New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-11-11

THE HOUSE OF MURRAY-sIR WILLIAM SMITH
THE QUARTERLY AND
THE EDINBURGH,

English publishing trade, has long since settled
down into safe and no doubt lucrative husi
ness. IL there be something regal and thers
fore incongruous In the style and title give -
the Murrays 1t Is derived from their own
annals 1t was their historiograpber DIR
Smiles, who called his book the Memoir ana
Correspondence of John Murray Ohe Secondy"
and who wrote two entertaining volumes On
the Origin and Progress OF the House.: n
book wherein was writ large much other his.
tory than that Of the House Moores life ~
Byron" had long before given us the best OF Il
in far less conventional form; or more ac-
curately speaking, the Letters and Journal of
Byron" embodied and embedded In Moore's
rather dreary and very long-winded prose had
given US the best Other iuminative pages are
to be found in Crokers Memoirs" itself n
book which has never had half the popularity
or fame it deserves. SO lasting is the prejudice
which one gttering and none too scrupulous
writer like Macaulay can mplant in the public
breast against a rival whom he hated John
Murray the Second found his account IN
dazzling the author with his free-handed Offers
Of thousands Of guineas 1t was day when
the publishers name would Of itself sell a book.
SO it does now, but by very different process.
and by methods more strictly businesslike IL
no. more profitable brilliant
Now Mr.. Murray publishes biographies die.
tionares books of history, Of travel and hand
books of travel; above all. educational books.
The thirst of the day is for useful knowledge.
and 1t can be slaked at the counter In Abe
marle-st. 1t is largely from books Of this
kind. and more especially from Dictionaries
handbooks and schoolbooks that the profits Of
publishing now accrue. Any publisher will tell
you that series of good textbooks is a
gold mine. What kind OF mine it may DO
to the author Of them I know not; unless the
author have attained, which such authors rarely
do a commanding position like that Of the
late Sir William Smith He and the Murrays
together brought this kind Of industry to its
height. There was, in effect, though presume
not in law, nor from a purely business point
Of view, a partnership between the two.
Sir Williams death is a real loss to his pub
Usher; it is also, though perhaps to less
extent, 10 the public 1t may very probably
be a loss to readers of THE Quarterly Review"
Of which for twenty-sx years he had been
editor. He was a very good editor. 1t il
the fashion in these days to scott at periodicals
which appear but once a quarter. The world.
say the more impatient, will not wait for them.
Still, the world does watt THE Quartery's
and THE Edinburgh" continue to appear and
the proof that the world does wait and does
read is that the daily papers themselves are
apt to devote a leader to each; sometimes
political, sometimes literary, sometimes both.
If the monthly reviews ever secure the sans
degree Of attention it is for signed article
The papers in the two older reviews are. Of
course never signed; such weight as they have
is due to their intrinsic merit, and to the
thority of the review itself. "rhe Quarterly
kept to its old traditions; it was Tory as long as
there any very Tories; it then became. and
has since remained, Conservative. The anony-
nous form was preserved with strctness; the
editor was as anonymous as the contributors. Il
is only upon his death that the veil is lifted, and
that Sir William Smiths name is mentioned in
the periodical he controlled. There was ne
secret; everybody knew who cared to know, but
it never announced officially. Now trib-
ute is paid him, and there are interesting re.
marks upon the function of editorship. Here ID
one:
We believe that Sir William Smith. during
his long term OF edtorship had no serious diff.
ference with any contributor He not an
editor in name only, but in every number he
had to curtail. to alter to harmonic. and to
amend. often 10 a considerable extent: yet his
courtesy, his frmness, his straightforwardness,
and his literary experience enabled him to do
this in a manner which almost invariably
of the writers themselves.
Very different this from the wrangng which
went on in the rival Edinburgh" as revealed
in the Macvey-Napier correspondence. Napier.
too, a good editor, but he had a team to
drive which included Brougham Macaulay and
other intractable persons who tasked his
patience and tried his temper. and reviled each
other in letters to Napier. There was jealousy,
nlordi pa naf
William Smith really escaped all trials of this
kind. he was both judicous and lucky. He
made the Quarterly readable too. 1t has long
had a vivacity which has long been wanting to
it's chief competitor: which, however. has some-
times deviated into sprightliness. One thing
Sir William understood which Mr.. Henry Reeve
never mastered the art of titles. Hardly any
where is II more useful than in preparing
list Of the contents of a review or magazine.
The casual reader-and most readers OF re-
views are casual-runs down the list and,
fear sometimes decides then and there on the
merits of the bill of fare from the names or the
dishes: not having the names of the authors
of the dishes to bias his judgment. Mr.
Knowles much prefers that the judgment should
be biased in that way: and no doubt 1t is, and
no doubt he also from his own point Of view,
is right
There are commonly more good articles than
one in each of the two quarteres But the
daily papers and the public are apt to pick out
either the most timely or-if such word may
be used in connection with such respectable
pubcations-the most sensational The po-
litical article in THE Quarterly" has supplied
mild sensation this month"; and the chief Con-
servatve organ in the London daily press has
nibbled at it. The novelty Is TO be found IN
the suggestion that the Queen should now de
what George Third did in 1888. dissolve Paria'
ment of her own motion. The people were m
1888 with the House of Lords and against mo
House Of Commons; as the election proved.
The Unionists believe that similar state OK
things exists now. Their theory is In part thst
which Lord Salisbury expressed at Preston last
week However weak the House OF Lorus
NAV be. il Is infinitely more strong than Mr..
ci,de,one 81 long as IL has England at Us