Literary Copyright | Page 4

acted under the power of
its charter from the Congress of the United States. The members thus
selected, who joined the Social Science Association, were given the

alternative of organizing as an independent institute or as a branch of
the Social Science Association.
At the annual meeting of the Social Science Association on September
4, 1899, at Saratoga Springs, the members of the Institute voted to
organize independently. They formally adopted the revised constitution,
which had been agreed upon at the first meeting, in New York in the
preceding January, and elected officers as prescribed by the
constitution.
The object is declared to be the advancement of art and literature, and
the qualification shall be notable achievements in art or letters. The
number of active members will probably be ultimately fixed at one
hundred. The society may elect honorary and associate members
without limit. By the terms of agreement between the American Social
Science Association and the National Institute, the members of each are
'ipso facto' associate members of the other.
It is believed that the advancement of art and literature in this country
will be promoted by the organization of the producers of literature and
art. This is in strict analogy with the action of other professions and of
almost all the industries. No one doubts that literature and art are or
should be leading interests in our civilization, and their dignity will be
enhanced in the public estimation by a visible organization of their
representatives, who are seriously determined upon raising the
standards by which the work of writers and artists is judged. The
association of persons having this common aim cannot but stimulate
effort, soften unworthy rivalry into generous competition, and promote
enthusiasm and good fellowship in their work. The mere coming
together to compare views and discuss interests and tendencies and
problems which concern both the workers and the great public, cannot
fail to be of benefit to both.
In no other way so well as by association of this sort can be created the
feeling of solidarity in our literature, and the recognition of its power. It
is not expected to raise any standard of perfection, or in any way to
hamper individual development, but a body of concentrated opinion
may raise the standard by promoting healthful and helpful criticism, by
discouraging mediocrity and meretricious smartness, by keeping alive
the traditions of good literature, while it is hospitable to all discoverers
of new worlds. A safe motto for any such society would be Tradition

and Freedom--'Traditio et Libertas'.
It is generally conceded that what literature in America needs at this
moment is honest, competent, sound criticism. This is not likely to be
attained by sporadic efforts, especially in a democracy of letters where
the critics are not always superior to the criticised, where the man in
front of the book is not always a better marksman than the man behind
the book. It may not be attained even by an organization of men united
upon certain standards of excellence. I do not like to use the word
authority, but it is not unreasonable to suppose that the public will be
influenced by a body devoted to the advancement of art and literature,
whose sincerity and discernment it has learned to respect, and
admission into whose ranks will, I hope, be considered a distinction to
be sought for by good work. The fashion of the day is rarely the
judgment of posterity. You will recall what Byron wrote to Coleridge:
"I trust you do not permit yourself to be depressed by the temporary
partiality of what is called 'the public' for the favorites of the moment;
all experience is against the permanency of such impressions. You
must have lived to see many of these pass away, and will survive many
more."
The chief concern of the National Institute is with the production of
works of art and of literature, and with their distribution. In the remarks
following I shall confine myself to the production and distribution of
literature. In the limits of this brief address I can only in outline speak
of certain tendencies and practices which are affecting this production
and this distribution. The interests involved are, first, those of the
author; second, those of the publisher; third, those of the public. As to
all good literature, the interests of these three are identical if the
relations of the three are on the proper basis. For the author, a good
book is of more pecuniary value than a poor one, setting aside the
question of fame; to the publisher, the right of publishing a good book
is solid capital,--an established house, in the long run, makes more
money on "Standards" than on "Catchpennies"; and to the public the
possession of the best literature is the breath of