Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

On a New Sub-Class of Fossil Birds (Odontornithes) (American Journal of Science (3), vol. v., pp. 161, 162, February, 1873).

Or the Structure and Affinities of the Brontotherida (American Journal of Science (3), vol. vii., pp. 81–86, January, 1874).

Notice of New Equine Mammals from the Tertiary Formation (American Journal of Science (3), vol. vii., pp. 247-258, March, 1874).

New Order of Eocene Mammals (American Journal of Science (3), vol. ix., p. 221, March, 1875).

On the Odontornithes, or Birds with Teeth (American Journal of Science (3), vol. x., pp. 403-408, November, 1875).

Principal Characters of the Dinocerata (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xi., pp. 163-168, February, 1876).

Principal Characters of the Tillodontia (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xi., pp. 249–251, March, 1876).

Principal Characters of the Brontotherida (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xi., pp. 335-340, April, 1876).

On a New Sub-Order of Pterosauria (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xi., pp. 507-509, June, 1876).

Recent Discoveries of Extinct Animals (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xii., pp. 59-61, July, 1876).

Notice of New Tertiary Mammals; Part V. (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xii., pp. 401-404, November, 1876).

Principal Characters of American Pterodactyles (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xii., pp. 479, 480, December, 1876).

Notice of a New and Gigantic Dinosaur (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xiv., pp. 87, 88, July, 1877).

Principal Characters of the Coryphodontidae (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xiv., pp. 81-85, July, 1877).

Characters of the Odontornithes, with Notice of a New Allied Genus (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xiv., pp. 85-87, July, 1877).

Address on Introduction and Succession of Vertebrate Life in America (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xiv., pp. 338–378, November, 1877).

A New Order of Extinct Reptilia (Stegosauria) from the Jurassic of the Rocky Mountains (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xiv., pp. 513, 514, December, 1877).

New Species of Ceratodus, from the Jurassic (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xv., p. 76, January, 1878).

Notice of New Dinosaurian Reptiles (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xv., pp. 241–244, March, 1878).

Notice of New Fossil Reptiles (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xv., pp. 409-411, May, 1878).

Fossil Mammal from the Jurassic of the Rocky Mountains (American Journal of Science (3), vol. xv., p. 459, June, 1878).

Other scientific papers of interest by Prof. Marsh will be found in the same journal, as well as in the Zeitschrift of the Geological Society of Germany; American Naturalist; "Proceedings of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences; "Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society; "Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science;" and in other periodicals.

[ocr errors]

EDITOR'S TABLE.

THE ENGLISH REPORT ON INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.

THE

HE report of the English commission on the general subject of copyright is now complete and before the public. It shows that there has been a searching investigation into the existing condition and working of copyright-laws in that country, with an honest view to such amendments as are necessary to more thorough protection of the right to literary property. The report is able and exhaustive, and recommends parliamentary measures which, if carried out, will be of great advantage to authors, and will be an honor to England. The commissioners found the subject encompassed with serious and perplexing difficulties, but they did not make these the occasion of shrinking from the duty that had been assigned to them. If any American wishes to preserve a decent selfrespect, we advise him not to pass from the reading of the English copyright report to the report of the United States Senate upon the same subject, made in 1873, by Mr. Morrill, of Maine. The contrast between the two documents is remarkable. The English report is grave and formidable, and shows that there has been long and earnest work over a question that is felt to be of great national importance; the American report is a miserable tract of half a dozen pages, evincing by its meagreness the utter indifference of those who drew it up to the subject which they had been appointed to consider. The English report recognizes extensive defects in the legislation of that country upon the question, and recommends bold changes in it to secure a better state of things; the American report sees nothing wrong that it is desirable

to amend, and recommends Congress to take no action in the matter. It treats the subject from the low and selfish point of view of the American political demagogue, enters with a relish into the sordid squabbles of book-manufacturers, and pays not the slightest attention to the important principles that should be recognized as at the basis of a just and enlightened policy of international copyright. The English report, on the contrary, treats the subject with dignity and seriousness, bringing out clearly the great principles that should control it, and taking high and impregnable moral ground in regard to the duty of the English Parliament in legislating with reference to it. It is a question of international ethics, and England has shot a long way forward by adopting the Christian standard of conduct in this relation, and saying we are prepared to do as we would be done by. The high-water mark of international morality hitherto reached has been to do as you are done by, to reciprocate, to concede benefits if benefits are granted, and to deny them if they are denied. England takes the lead in affirming that the thing which is right, just, and equitable, must be done, whether other nations reciprocate or not. She took an important step in this direction in entering upon the policy of free trade, and now proposes to carry it out in her international treatment of literary property and the rights of authors. The commission recommends to Parliament to grant copyrights to American authors whether the United States will do the same thing for English authors or not. They say: "It has been suggested to us that this country would be justified in taking steps of a retaliatory character, with

