From the above brief summary it is easy to see that a story that might prove eminently acceptable from the point of view of one magazine might not do at all for another. That the placing of a story, in other words, demands a certain amount of knowledge of market wants and market conditions. This brings us to the consideration of the agent. Is or is not an agent of help? This question is largely one for self-determination. It depends somewhat on the personality of the author. All agents cannot help all authors: there is a give and take of personality; in other words, the human equation has something to do with the success of the relationship. An agent cannot sell a story that is not sellable; an agent cannot repeatedly get higher prices for the author than the author can get for himself. An agent does know more of the markets and its fluctuations; agency advice--as it is a matter of business--is apt to be impersonal and good; agency direction can save much misguided effort. There is an impression that agents are perhaps not popular with editors. This is not true. Perhaps the letter of James E. Tower, editor of The Delineator given herewith and which came unsolicited, is as good actual proof of this fact as any statement which the writer might make. Dear Miss Wick: A certain periodical, which has its distribution amongst writers, has put in my mouth words which I did not say and which do an injustice alike to some good friends of mine and to me. I am quoted as having said, at a recent luncheon, that editors are not keen about purchasing from literary brokers. I never said that nor implied it. I said that I felt that the brokers had been the largest single factor in raising and maintaining authors’ prices; that the publishing trade were inclined, on this account, to look askance at the agent system, but that authors formerly did not receive adequate compensation and that the better prices had raised the standard of authorship and benefited the trade, as well as the writers themselves. My own editorial career is sufficient refutation of the statement attributed to me. I think I never heard an editor express any prejudice against the broker system. Sincerely yours, JAMES E. TOWER. Lastly do not let it be felt that the compiler of these editorial want paragraphs, this editorial exposition of the stories the editor wants and buys, desires to express any personal opinion as to the relative literary merits or commercial status of the magazines listed in this book. This is not a book of criticism. It is an effort to have the editors talk directly to those who for any reason whatever are interested in the American short story as it is published week in and week out in our magazines. JEAN WICK. NEW YORK CITY. _Ainslee’s Magazine_