The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-01-03

gins to look like the Leopold heirs are
going to have an old-fashioned Will
fight" have disappeared from the col
uinns of the press.
| Then we can so on to other errors
These kind is constant affront &c
| the eye and the car. So is different
than" There is plenty of mission
airy work for the Industrious grammar
sharp TO do in the newspapers and out
of them. and we always like TO see
him at it.
BUYING SHORT STORIES NY THE
LABEL.
INC editor OF the magazine that
bought out Tom Lawson, John
o'Hara Cosgrave. raises the old qucs-
ton as to whether or not manuscripts
are bought on the reputation of the
author. and settles it with /. thundep-
ling negative. Most editors, says Mr..
Cosgrave, in a Sunday newspaper ar
ticie, Judge manuscripts exclusively
on their merits 81 think" says he.
i that man who cannot view manu-
script in this light is unfit to sit in an
editorial chair II should be said
that the idea that editors and publish
!. Iers bought from the label grew up very
naturally among the populace. Per-
haps 1t was some suddenly successful
author working off his old unsold man
uscripts. Perhaps 1t was a one-book
or one-story man. houndering vainly
with waste words or barren ideas. But
at any rate SO much poor stuff has
been published. so much that is weak,
boring and atrocious, that no explana-
ton of it seemed possible except in
the well-known and thoroughly adver-
disable names that went with It,
Mr.. Cosgrave's contrary statement is,
of course. entirely acceptable. We
must decline to acknowledge. however,
the virtue which he seems to consider
i. as attached to this editorial position.
. since the whole thing is frankly only
e a matter of business. On what basis
: are manuscripts appraised and Judged !.
+ None other, he himself would certainly
i tell us. than. whether or not they will
S be pleasing TO the readers for whom
> they are meant This, of course. is no
: accusation, but merely a statement OF
fact Magazines are not run as elee-
| Inosynary institutions or with any
!. idea of "clcvating literature" but sim
D1v n oI.a y,
tracing readers. They are business
institutions, like department. store,
land they buy as the department. store
buys. The forln-letter which publish
ers use IN returning a profrercd book
attributes the unfavorable decision TO
the fear that the publication of the
manuscript would not prove "a COM
mercal success" The printed rejec-
tion-slip used by magazine editors is
much more vague and guarded. but If
1T went into details at all 1t would
undoubtedly express the opinion that
the story offered would not be generally
pleasing to the magazines readers.
That is the touchstone all along the
line. 1t is a routine matter with all
editors ito return manuscripts which
they personally like very Inuch--con-
siderably more, in fact. than others
Which they accept. They are not in
business to please themselves Their
object in life is to please their public.
again like the department store.
ltsecms reasonable enough that mag
azines should buy by the name. since
great many people, we Imagine, would
rather read the second rate work Of
celebrity than the much better work OF
an unknown. But If. as Mr.. Cosgrave
says. most magazines do not do this.
we must attribute their sclf-rcstraint
not to superior virtue, but simply to
their expert belief that. after all, the
people do not like this policy. and ac-
cordingly that it doesn't pay. They
have reached the conclusion that their
readers prefer tho work to the name.
ihey are stu striving to please That
thcy succeed very we'll, with all their
Iplanning, we cannot think. Few
american institutions are so generally
criticized and belittled as "thc stories
in the magazines
---------::--.-------c-------s~
Mighty Few men of zelaya's sizc ever
kicked up such ruckus. II he were.
bigger than minute. he might be
| troublesome,
| Rarely did Richmond have a quicker