inebriate-a draught which shall do them as much as they will endure of good, in a way more delightful than the most delightful evil? Can you?

Your smile is gone. Now we see your blue(ish) eyes sparkle a little under the gathering yellow brow. You have forgotten the lip-service. And the thought of heavy and complicated responsibility challenges a rising respondent energy in your heart. That is manly. You are not so ignorantly certain, either, as you were. Not discouraged? Wait a little. An impartial intellectual eclecticism has been the very ideal of your studies and your literary efforts? And that may perhaps

Perhaps; and only perhaps. You may be the Coming Man. Who knows? If you are, we individually will enlist as a faithful private under your banner. But who knows?

We think we remember you angry, Alick. Were you ever? Oh yes, you say--when that great jeering tow-headed fellow boxed your ears. Yes, you were. We recollect how you polished him off; and were suspended from college, too. Aha, impassible Alick?

Why, dear man, you are as touchy as tinder. Do you not know that if a careless waiter, even, at a public dining-room, delayeth his coming, you fume and fret yourself into a hot mist of fidgets? How at any suspected imputation or insult, you jump like a snap-bug, and avoid firing great volleys of vituperation only by biting off the tip of your tongue?

Well; you can't deny it, though we see that you are getting angry already, even at the description.

But-suppose, for instance, you sat in our place, as we said-truly it is a place to be filled by a man mightier than he who taketh a city-namely, by a ruler of his own spirit. For humbugs will be let fly at you. Spiteful rivals will sneer at you. Unscrupulous contemporaries will-ahem! -convey. Arguments for belief as clear, to you, as common honesty, or the golden rule, will be vilipended as nests and summaries of all iniquity-infernal machines exploded to shatter the peace of God and the happiness of men. Each contribution rejected may be the chrysalis whence shall shortly creep a volant thing, fitting dimly here and there, and whispering contagious dislike. For contributors (although all ery nice people) are only human. Have

patience while we state a fact or two to substantiate our assertions; facts, as the chess-books say, "recently occurring in actual play." A gentleman-of the cream of gentility-a spoonful of cream of gentility, we might say-sent us a poem; a composition which we will mildly characterize as less than Miltonian. And therewith he wrote, LC If you accept the inclosed, send me a check for One Thousand Dollars." You know, Alick, that every man has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. He has also the right, my friend, to set his own value upon his own poetry. But, candidly, we did not send him the document alluded to; and that for a plain reason; namely, that the amount would, at twenty-five cents per hundred (the usual rate), have procured us four hundred thousand old newspapers, full of matter equally valuable for our purposes; from among which we might select any portion, correspondent in dimension with the Thousand Dollar Poem, at an expense (estimated) of one eighth part of a mill, current money of the United States. We may add, as a specimen of the curiosities -or rather the amenities of literaturethat there was a most wonderful quantity of diplomatic noncommittalism in a set of kind endorsements which our friend had forwarded to further his suit.

That is a mild specimen of an "asker." But, Alick, in such a case you must not fire off a quiverfull of jokes at him, the unhappy. You must write a civil and sugared letter, regretting that the finished (a safe word) production which he sent is unfortunately of a length which must at present preclude its insertion.

Here, again, is a case of mental delusion or frailty, which is worth recording. A correspondent, very evidently a worthy and kind-hearted one,-writes to our publishers that a literary friend of his had recently died at his house, in the country. As literary executor of the deceased, our correspondent says he is much interested in learning from the papers left in his possession, that his late friend was the author of the Potiphar Papers, and as there could be now no reason to the contrary, he calls upon our publishers to do justice to his friend by announcing the fact, that these "admirable papers," &c. were by Mr. —. The reply of our publishers (was briefly to the effect that the gentleman was mistaken, inasmuch as the said papers were from another source altogether; and, moreover,

the said publishers had never written a line to the deceased friend, and, indeed, had never heard of him, or from him in any way whatever. Whereupon our worthy correspondent replies, with very excusable indignation, that he has positive proofs to the contrary. "I have," says he, "Mr. -'s correspondence in my possession. In it I find several letters from your firm of the most flattering description." sample, I will quote the following, which I wish you to reconcile with the one quoted above," i. e. to the effect that the authorship of said papers belonged elsewhere.