a view of enforcing, incidentally, that protection from the United States which we accord to them. This might be done by withdrawing from the Americans the privilege of copyright on first publication in this country. We have, however, come to the conclusion that it is advisable that our law should be based on correct principles, irrespective of the opinions or policy of other nations. We admit the propriety of protecting copyright, and it appears to us that the principle of copyright, if admitted, is one of universal application. We, therefore, recommend that this country should pursue the policy of recognizing the author's rights, irrespective of nationality."

On a subject which presents so much that is conflicting and unsettled, it is not to be supposed that there would be complete unanimity of opinion among the fifteen members of this commission, who were chosen because they are men of intelligence, and capable of forming their own views. The subject, besides, was one of great extent and complication of rival interests, involving the policy to be pursued regarding home and foreign copyrights, abridgments of books, musical compositions, dramatization of novels, lectures, newspapers, paintings, photographs, translations, registrations, forfeitures, infringements, and scores of other matters hitherto left to a chaotic system of legislation. But, considering the task they had before them, the commissioners have come to substantial agreement as to the measures recommended. There were two or three wrong-headed and crotchety men, who made dissenting reports on various points, although concurring in the main practical results. Chief among these eccentric dissentients was Sir Louis Mallet; he could not agree with his coadjutors, and with some of the leading gentlemen who testified before them, as to the ground of rights in literary property. Many ingenious and fanciful arguments have been made to prove that men have no right to the

property they create by brain-labor, or have only such a qualified right to it that to appropriate it without consent is not stealing. What a man earns by his hands, and by capital invested in tools and machinery, they admit he has a right to against the world; but what he earns by laborious thinking, and by capital invested in education, may be taken from him by anybody who wants it. Many funny reasons, as we have said, have been offered for allowing those who can make anything by it for themselves to plunder authors of the products of their toil, but Sir Louis Mallet has the honor of contributing the last curious pretext for this sort of robbery. He says: "The right conferred by a copyright-law derives its chief value from the discovery of the art of printing; and there appears no reason for giving to authors any larger share in the value of a mechanical invention, to which they have contributed nothing, than to any other member of the community." But, if authors are not to be permitted to hold their property because the discovery of the art of printing has contributed to its value, what right has anybody to hold any property that is the result of an invention or discovery to which he has not contributed? The doctrine would make sad havoc of the rights of capitalists and laborers in all countries, whose earnings and accumulations are due to the use of steam-engines, telegraphs, spinning-machinery, and a thousand other devices to which they have never contributed.

Sir Louis Mallet coincides in the practical recommendations of the report, although not agreeing with the grounds upon which they are made. Yet he exhibited a good deal of ingenious perverseness in embarrassing the inquiry. This was well illustrated by the case he undertook to make out against the necessity of international copyright by the success of the "International Scientific Series," where foreign authors are paid without the compulsion of an international copyright

law. His case, in a word, is this: By a satisfactory arrangement contributors to the "International Scientific Series" are liberally paid by the English publisher, and then fairly paid again by the American publisher—what more is wanted? The answer, of course, is very simple: There is wanted legal protection to the property. The American publishers concede that there is a property-value in the books they reissue, for which they are willing to pay under a voluntary contract; but how does that proceeding absolve the United States Government from the duty of protecting that property as it protects other property? Reasonable men will see that the convention of publishers in different countries, to carry out such a project, is but a weighty testimony to the just claims of authors which it is the duty and office of government to sustain and enforce by the proper legislation. It is the one great duty of government to protect the rights of its citizens, and prominent among these is the right of property. All civilized countries recognize the right of property in books, and there have been attempts to make this recognition international, that is, to induce nations to extend their morality beyond their geographical borders. In the absence of any such arrangement, a few parties agree that they will voluntarily recognize the rights of intellectual property, and the very doing of this is to be made a new excuse for neglecting to enforce the fundamental obligations of justice.

COOKERY AND EDUCATION.

ery and agriculture are arts of civilized nations; savages understand neither of them."

