The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-08-11
PLAGIARISM officially con-

The thing that hath been, it is that
which shall be; and that which is done
is that which shall be done; and there is
no new thing under the SUM- These words
are commonly attributed TO Solomon, as
the putative author Of the book of Eccle-
~siastes, but there is not a particle Of ex-
ternal evidence OF the fact and no internal
evidence. except the ostentatious use of his
name, which learned critics have regard
ed as a trick by the real author. supposed
TO have lived long after Solomon, to give
force and emphasis to his thoughts by at
tributing them to the wise man Of old.
There is strong reason for believing that
Solomon never heard of the book of Ec-
clesiastes. though. barring it's tone of Gym
iclsm, at times approaching p~essimism.
he need not have been ashamed to father
it's wisdom.
The closing words of the verse above
quoted are manifostly truer now than they
were when written. If there was no new
thing under the sun two or three thousand
years ago, how much less so now. when
nan and woman have been thinking the
same old thoughts, having the same old
experiences ara living the same old lives
that much longer. The thought has an
applica ton in literature. Every now and
then some noted author is accused of
Plagiarism because ne has expressed a
thought resembling in substance or form
the previous expression of some other au-
thor. Now, everybody knows that DELHI
crate plagiarism is a not thing,
but no doubt unconscious plagiarism is
much more common, and that kind of imi-
tation or repetition should not be char
acterized by the odious term that belongs
TO the real osfense. Considering the null
tiplicity of utterances on all kinds of top
les, the infinite variety of thoughts that
have been put forth by men OF genius in
all ages of the world, the wonder is that
any person can write anything new or
original nowadays. Yet men are doing it
all the time. The gold that is mined now
adays is just as valuable as that which
was mined in Solomon's time or before.
The pearls that are found in the waters
Of Wisconsin or Indiana are as precious.
weight for weight, as the one that Cleo
patra swallowed. if that somewhat apoc-
ryphal story is true. Nuggets of gold
found nowadays are not barred from mint
age because they resemble the nuggets
found when the world was young. So it
must happen that authors Of the present
time will often present thoughts resembling
in substance or form What has been writ
ten before. and do it unconsciously and in
nocentIy. This is not plagiarism. If the
thought is given a new application it is
practically a new thought. A kaleidoscope
contains only a few bits of colored glass,
bright beads, etc. but turning it produces
an infinite variety of combinations with
perhaps never an exact repetition of any
che. A new turn makes a new thought.
An author who has been an omnivorous
reader and who has a retentive memory is
pretty sure unccnsciously to appropriate
and assimilate much that he has read.
but if it passes through his own brain
he has a right to do that. The food that
a man digests and assimilates becomes a
part Of himself. About the last man in the
world one would think of charging with
Plagiarism is the historian Macaulay. yet
the charge has recently been brought
against him. Some person has found
among Walpole's letters this paragraph:
'The next Augustin age will dawn on the
other side of the Atlantic. There will be
a T~hucydides at Boston. a Xenophon at
New York, and in time a Virgil at Next
CO and a Horace at Peru. At last some
curious traveller from Lima will visit Eng
land and give a description of the ruins
at st. Pauls like the editions OF Baalbec
and Palmyra" This does suggest Ma
caulay's famous passage when some trav-
eier from New Zealand shall, in the midst
of a vast solitude. take his stand on a
broken arch OF London bridge TO sketch the
ruins of St. Paurs.' but it is rather a remote
suggestion. Macaulay's language is en-
tirely different from walpole's. and the
whole figure is SO much more effectively
used as to make il entirely new. Macaulay
was a great leader and had a marvellous
emo 1t is possible the passage In
Walpole may have made an impression
and left a sort of residuum in his mind
that came up when he wanted a figure.
but it is just rs probable that he never
read Wslpole's passage at all. Macaulay
/ would have scorned. to use a secondhand
/ figure or illustration knowingly. With his
| splendid intellect and supreme mastery of
| style he did not need TO borrow from any
= Indy much less to steal Finally. when