"As a

"DEAR SIR :-Inclosed please find our draft on New York City Bank' for four hundred dollars, which we ask you to accept as a small consideration for the valuable services you have rendered us. As we have often before said, so we now say to you, that the Potiphar Papers have done more for the popularity of our Magazine, more to establish its character, than all else we have received or published. We feel that the trifle we send you is no compensation, but you know this is our first year. and the enterprise thus far has been an experiment. Its success warrants us in making it a permanent thing; and if we can secure yourself and a few others to contribute monthly, we think we can make it what the public now have reason to expect. Your health being again well-established, may we not expect regularly contribations from your flowing pen? Let all your leisure time be devoted for writing for us, and we will make the compensation satisfactory. We have under consideration a plan which, in the course of two months, we shall submit to you, for your improvement and approval, and then shall ask the terms upon which you will execute it. We have not realized the promised pleasure of seeing you in our city. What new inducements can we offer? The freedom of our houses and the city shall be yours. We do desire most sincerely to make your acquaintance personally, and shall not be satisfied with anything short of seeing you in our own "sanctum," and in our own houses. With new assurance of our interest in your prosperity, and continning good health, we are, most cordially, yours, &c.,

(Signed) "G. P. PUTNAM & Co."

This letter," proceeds our correspondent, "proves conclusively, by your own acknowledgment, that Mr. was the author of the Potiphar Papers,' and I am at a loss to perceive how, with this letter in being, Mr. Blank, one of our editors,' should claim for himself the authorship of this very

able and entertaining work. The only way in which I can reconcile the matter is, that the letters to Mr. were written by youwhile that to myself was written by Mr. Blank."

Now, Alick, perhaps you would have considered this curious assumption of bor rowed plumes in no other light than as a mere imposture for selfish or mercenary purposes; but why not suggest the charitable benefit of the doubt, and let it pass for an instance of peculiar mental hallucination?

It was rather cruel that the worthy executor should be so rudely undeceived in regard to the claims of his departed friend; but even charity could do no less. Our publishers had simply to pronounce the letter quoted as an entire fabrication, having no shadow of a foundation. But, whatever the motives which prompted such an imposture, or the mental disorder which caused such a delusion, we need only note it in this nameless way, as one of the minor curiosities of literature.

Our publishers, you think, should profit by the demonstration of liberality and hospitality so handsomely assessed upon them in this counterfeit epistle. They will of course seize the next opportunity to deserve this pleasant reputation. Lesser cheques and colder compliments, and more limited invitations, would be very ungracious, after the precedent so generously imagined for them as suitable in such cases.

The "fitness of things" in creditable authorship, is again exemplified (and rather too often by the way) by some of our contemporaries on the other side of the water. We refer to the now chronic habit in which several English Magazines indulge of copying from American books and periodicals, not only without credit, but in a way calculated to deceive. Here in Bentley's Miscellany, for August, is a specimen -a poem of Tuckerman's, copied from his volume published by Ticknor in 1850, is given as an orginal contribution to Bentley, with the careful omission of the author's name—reversing, in this instance, ■ recent compliment to ourselves in the same magazine, when it copied the poem of "The Two Angels," adding the words "By Henry W. Longfellow," and giving it as an original poem, written specially for Bentley! And then as an example of appreciative and generous "conveyance," we find that a composition for which our publish ers had taken pride in sending the author

a 'considerable' compliment, is going the rounds of American periodicals credited to an English magazine! Call you this "encouraging American literature? No? You would denounce the meanness, dishonesty, &c. &c.? Calmly, worthy friend. Remember that anything mean is decidedly "UnEnglish." Besides do not our excellent and respectable cousins have provocation? These several courtesies' they think are only reciprocal, and if they are so deficient in poets, and find it so difficult to fill their pages with readable matter from their own authors, can we grudge them a lift, now and then? True, it is pleasant to have one's "good works" recognized and acknowledged in some shape-but meekness and charity are Christian virtues. Let us help our neighbors over sea as far as practicable, and let the "balance" go towards the old scores that are certainly rather in their favor, and so we will still pay our poets and lend them to Bentley and Eliza Cook and the rest, without con-sid-e-ra-tion.

Further, Alick; for we would exhibit to you a fair specimen of the thorny understratum beneath that which you count a bed of roses-there exploded upon us, not long ago, a direful storm of wrath, aroused by an article discussing a question of great importance, touching the religious, moral, social, and pecuniary prosperity of the whole country. We will quote only one specimen of the epistolary torpedoes which cracked about us as fast as squibs at a regimental training.

"I can but hope and trust," says our correspondent, "that this matter will be amended; and that the Magazine will simply occupy neutral ground in relation to all political and disturbing questions. If not, I shall then be compelled in selfdefence to adopt more decisive measures upon the subject."

Alick, Alick! your conduct in respect to this esteemed friend would have been totally indefensible. You would have flashed editorial thunder and lightning about his head and ears, enough to make a Sennacherib of him. You would have twitted him with being an emperor, or something of the kind; with residing (we do not break confidence in saying so much) in the "kingdom of South Carolina"-and talking as if he owned it; you would have inquired, with sarcastic quietude, after the precise nature of the force to be applied "in self-defence;" you would have been confident that so clear-sighted and self-res

pectable a man would never fire a brutum fulmen at you-an empty bang? and you would have jeeringly inquired how you must needs expect to be compelled? You would have stated with offensive innuendo that free speech was yet exercisable in some portions of the country; and that you, individually, proposed to dwell in some such portion. You would have asked what interesting "question" is not "disturbing;" and how, if not "disturbing," there could be any "question" about it?

