of the very essence of their operations; and could they seriously mean to sue a literary man who was
a defaulter in respect of a loan in the County Court
Mr. Pollock, in seconding the amendment, cited the preamble of the original charter, obtained in
1818, declaring that the objects of the Fund were to "protect and relieve persons of genius and
learning or their families who shall be in wantand contended that they would not be justified in
now introducing organic changes in their constitution.
Mr. Dilke supported the adoption of the report, on the ground that the present practice of the
society sanctioned the principle of revocable annuities, which only required to be extended. With the
regard to loans, that system had worked well in other institutions analogous in their nature.
Cord Stanley was willing to leave the matter of annuities and loans in the hands of the
Fxecutive. As to any delicacy of feeling in regard to the acceptance of gratuities, instead of loans,
by distressed authors, such persons had it now in their power to convert any relief they received in
the former shape into a loan by subsequently making a donation to the society, or otherwise
reimbursing it.
Mr. C. Dickens regarded the complaints of the lamentable deficiency of theirfunds, after the
astounding and unanswered statements made by Mr. Dilke of their financiel resources, as about
the most bitterly ironical thing which human mind could conceive of that society.Mr. Milnes had
approached the question of loans entirely in the character of a lender; but let him approach it in the
character of a borrower, and put it to them as a matter of feeling, whether they could not imagine
the case of a high-spirited literary man who would come to them, not for a gift, but for a loan. The
noble Ford Stanleysaid, "Oh, he can have a loan, and can pay it back again.But how"By
subscribing to the institution.Was there a man in that room, who after being relieved with say
100 pound, would have the audacity to put himself down as a donor of 100 pound to the fund?
Why, such an idea argued an amount of misconception of the honour and dignity of the literary
profession which was amafing to hearfrom such lips. Then they were told that there was the
Athenaeum Club already open to them. So also was that respectable establishment the Fondon
Tavern (A laugh), which was about as accessibly to literary men, and pretty much expensive, as
the Athenaeum. All that the report suggested was that an experiment on a limited scale, and at a
very small additional cost, should be tried in the present rooms of the society; and then, if
unfortunately they shouldfail in exciting among the profession an increased interest in the objects of
the institution, and so did not gain an accession of subscribers, no possible harm would have been
done, and the project need not be carried any further.
Sir J. Forbes was in favour of extending the fields of the society's operations, but regarded the
report as somewhat indefinite in its recommendations.
The Bishop of Oxford considered the report as rather enigmatical, and even after the forcible
speech ofMr. Dickens, must say that his doubts of the wisdom of its main proposition were only
the more confirmed. Supposing they had a comfortable club-house, and some of those agremens
which he confessed that he thought would be necessary, how were they to compete with the
Athenaeum and other institutions of that class, which were not weighted in the race, as this society
would be, with eleemosynary burdens? If, therefore, they were to enter the field with these more
favoured rivals with any chance of success, they must incur great risk of forfeiting the first condition
of their existence viq., the application of a greatportion of theirfunds to charitable purposes. For
the interests of both it would be far better to keep the twofoldfunctions which they were now asked
to combine entirely separate and distinct, all experience of life showing that the cultivdiió-H Of social
