, 1869-02-21

Ar. Arnold J. Cooley, m English a7thor,
writes thus. 10 tie {London) Atttneu1a and
shows how new books a.a nsdc in London.
We have no. yet heard Of American publish
rs 1rsorting 10 tl1z method OF stocking the
literary market, and We doubt If therc Is one
Of any standing who would bc guilty Of 30
dishones. trick III. Cooley Gays:
On reaching p. 100 Of this Journal, uS sur
prskc was great at seeing two works In your
List Of New Books" fA1he7ed on nc. Now,
as have published 10 xae1s .eork taas se1sot,
in which my pame had becnXaccidentally in.
| Berled for that Of somc other suthor. euh-
saqueut written and personal eommunca-
| tlons which received caused nc, however,
| to change my opinion, and to look seriously
t st tie matter. On tho 11th inst, wrote =
| Letter Of inquiry to The publisher. with re-
ward nc copies Of the works. In due course
came the following, but no books:
"DrAn ~ sIa: N reply 70 }oar .tssr !e4t r
ssiTs tss1. sez % ~ tlas re ~ - esot' =
rol Il, eoamepees :. p. 3ss"i (aaa ends AZ =:
so4.) No = scfsdoa =. seen Esds n tnstt1t"
bio, and might also: be 1usttaable were II
\ true, and were the puLliaher the only party
| concerned, and the author ard purchaser no~
where and unInterestcd IN the ulatter. But
Whist are the fActs: The two works re-
ferzed to ere not published rs two Volumes
| OF the same work. but essentially - new
| works have i" superior titles totally diacr-
cnt and distinct lfom the title Of the ortgt-
mi work and these new lilies, and nothing
else, arc elArlnRly displayed In gold letters
on their coycrs 70 attract the attention oi
the nuwuy. md TO lead them 70 suppose
that they are new books which have been
only recently written by thels author
whereas they Art merely AttPrint Ind led
a careless teprini-ok N Older work, mud
| CT utAio rot only the clerseal aAd typosr4phi
cal cs1on OF the 0 lelnal wIsk, but also su-t
| an amount OF lreah uuGa a. 2uy perxun c IN
vernans with The mechanical department o
authorship would know must creep into {
reprint of 4 work loaded with figures and
data, aud OF which the proof:sheets had mol
,seu carefully read ty the author, As &c
te1t,"lt Is 4 graiultous statement Which, Il
true, would not alter the question but ths
contrary u the casc, though perhaps h soult
cNe1 Il hA1 not been Wiliuiiy deoe. EFeu
The " "preiAca" Of one Of these books that
apparently intended TO be the moro attrAc
original work. With omissions, and witt
words .urs=ptitiou,ly Inserted ore1 my aig
nature, Of which could not possibly bt
the aathor. Fortunately, the Wiseacre
whose Interpolation refers to the pres
cnt time, forgot TO alter the original DIST
! Ol t0r pItl1ccr WHICH kPpcAFs 0et1" -. l
Il true that on cxamlulng the body Of thes
works, the seuaihle reade. will perceive ths
they are mere reprints but =, this will gen
crally only happen df:<r ther purchas<
! tnowltdSo Of the deception Wll cons to
1stc.
In reference 10 the work from nh!eh tb
I pretended cew oncA referred 10 Aaoyo 4!
borrowed, ! may remark that, though wrl
. ten only a few years slnee, 1t would, OWN
, 10 tho progress OF discovery and reacasch ar
! the constant soclAl changes sincc that tim
Z now require extsn4irc alterations and adj
. tons. Without Ill thh. and very carcf
4 reading OF the 'psoo( sltets," l should d
. thlhk Vi publishing new edition.