There is a great deal of important truth wrapped up in this passage, of vital interest to society in general and to individual welfare, but which it has taken a hundred years to appreciate so fully that any considerable number of people can begin to coöperate in reducing it to practice. But, if what Rumford said is true, if the scale of population as well as the comfort and health of the people depends to such a degree upon the art of cookery, what are all the issues of politics over which men are fighting with such desperation in comparison with the systematic improvement of the culinary art? How greatly the public weal is dependent upon the condition of agriculture begins now to be widely understood, and since the time of Rumford great progress has been made in its scientific study through the establishment of special schools and colleges for the purpose. Agricultural education is now a recognized branch of popular culture which is destined to be greatly developed and extended in the future. The next great step must be to do the same thing for the art of cookery; and the friends of genuine social improvement may congratulate themselves that the progress of education is beginning to take effect upon this important department of domestic life. Cooking-schools are springing up in many places in this country and in England, and the English are taking the lead in organizing them as a part of their national and common school system.

Of the importance, the imperative Ir was a suggestive remark of Count necessity of this movement, there canRumford that "the number of inhabi- not be the slightest question. Our tants who may be supported in any kitchens, as is perfectly notorious, are country upon its internal produce de- the fortified intrenchments of ignopends about as much upon the state of rance, prejudice, irrational habits, rulethe art of cookery as upon that of agri- of-thumb, and mental vacuity, and the culture; but, if cookery be of so much consequence is that the Americans are importance, it ought certainly to be liable to the reproach of suffering bestudied with the greatest care. Cook-yond any other people from wasteful,

unpalatable, unhealthful and monoto- | be removed. American women have nous cookery. Considering our re- been driven out of the kitchen because sources, and the vaunted education and intelligence of American women, this reproach is just. Our kitchens are, in fact, almost abandoned to the control of low Irish, stupid negroes, and raw servile menials that pour in upon us from various foreign countries. And, what is worse, there is a general acquiescence in this state of things, as if it were something fated, and relief from it hopeless and impossible. We profess to believe in the potency of education, and are applying it to all other interests and industries excepting only that fundamental art of the preparation and use of food to sustain life which involves more of economy, enjoyment, health, spirits, and the power of effective labor, than any other subject that is formally studied in the schools. We abound in female seminaries and female colleges, and high-schools, and normal schools, supported by burdensome taxes, in which everything under heaven is studied except that practical art which is a daily and vital necessity in all the households of the land.

all its associations are degrading, and they demand education as a preparation for all those other activities to which educations leads. When the art of cookery becomes a matter of intelligent study, so that its practice will no longer be a badge of debasement and humiliation, occupation will be sought and honored in this field as elsewhere. The establishment of cooking-schools is, therefore, in the direct line of our domestic amelioration and emancipation. They are already, as we have said, established, and, considering the embarrassments of an initial movement of this kind, are in most successful operation. Though at present narrow in their scope, they will develop and widen so as to afford a training in the broader field of general household activity; but we are well content with what has been already gained. The South Kensington Cooking-School, in London, is a normal school for training teachers to go out and take charge of other schools in different parts of the country. How successful this institution has been may be inferred from the fact that it has already given us the best practical cook-book that we now have. We call attention to the notice of this work in the following pages, from which the reader will gather some interesting information as to what has been accomplished on the other side of the Atlantic in relation to this important subject, and which will afford important hints for carrying out a similar work in the United States.

Acquiescence in this state of things as something permanent and irremediable is no longer possible. If, as Rumford says, cookery is an art of civilized nations, it must improve with the advance of civilization. It is undoubtedly the most backward of all the arts, and various causes conspire to its continued neglect. But, whatever the difficulties to be overcome, the time has arrived when the advance of intelligence and the spirit of improvement must invade that last stronghold of traditional stupidity, the kitchen. Nor are the difficulties of doing this by any means so great as is commonly supposed; they will vanish as soon as the task of alleviation and amendment is earnestly undertaken. | the practical arts, there is none that can As soon as thought and cultivation are brought to bear upon the domestic operations of the kitchen, they will be elevated in the common respect, and a most formidable impediment will thus

SCIENCE IN RELATION TO TEACHING.

Or all the applications of science to

for a moment bear comparison with its application to the art of teaching. Scientific education, as currently understood, refers to something of greatly inferior importance: it means instruc

« AnteriorContinuar »