TO THE PROPRIETORS OF THE ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA. MY DEAR SIR,-As I find that you and the other proprietors are still inclined to hold that the new edition ought to be limited to twenty volumes, it has occurred to me that it might be useful to state in writing the chief grounds of the very decided opinion to the contrary which I entertain. I have accordingly done so, as plainly and briefly as I could, in the accompanying paper.-Yours faithfully, MACVEY NAPIER. 1. It is now nearly thirty years since it was found necessary or advisable, with a view to the success of this Encyclopædia, which at first appeared only in three, afterwards in ten quarto volumes, to extend the number to twenty; and, if that number was then thought necessary, it is obvious that the lapse of time, the course of events, and the progress of discovery, must have furnished matter for large additions to the subjects formerly discussed, and generated a number of new topics, which could not be overlooked in any Encyclopædia pretending to exhibit a complete view of human knowledge. It seems pretty clear, therefore, that the Encyclopædia Britannica would take a lower station than it held then were it limited, in its renovated form, to the same number of volumes that was so long ago judged necessary to its completeness. 2. In order to maintain a successful rivalry with other works of the kind, it must be renewed upon a scale admitting of an equal, or nearly equal, share of various information. The new edition of Rees1 will consist of at least thirty-five, the Metropolitana of at least twenty-five volumes. These are the works with which the Encyclopædia Britannica will constantly be compared: and, considering that Encyclopædias are very generally purchased as themselves constituting a library, as professing to furnish a complete repertory, not only of scientific, but of every species of knowledge, it seems evident that this Encyclopædia would lose ground on that score, 1 The new edition of Rees consists of 45, the Metropolitana of 35 volumes. if the new edition should be restricted to the proposed number of volumes. 3. Encyclopædias have risen into consequence with an important and influential class, for whose use they were not originally designed. As they have been found to furnish the best means yet devised for diffusing knowledge in a systematic form, and have been largely used for that purpose, both in this and in other countries, they are now regularly perused or consulted by men of science, and the whole body of the learned. To limit the Encyclopædia Britannica in such a way as to render it necessary, either to diminish the quantity of miscellaneous matter more particularly adapted to the wants and taste of ordinary readers, or to treat important subjects in a way too curt and superficial to satisfy those of a higher class, would lower its popularity and reputation, and enable its rivals to gain an ascendancy at its expense. 4. In all that has been urged in favour of the limitation to twenty volumes, it seems to have been forgotten that the real question at issue is, not whether a new Encyclopædia might not be constructed upon that scale, but whether it is possible to give a new edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica, including all that is valuable in that work and in its Supplement, joined with such necessary additional articles as are not to be found in either, within the space proposed? Such is the true state of the question, and therefore, in as far as the opinion that twenty volumes would suffice, is not founded on an examination of the contents of these multifarious works, it is a mere hypothesis, or preconceived notion, not a conclusion formed upon an accurate survey of facts. It is not enough to say that a prospectus holding out the promise of a new edition in twenty volumes, would be viewed with more favour than if the number was twenty-four. In saying this, the distinction just referred to is entirely overlooked. The statement would be more in point if it could be added that these twenty volumes would contain all that is valuable, with all the additional articles necessary to the completion of their design. But, if this could not be said, it must be evident that the undertaking would be stripped of its most distinctive recommendations. Its limitation to twenty volumes would not surely furnish any such. There would be other Encyclopædias-Brewster's for example-in twenty volumes. To stick to that number, therefore, whether compatible or not with other important ends, would be unwise. The public in the end would be better pleased with twenty-three or four than with twenty volumes, if it should appear that, without that number, the work would not have been made suitable to its declared objects and pretensions. 