Too true, Mr. Trappem—that _is_ the way; and many a Government office, or other imposing array of Committee-men, and Honourable Boards, have practised this same expedient upon the inventive genius and collective knowledge and talent of the public. The last instances which deserve to be recorded, not merely because they are the most recent, but rather on account of their magnitude and completeness, are the invitations to competitors for models and plans, issued by the Metropolitan Commissioners of Sewers,—and by the Commissioners of the Exhibition of Industry of all Nations. In order to supersede prevaricating denials and evasions of what we have to say concerning the Metropolitan Commissioners of Sewers, it may be as well to premise that they have for some time adopted the cunning “fence” of a “_Committee_ of Commissioners,” behind which the Commissioners make a dodge on all difficult, alarming, and responsible occasions. When all is safe, and clear, and sunshiny, it is the Commissioners who have done the thing; directly matters look awkward, and a bad business, the diplomatic bo-peeps leap away from the bursting clouds—and the Committee of Commissioners have done it all, for which the main body of the Right Honourable Board is by no means responsible. A similar manœuvre has been adopted by the Commissioners of the Exhibition of Industry, who have got two Committees to screen them. Now, in the name of all worthily striving spirits,—of all those who have devoted their talents, time, and money to the production of models, designs, or plans,—of all those who have laboured hard by day or by night, perhaps amidst other arduous and necessary avocations,—in the name of all those, who, possessing real knowledge and skill, have naturally and inevitably been led to indulge in high hopes, if not of entire success, at least of fair play and of some advantage to themselves in reward, remuneration for reasonable and necessary expenses incurred, or, at any rate, in receiving honourable mention,—and, finally, in the name of common justice, we do most loudly and earnestly protest against all these and similar appeals to the collective intellect of the public, unless conducted upon some liberal and definite method of compensation for all eminently meritorious labours. That one great prize—either as a substantial tribute, or in the exclusive adoption of an entire plan—should be awarded to one man, and that the half-dozen next to him in merit, perhaps equal or superior, should derive no benefit at all, is manifestly a most clumsy and unjust arrangement. But when we find great appeals to the public, nobly answered, and yet _no one_ work selected as the work desired,—no one rewarded—but every one _used_ and got rid of—then, indeed, we see an abuse of that kind which ought to be most fully exposed, so that it may serve as a warning in future “to all whom it may concern.”