page 135

Our Exchanges.

The first number of a neatly-printed « bi-monthly » (we presume this term is used correctly in the sense of an issue every two months) entitled Printing reaches us from San Francisco. It is published by Messrs Tatum & Bowen, Clay-st, and is a very creditable production. « It is not intended, » says the editor, « that Printing shall be an advertising sheet alone. Articles of interest to reading and thoughtful printers, and specimens of letter-press in one or more colors, will appear in each issue. » This promise is redeemed in the first number; and the advertisement in tints and colors, which forms the frontispiece, is a tasteful and harmonious piece of work. From a note in this paper, we gather that the novelties mentioned in the last paragraph of « Recent Specimens, » page 127, are by John Graham, Chicago—a name new to us. In grace and delicacy of finish they equal if they do not surpass anything of the kind yet produced in America, and are sure to have a « run. »

The British Printer, May-June, is as good as ever. It contains a beautiful portrait of Mr Isaac Pitman, « a benefactor of the race, » and a view of the Phonetic Institute, Bath; and a striking pictorial supplement in chromotype, printed from five plates, by Ferd. Jasper, Vienna.

El Poligrafo, Buenos Aires, is a large quarto of eight pages in a colored wrapper, on which is a bold and handsome design. The numerous trade advertisements are elaborately displayed, American and German ornaments being freely combined.

The Inland Printer for August contains beautiful specimens of process-engraving, and a special supplement showing a remarkable piece of work by a master of color-printing—Mr Earhardt. It is a design containing thirty-six colors produced by five printings.

L'Intermédiare for August contains a practical article on Plomhotype (otherwise known as Chaostype, Owltype, Selenotype, &c.,) illustrated with colored impressions in detail showing the method of producing the characteristic effects.

Just twelve months ago, the St. Louis Stationer published a paper by Mr Richard Ennis, on international copyright. In our January number, in acknowledging our new exchange, we made some comments and quoted a few lines from the article in question. We entirely dissented from the writer's conclusions, and gave reasons for so doing; but as the article was long enough to fill a page of our paper, we made no attempt to review it in detail. We had not noticed at the time that Mr Ennis was the editor of the Stationer, though we could see that the ideas advanced had the editorial approval. The article, it appears, has been made the subject of a good deal of hostile comment; but our editorial brother, ignoring critics nearer home, has devoted a column in his last issue to the pulverizing of Typo, and he certainly wields the pestle to some purpose. He thinks we ought to have copied his article in full, and he charges us with « giving a number of garbled extracts from the 'paper' which distort and change both argument and meaning. » Had we done so, we should have deserved a good deal rougher handling than the Stationer gives us. Now, we have carefully re-read Mr Ennis's article, and we find we have done nothing of the kind. Not only this, but the reply justifies our criticism, whether our opinions are right or wrong. But the Stationer has been guilty of a small unfairness. Six times in the article the word « paper » (referring to Mr E's article) is placed in inverted commas—and one of these is in a quotation from our paragraph. The only inference a reader can draw is that Typo thus distinguished the word as a mark of contempt. On reference to our January number we find that the editor has taken the liberty of adding the quotation marks to our paragraph. This is garbling. We would remind the editor that his article did not appear as an editorial, but appeared in a Typothetæ report, and was distinctly headed « Paper by Richard Ennis. » Why, then, does he interpolate quotation-marks, and six times repeat them, as if we had used the word in an offensive sense'? Our objection to the article was that the writer, after refusing to acknowledge such a thing as literary property, said « We are ready and willing to protect our home authors." We objected that the refusal to recognize literary property was a form of dishonesty—the writer in reply refers us to a passage in the original paper, declining to discuss the question on this ground. The words are: « It is not a question of sentiment as to what we should do for the authors of the old world, but how would the passage of the Chace international copyright bill benefit our people at large. » Of course « sentiment » has nothing to do with the question—the word is often used to blink the issue when « principle » or « rectitude » are intended. We do not intend to discuss the expediency of copyright laws when the moral aspect of the case is steadily ignored. And a careful reading of the article we are charged with misrepresenting, only shows us one argument we failed to note. The writer dwells largely on the danger if international copyright were recognized, of a literary « corner. » « It would build up a large book monopoly, as the oil and sugar trusts, which of all things should be avoided." We may be pardoned for hinting that such a danger is imaginary. The older countries, under strict copyright laws, have not suffered any inconvenience in this respect. It is painful to read nearly every month of some industrious literary man or woman, whose works have given pleasure and instruction to a whole generation, being reduced to penury after a life-time of hard work. The Stationer is justly severe on papers that have annexed its original articles without giving their authority; but the hardship would be greater if every such plagiarism represented a direct pecuinary loss. We are, however, surprised that holding the views he does regarding literary property, he has retained the word « plagiarism » in his vocabulary. May not « others have covered the ground ages before his ancestors were born » ? Is it not contended that « words once uttered, like the flashing lightning, should belong to humanity » ?

The Printer's Bulletin for September effectively displays some of the popular productions of the Boston Typefoundry. It contains a number of good portraits of leading Boston printers. A grand legible series of roman, specially designed for news-work, but equally adapted for book-printing is the « heavy-serif face, » and it affords a strong contrast to the meagre styles so fashionable at present. We would not have guessed had the fact not been stated, that the specimen was worked from a stereo. Publishers of daily papers might do worse than look up this series.

Boolis and Notions, Toronto, is as usual lively and interesting. The editor is « down » on cutting stationers. We regret to say that they are found in other places than Canada.