We, Alick, are wiser. What is the use of calmly stating cases to a man in a delirium? What did we say about it? Nothing.

We wished, to be sure, that allowance had been made for human liability to err; for our (possibly) honest mistake; and we resolved, as we had always resolved, not to choke down fair statements of our own or anybody's else opinion, to suit Maine, Michigan, or Mississippi.

You would demolish them? You would show them what it is to undertake to gag a free citizen? Restrain your impetuosity, impulsive friend. They honestly differ from us, and if they are unfortunate in not being able to endure a fair and thorough examination of both sides of any subject, let us not imitate their tender timidity.

But you look disconsolate. You don't see the use of trying either to edit or contribute, if neither editor nor contributor has only such chances of pleasure and success as we have delineated?

You are vibratory, Alick. There is use, and great use, both in editing and contributing.

It is a noble object, that of standing highest among the periodic utterances of so true and living a mind as our American mind. And the achievement of adequately controlling those utterances-or a principal vehicle of them,-is task enough to satisfy a very high ambition-and a very widely and vividly active intellect.

The honest editor's is a noble office; and we magnify it accordingly. And why should you take a view so suddenly sad, of the contributor's fate? It is true that ninetenths of the matter offered us cannot come into the Magazine, and could not, even if Bacon, Milton, Shakespeare, Scott, Irving, Hawthorne, or De Quincey, should furnish us the same amount. The greater the mass, the better is the best; and this is our reason for desiring an extended field from which to choose. Meanwhile, lest you, "humble"

Alick, and other modest worth unknown to fame, should take undue discouragement from our words, understand, we pray you, that we have found our most satisfying literary success in the fact that while we have received assistance from leaders in American literature, so we have transplanted into our conservatory, full many a plant that otherwise might have wasted every particle of its sweetness upon the desert air. What we mean, in plain English, is simply this: that nobody ought to be dismayed at this chance of failure; because, first it is no greater here than elsewhere; and secondly, the greater the alternative honors.

Perhaps, that is reasonable, you say? It is. That last MS. of yours? Had we had time to read it?

No. We did read one page; and it occupied a golden half hour of our time. You have no right to expect that we shall decipher for you. If you send us hieroglyphics. you must inclose a Champollion. Your composition was evidently very good; and we think we may promise that if you will do two or three more clerical operations upon it, it shall appear.

You write a remarkably plain hand? Pray "don't be dreadful." It is so plain that it is repulsive. We speak to you like a father, dear Alick; with tears in our eys; and you should not be vexed. In the first place, you have written on both sides of the sheet. Paper is not so dear, but that you might waste half the space on it, to do much towards gaining the eyes of the editor, and the care of the composi

tor.

You have used foolscap. Leave it, hereafter, for those whose heads it fits. It folds very inconveniently; and, in our hands, or on the table, it wriggles and crooks in an ugly, inconvenient, provoking fashion; so that we cannot well appreciate the excellence of the sentiments inscribed upon it. Commercial note," or an equivalent size, is the paper you should use.

The writing is not good. See here, is that word-no, you must not see the context -psalm. or Jerusalem?

Jerusalem, you say, of course.

No, it is meant for psalm. "A psalm exhaled from the deep soul of the nation."

I could pose you over your own script, all this day. You cannot read your own writing when it is cold. Let us enunciate to you our statement of the theory of writing.

Its first requisite is to be read easily.

Its second requisite is, to admit of rapid execution.

Its third requisite, to be beautiful in form, of letter, line, and page.

Therefore, Alick, when you send MS. to us, be careful, first, that it is legible. That secured, write as fast and as handsomely as you will.

Alick departed. He had, perhaps, been unceremoniously trimmed. But he is much benefited, if only he adds to the tail of his judgment as the English judge learnedly remarked, by way of obiter dictum-what we clipped from the wings of his imagination.

Alick is nobody. We mean that he is nobody in particular.

CORRESPONDENCE.

We insert a letter, unfortunately some time mislaid, giving valuable information as to Fitch's and Fulton's deserts in the history of steam navigation. It is from a distinguished contemporary observer and actor in the matters whereof he speaks.

FITCH'S AND FULTON'S STEAM NAVIGATION. To the Editor of Putnam's Monthly.

SIR-I have been infinitely amused by your article upon the Reminiscences" of the cosmopolitan Nolte; more so, even, than by the book itself, which, though amusing from its very errors, contains, among many "too tedious to mention," one in particu lar that, from its relation to the judicial history of our State and the Union, calls for correction. I undertake this task the more readily, from personal participation and knowledge in regard to the matter in question.

