.' Was it pos-
sible to disassociate theses feelings in the present instance?
Let the meeting observe that the committee was on-
trusted with the conduct of a great cause, which they
had brought .not to a successful issue, but to a failure!
And how did the committee feel? They felt more than
ever convinced of the• justice of the miss! They were
also thoroughly convinced, every. member , the
committee, - that it was impossible to have gone
before men; of higher honour or intellects than
the arbiters! Then how came it, it might be asked,
that with a good cause acid excellent. judges this 'cause
should fail? He would tell them the only -cause
of failurewas this, that while the committee intended a
conferene-it eurned.out to be something different, He
had expected tbat they would be placed before some two
of three or fuor persons to confer and to consider the
matter in a private rQQIII, in order to-sift the matter in
dispute; but probably.it arose from the judicial habits
of dati Lerd Qhjef Jesticee that they had in lieu of a con-
ference jadicial hearing;ethey were allowed to say
what Iheyettad to say, and thus ended the first day's in-
terview. Op the second day their opponents were
hefted, and the deputation had the reply; but (they had
not the slightest glimpse of what was ,passing in
.the
minds cf the judges. Had they been apprised of this
the committee would haye known better how to deal with
the matter, but thequestion before the arbitrators was
scarcely alluded to, and - the judgment seemed to arise
miler out of reviews in the newspapers. The question
which was put before them was thee whether the fixed
price was a benefit to 'the public as well as the trade. It
was felt that every in-an knew the price of books. Every
men saw in the newspapers the prices, and knew where he
could get the book and the price. This point had, been
scarcely touched upon. He thought the cause of failure
Wes, that instead of a conference the deputation had had
ajiidicial investigation. Again, there was some popular
notioti—some value ,and unjust notion, of what was
called free trade. One observation made by Lord
Campbell, which he read, was tb the effect that the
publishers had no right to dictate any terms to the re-
tail booksellers in reference to how they should dispose
of their works after they were sold to them, as such a
system was a derogation of the rights of the purchaser.
Ha would say this was begging the question—it was
supping over it. The question the committee urged
was, that it was not a matter of bookselling only, and
that while there was a fixed price, nothing was more
common in free-trading than to maintain that fixed price
by, coercive lews.--(Cries of " No," and" Yes.") They
cited the case of many of the principal manufacturers in
Manchester, who actually inflieted a penalty of 204 when
the purchasers of goods were selling at a less price than
they ought. There were similar cases in Darby, and
stationers and others. Those gentlemen who op-
posed- them had -set aside certain' reasons, and among
these reasons was the one that the present practice was
derogatory of the rights of the purchasers, and also
that the effect.of the tickets, or the withdrawing them,
was hurtful CO the :feelings of those who were tons ex-
pelled irons the association. Taeae, then, were given as
the reasons ter the abrogation of the rures and regu-
lations of this 'association. 16 was admitted by the
jedges • themselves that if the regulateins in question
were done away with, with an unlimited competition
the number of retail treek.ellers must be very conside-
rably diminished. That wad what was against the present
practice, teed the system of espionage, as it was termed,
when, in order eto -test a mans probity, they sent a
person, as an. opea customer, so buy a book, to ascertain
whether the tradesman was underselling. The retail
dealers were, he supposed, to transport theinselves to
the antipodes. The committee did feel that they had
worked . hard—that they bad done their, best—to codact
the case of the whole trade before the jatfge,se the
having"tii
uro, as he had before observed, arose from their
had a judicial hearing instead of a conference,
thought the meeting hal better agree with the Coln.
nsittee, and abandon any coercive system: it would be a
wore kracefal compliance with ,the judgment they had
obtained.. But ,the trade would be wanting in justice to
ithelf, if it did not consult upon what should be the
system to be pursued in future.—:(ideer.)
•Mr. BIGG moved the second resolution, " That
the thanks of the retail booksellers be presented
to eiassrs. W. Longman, John Murray, and the
other gentlemen who formed, a deputation to L .rd
Campbell, fur the. zealous and able spanner in
rilitche'on that occasion, they advocated the interests
of the bookselling trade."—(Cheers.) 114 'thought a
special resolation was due to those gentlemen.: He be-
li-ved that the judgment of the authorities to whom the
disputed point. had been referred would have had much
greater weight if the reasons had net been attached to
paidtha judgment,
forea a bunt;t'aln° 4g.which
was
this--that w mete who
had a right to do with it as. be
liked. But there was one fetid fault, that the large
were
could aganthostt dtehneyn that ile; tbelievedhe_.tmh majority rwere
o of
raount.gh,obr
but
pre-
sent time they were influencedandbyby
farlseepriyeeanstaastioton
which had been Made to them,
what were their intereets; but they were. still. a.,ainst
thew, and so. long as the authors, the publisher; and
the retail booksellers constituted a threefold cord:
that
cord could not be broken, Their opponents knew that
us long as these three 'parties held together, their efforts
would,be useless. He would not any they had shows
the innocence of the dove, but they.had roused the
of serpent a publication of Me.
vrserpents.By
Parker's, it .appeared that out of 100. authors, 56
bad openly. avowed that in giving their opinion
they. were solely guided by the consideration of
their own. interest. In other words. these gentlemen
thought • that if they reduced -the allowances, it would
benefit them. He contended that the •attempt to. alter
the present state of things would tend to this—that the
retail booksellers would not subscribe as they , had done
hitherto, and that the utidersellers would be anxiousfor
the renewal of this associatioc.
Mr. EnTriGliaat WILSON seconded the resolution, and
__in warm terms expressed his regret that the association
wets about to be dissolved.

Mr. DALTON having briefly addressed the meeting,
Mr. LONG3LiN sail it was a great cousulation to find
that the etEßts of the committee were appreciated.
' Resolution carried unanimously,
Mr. :CURE; a long speech, proposed the nex
rk4intion, " That the assouistion tie forthwith dis,