2110-1-2-5

OXFORD UNION SOCIETY

May: 26: 96

My dear Mother,

I had your letter this morning. What a depressing person you are! I am glad to hear that you enjoyed Broughton & that Father enjoyed Beattock. I think Innerleithen will be very nice. I am sending Ervie [Walter] something for his birthday.

I had better give you a resumé of my exact poistion with Watt as you don't seem quite to understand it. I wrote to Watt a year ago last March offering him Sir Quixote, which he declined, but said he would wait for the long novel. Last October he wrote to me telling about Blackwood's request. I told him I had no objection to let him offer the book to Blackwoods.

This did not in the least imply that Blackwood wd be the least likely to take it, as I heard later from other resources that they pay badly & are not good men of business. Still they were Scots publishers and I would have foregone a good deal for that. Then came Lane's offer which I accepted with full cognisance of my position toward Watt. This practically deterred me for three years from having any book-dealings with Watt. What then was my obligation? To let Watt have something to do with the book. Certainly, but not it all. A literary agent has no interest in a book like a publisher. He merely sells it, or rather you engage him to sell it for you. It would be as absurd if he wanted to have the whole sale of a book, as if a solicitor who you employed to do a piece of work, should insist, because you promised to give the job to him, to do some part of it which you can do yourself. I must say that Watt very sensibly never talks about an obligation, it is entirely

a commercial matter, and he only objects that now his business has assumed such proportions that unless he has the whole control of a book he will take no part. And he gives himself out in that little book he published, as willing to undertake the sale of the whole or part rights in any book. If I had thought a year ago that he would assume such dictatorial airs I would not have promised anything.

I may say however that I think he has behaved quite well, and that our correspondence has been quite courteous. I pointed out to him that, I was (1) under obligations to Lane (2) desirous of having my books in one publisher's hands. The latter is the sentiment of the majority of authors, and Watt recognises it. And because Lane along with Heineman prefer to deal only with authors direct this arrangement can not be made through Watt.

What has Lane done? Well when I wrote to him he went round to the editors of the Illustrated London News, Chapman's, Cornhill, Windsor, Black and White. All said they would be quite pleased

to consider my book direct. The Editor of the Illustrated London News has arranged to read it just at the end of this week. Lane has behaved quite well and all this he does without a fee, while Watt charges his 10 or 15%.

However, I have not by any means done with Watt. We are on quite good terms. I intend to call on him in London at the end of this term, and explain matters more fully than I could do in letters. I do not think he will hold out, and I think I may persuade him to take up the serial rights of what I may write in the future. As to book-form my mind is quite made up. I shall keep to Lane, but never for a moment go below 1/ of royalty, which is as much as I could get through Watt. If at any time I cannot get this I shall have no compunction in using an agent. But at present I firmly believe - as Besant is never tired of preaching - of the necessity of keeping to one publisher.

On Sunday at Mansfield that American was preaching again. It was rather better. I spent all the afternoon in reading the Greek Testament for my Examination in Divinity.