I refer to his account of the introduction of steam navigation upon our waters, the whole credit of which he gives to Mr. Fulton, without noticing the assistance which that ingenious and adroit mechanician derived from the inventions and experiments of his predecessors. He mistakes, in the first place, in assigning a secondary part to the late Chancellor Livingston, in his connection with Mr. Fulton; whereas, it was the Chancellor that first directed the attention of Mr. Fulton to steam navigation, and furnished the pecuniary means for its suc cessful establishment, as well as for the previous experiments-and that, not in consequence of any family connection between them, as Mr. Nolte supposes, but from Mr. Fulton's introduction to him at Paris, in relation to his torpedo and catamaran projects, while Mr. Livingston resided there as Minister from this country. Both Mr. Liv.

ingston and his brother-in-law, the late John Stevens, besides, John Fitch, James Rumsey, and others, had been engaged in experiments of the kind long before the Chancellor's mission to France. Upon Mr. Fulton's presenting himself in Paris, Mr. Livingston, apprised of his mechanical skill and ingenuity, engaged him to assist in the experiments he was then making in steam navigation on the Seine. He was aware that prior to any of his own attempts, John Fitch had, in the year 1787, obtained exclusive grants from the States of Pennsylvania and New York, to navigate their waters with the steamboat by him lately invented," provided, that within one year, such boats should be placed by him on those rivers, and whose speed should not be less than four miles an hour. This condition was performed, whereupon the State grants became absolutely vested in Fitch and his representatives. About the same time, Rumsey was engaged in similar experiments upon the waters of Virginia, but with what result, does not appear.

Fitch, who had used a very imperfect engine, constructed by himself, afterwards repaired to Europe, to avail himself of the improvements made in that machine, in its application to other purposes, both in England and France. Having gained the information he sought, he was about to embark on his return home, when he was taken ill, and died at L'Orient. His papers, plans, models, and drawings, fell into the hands of Mr. Moses Vail, United States Consul at that port, of which Mr. Livingston was informed, and sent Mr. Fulton with authority to receive them, and they were delivered to him accordingly by Mr. Vail. Before, however, Mr. Livingston went to France, he had procured from the Legislature of New York, in the year 1798, an Act transferring to himself the exclusive right granted to Fitch, upon a representation that the latter had gone abroad and died, without performing the condition upon which his grant depended. The same allegation might have been made with stricter truth in regard to Mr. Livingston, who was never able to perform the similar conditions, till on his return from France, he had associated Mr. Fulton in his enterprise, and obtained a revival of his grant, which ad in the meantime expired, by its own limitation, in their joint names.

You will observe that the grant to Fitch was made before the adoption of the present Federal Constitution, when the State had a right to make it, while the transfer to Mr. Livingston was made, after that Constitution had been nine years in operation, and the State had surrendered the right to the Gene

ral Government. It was upon this ground, principally, that the validity of the State grant was drawn in question, both in the Courts and Legislature of this State. The Chancellor, Lansing, decided against it; but his decree was reversed by the Court of Errors, and final judgment rendered in its favor. A compromise, however, was entered into between the parties, by which Messre Livingston and Fulton granted a license to their adversaries for the exclusive right of steam-navigation upon Lake Champlain, upon condition of their forbearing to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, whose decision alone was final upon the main point in controversy.

But a memorial was subsequently presented to the Legislature at the session of 1814, by Governor Ogden of New Jersey, setting forth in substance that he was the proprietor of a ferry between Elizabethtown, in that State, and the City of New York, the value of which was destroyed by reason of a license granted by Messrs. Livingston and Fulton to John R. Livingston, for the exclusive navigation of the intermediate waters by means of steam; and that he had applied to the State grantees for a similar license, and had been refused. He also stated, that he was deterred from venturing a steamboat upon his ferry by the extraordinary penalties given to protect the State grant, declaring it ipso facto forfeited to their use, directing the Court of Chancery to issue an injunction for the seizure of such boat, and rendering it irrepleviable during a trial, thus in effect awarding execution before judgment, and without a trial. He, therefore, prayed relief, either by an act, declaring that the State grant did not extend to the conterminous waters, common to both States, or by a repeal of the extraordinary remedies above mentioned, which, in their operation closed the doors of the Courts of Justice against a trial of his rights.

This memorial was referred to a select. committee, consisting of the Hon. William A. Duer, late President of Columbia College; the Hon. John Savage, late Chief Justice of the Supreme Court; the Hon. Samuel Young, afterwards Canal Commissioner and State Senator; John H. Avery, Esq., an eminent lawyer of Owego; and Bethel Mather, a respectable merchant of Troy. It was upon the hearing before this committee that the facts above stated appeared in evidence. A remonstrance having been interposed by Messrs. Livingston and Fulton, they appeared before the committee, by their counsel, Messrs. Emmet and Colden; while Governor Ogden conducted the inquiry on his part in person.