whom he hates is invulnerable, lays in wait for that reason the more vigilantly to wound him in his fortunes. In such cases, when the copyright as by the existing law departs from the author's family at his death, or at the end of twenty-eight years from the first publication of every work, (if he dies before the expiration of that term,) his representatives are deprived of their property just as it would begin to prove a valuable inheritance.

The last descendants of Milton died in poverty. The descendants of Shakspeare are living in poverty, and in the lowest condition of life. Is this just to these individuals? Is it grateful to the memory of those who are the pride and boast of their country? Is it honourable, or becoming, to us as a nation, holding,..the better part of us assuredly, and the majority affecting to hold,.. the names of Shakspeare and Milton in veneration? To have placed the descendants of Shakspeare and Milton in respectability and comfort, .. in that sphere of life where, with a full provision for our natural wants and social enjoyments, free scope is given to the growth of our intellectual and immortal part, simple justice was all that was required;..only that they should have possessed the perpetual copyright of their ancestors'

works,..only that they should not have been deprived of their proper inheritance.

The decision which time pronounces upon the reputation of authors, and upon the permanent rank which they are to hold in the estimation of posterity, is unerring and final. Restore to them that perpetuity in the property of their works, of which the law has deprived them, and the reward of literary labour will ultimately be in just proportion to its deserts.

However slight may be the hope of obtaining any speedy redress, there is some satisfaction in earnestly protesting against this injustice. And believing as I do, that if society continues to improve, no injustice will long be permitted to continue after it has been fairly exposed, and is clearly apprehended, I cannot but believe that a time must come when the rights of literature will be acknowledged, and its wrongs redressed; and that those authors hereafter who shall deserve well of posterity, will have no cause to reproach themselves for having sacrificed the interests of their children when they disregarded the pursuit of fortune for themselves.

COLLOQUY XV.

THE CONCLUSION.

MONTESINOS.

HERE Sir Thomas is the opinion which I have attempted to maintain concerning the progress and tendency of society, placed in a proper position, and inexpugnably entrenched there according to the rules of art, by the ablest of all moral engineers.

SIR THOMAS MORE.

Who may this political Achilles be whom you have called in to your assistance?

MONTESINOS.

Whom Fortune rather has sent to my aid, for my reading has never been in such authors. I have endeavoured always to drink from the spring head, but never ventured out to fish in the deep waters. Thor, himself, when he had hooked the Great Serpent, was unable to draw him up from the abyss.

SIR THOMAS MORE.

The waters in which you have now been ang

ling have been shallow enough, if the pamphlet in your hand is, as it appears to be, a magazine.

66

MONTESINOS.

I

Ego sum is," said Scaliger,* "qui ab omnibus discere volo; neque tam malum librum esse puto, ex quo non aliquem fructum colligere possum.' think myself repaid, in a monkish legend, for examining a mass of inane fiction, if I discover a single passage which elucidates the real history or manners of its age. In old poets of the third and fourth order we are contented with a little ore, and a great deal of dross. And so in publications of this kind, prejudicial as they are to public taste and public feeling, and therefore deeply injurious to the real interests of literature, something may sometimes be found to compensate for the trash and tinsel and insolent flippancy, which are now become the staple commodities of such journals. This number contains Kant's idea of a Universal History on a Cosmo-Political plan; and that Kant is as profound a philosopher as his disciples have proclaimed him to be, this little treatise would fully convince me, if I had not already believed it, in reliance upon one of the very few men

Epist. 59. p. 172.

who are capable of forming a judgement upon such a writer.

The sum of his argument is this: that as deaths, births, and marriages, and the oscillations of the weather, irregular as they seem to be in themselves, are, nevertheless, reduceable upon the great scale to certain rules; so there may be discovered in the course of human history, a steady and continuous, though slow developement of certain great predispositions in human nature: and that although men neither act under the law of instinct like brute animals, nor under the law of a preconcerted plan like rational cosmopolites, the great current of human actions flows in a regular stream of tendency toward this developement: individuals and nations, while pursuing their own peculiar and often contradictory purposes, following the guidance of a great natural purpose, and thus promoting a process, which even if they perceived it, they would little regard. What that process is he states in the following series of propositions :

1st. All tendencies of any creature, to which it is predisposed by nature, are destined in the end to develope themselves perfectly, and agreeably to their final purpose.

2d. In man, as the sole rational creature