The article in the 'Quarterly' was certainly not written by Dr. Smith, and I have reason to know that he is a good deal ashamed of it. Nobody seems to know who wrote it. I do not expect they will reply upon us; but nothing is more beneficial to the two Reviews than a little controversy, especially when serious principles are concerned. This question is precisely the _crux_ or test of Whig and Tory principles; it is the old fight of parliamentary power against prerogative. There has not been in England, for a hundred years, a minister so indifferent to Parliament and so subservient to the Court as Lord Beaconsfield. _Foxholes, July 16th_.--Dizzy's fireworks will soon burn out; and when people come to reflect on these transactions, and their consequences, they will be found to be some of the most questionable in modern English history. He has the merit of presenting a bold front to Europe and of avoiding war; but the cost will be great and the ulterior consequences formidable. I suppose they are going to give him a Roman triumph this afternoon from Charing Cross to Downing Street. Sed quid Turba Remi?... ...... Idem populus... ... hac ipsa Sejanum diceret hora Augustum. To my old eyes all this is a sham--a scene out of 'Tancred' and 'Lothair.' Depend upon it, the article on the 'Constitution and the Crown' will be read. _Foxholes, August 10th_.--I never in my life read a better article than this of Froude on Copyright. It is incomparably good in force of argument, vigour of style, point, and truth, and, I think, will go far to settle the assailants of copyright. I confess I enjoy the smashing of the sages of the Board of Trade and old Trevelyan. They will see that if they attack literature, literature is able to defend itself. _From Mr. T. Longman_ _Farnborough Hill, August 14th_.--... I entirely agree with you in the excellence of Froude's article [on Copyright]. ... I see that he thinks that copyright may be in danger, and that the tendency of writing will flow into periodical literature. That I know has long been XIXth Century Knowles's opinion. He says he cares nothing for any copyright, and never asks for it. Like the 'Times,' he does not, in fact, need it. His writers are highly paid, and he and they are satisfied. _To Mr. T Longman_ _Foxholes, August 15th_.--... No doubt any restriction of copyright in permanent works would have the effect of inducing literary men to write more and more in periodicals, which are not permanent but well paid. This argument is very important. I am not sure that Froude has laid sufficient stress upon it. Good and solid literature already suffers considerably from the fact that fugitive literature is far better paid, and that a literary man can rarely afford to write a large and substantial book requiring years of labour. Herbert Spencer's evidence is very interesting; but few men have the courage to risk their all in labouring for the future.