5. Were it resolved that the twenty-six volumes, of which the Encyclopædia and Supplement consist, with all necessary additions, should be comprised in twenty, the necessary processes of elision and compression would require a complete remodelling of the work. Every article of any length would require to be measured and rearranged with reference to the new scale; in a word, to be mostly written anew. This remodelling could not be accomplished creditably by mere cutting and piecing. Some journeymen might proceed in that way, but, by following it, the undertaking would sink into contempt. This would be the certain issue of any attempt to compress twenty-six into twenty volumes. By such a process, no doubt, the proposed reduction might be effected; but, besides other consequences, there would be two very important ones; in the first place, the entire remodelling thus required would add greatly to the sum to be paid for the assistance of literary labourers; and, in the second place, the publication of the work would be rendered more irregular, and no definite period for its completion could, with any tolerable degree of certainty, be assigned. 6. Taking the two works together, there can be no doubt that there will be considerable room for cutting out and abridging; but when it is considered how much matter is contained in a volume of 800 closely printed pages, it will be evident that the cutting out judiciously of a quantity equal to two such volumes would be no easy task; and when it is further considered that, although there is much that may be taken out, there is also much that ought to be put in,-that under every letter of the alphabet there are a number of articles, not included either in the Encyclopædia or Supplement, which the public would be entitled to look for in a new edition, there is a strong presumption that it would be more reasonable to fix upon twenty-four than upon twenty, as the proper number for that edition.1 TO SIR JAMES MACKINTOSH, Edinburgh, June 22, 1828. MY DEAR SIR,-Soon after my return to this place, I caused a copy of both parts of Mr. Stewart's discourse to be forwarded to you. The history of metaphysical philosophy during the eighteenth century being, according to his view of the subject, completed in the second part, all that remains to be done is a sketch of the progress of Ethical and Political Philosophy during the same period. This sketch, while it would fall to be announced as the fulfilment of a design chalked out and partly executed by him, would at the same time form a distinct essay of great interest. I earnestly trust that you will undertake it. There is no man alive so capable of doing it justice; and I cannot but think that, richly prepared as you are, you could execute such a sketch as is wanted at a comparatively small cost of time and labour. I found Mr. Stewart so unwell that I could not have the satisfaction of again seeing him. He had been sinking for some weeks, and a fresh paralytic attack brought on the closing scene. Yours very truly, MACVEY NAPIER. SIR JAMES MACKINTOSH. Clapham Common, August 10, 1828. MY DEAR SIR,-I understand your proposal to be that I should write a Discourse on the state and progress of Ethical, Political, and Economical Philosophy in the eighteenth century, for which I am to receive five hundred guineas. This proposal has a good deal perplexed me. I do not think I should be a gainer by it, considering the deduction of time The seventh edition was completed in 21 volumes, the first of which consisted of the Dissertations by Stewart, Mackintosh, Playfair, and Leslie. from History, and I am a little doubtful what that deduction may be. If you can prevail on your Proprietors to add another hundred to the remuneration, leaving the extent unfixed up to 100 pages, I will undertake it.-Yours very truly, J. MACKINTOSH. October 27, 1828. last to you, I was MY DEAR SIR,-A few days after my revisited almost daily by a complaint from which I had formerly suffered, though never so long and so constantly. It was a sinking at an early hour of the forenoon, which, after it once came on, threw me on the sofa for the day. It altogether disabled me for the time for every exertion, mental or bodily. The attacks were sudden; the recovery, though not so quick, yet sufficient to show no remains to any other eye. Nothing appeared to call for pity, or even to acquit me of indolence. I have thus lost six weeks,-a grievous calamity at an age when time has become so precious. I am in hopes of resuming my Discourse in two days, and I have not the least doubt that, with even moderate health, I shall be able to let you have it by Christmas. I have concealed from you nothing of my past state or present expectations, but it is a part of my sufferings that I am obliged to conceal them from most persons.-Very faithfully yours, J. MACKINTOSH. November 12, 1828. MY DEAR SIR,-I have once more resumed my unfortunate Discourse, and I have the utmost hopes, from the apparent success of a severe remedy, that I may finish it on a somewhat reduced scale within two months. All that I can certainly promise is, that there will be no day in which I shall not attempt to do the utmost possible. Be assured that nothing but absolute inability will stop me for a moment. I dare say no more. I feel as strongly the force of my engagement to you as it is possible for yourself to consider it. I see with pain and fear how much you rest on a broken reed. But you will do me the justice to remember that, from the beginning, I warned you of the precariousness of my health. You |