Page:Journal of botany, British and foreign, Volume 34 (1896).djvu/335

 THE DATES OF REES'S CYCLOPEDIA. 809 My copy is in admirable condition — perfect, so far as I know, with tlie exception of one sheet — with grey paper-boards, cream- coloured backs, and pink labels. Each part is not dated outside, but inside the cover there is often a list of new books published by Longmans, generally dated — sometimes even with the day of the month. These close dates seem accurate and trustworthy ; at least, the first one of all is confirmed by a later statement to the very day of issue. This source and information I have called " Book List," and I rank it only second to the definite dates given in the Monthly Literary Advertiser. Both these authorities added together yet leave many gaps. I hoped that the dates on the plates would enable me to fill them up, but I have been grievously disappointed. Even in the earliest issues the dates varied, till, towards the middle of the work, they differed by many years, then only the year was given, and, in a few cases, no date whatever — only, *' Published, as the Act directs, by Longman," &c. I had hitherto believed that the dates were fairly trustworthy, but the cynical indifference to actual fact betrayed in issuing in one cover such widely various dates as 1805 and 1813 caused me to investigate the whole question of dating plates. The custom arose in order to preserve the copyright in the engraving. In 1735 an Act was passed (8 George II., c. 13) specifying this, and stating that the designer " shall have the sole right and liberty of printing and reprinting the same for a term of fourteen years, to commence from the day of the first pub- lishing thereof, which shall be truly engraved with the name of the proprietor on each plate, and printed on every such print or prints." The penalty was to be five shillings on every print of the infringe- ment, one half to the Crown, and the other to the informer suing. In 1767 this was modified, the term of years being extended to twenty-eight, the occasion being to protect the engravings after Hogarth's pictures. An important decision of Chief Justice Best in 1816 shows that the law had not relaxed, although the practice, as shown in the Cyclopaedia, had. The Copyright Act of 1842 gave the death-blow to these provisions, every map or engraving in a copyrighted book thenceforward sharing in the protection.' In the following tabular statement I have given the volume and its part ; also the running numbers of the parts, as that is quoted frequently in the Montlily Literary Advertiser. Next follows the contents, or, in other words, the first article and the last in each part, then the nearest date assigned to it, authenticated by the source of information. The initials M.L.A. stand for Mojithly Literary Advertiser, and are most to be trusted ; next the book-lists — as already mentioned — and finally, a few entries have been given from among the dates of the plates in each part ; when the dates varied, as they almost always did, I have taken the latest in date, but, as will be seen from what has gone before, these dates are worth very little, and in too many cases I found them absolutely useless. In conclusion, I may say that I should be glad if some suitable