University of Virginia Library

The Egoist Tearsheets

The first printed text of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man was serialized in The Egoist, London, in 1914 and 1915. Tearsheets from The Egoist were in 1915 and 1916 circulated in the sustained, though long unsuccessful, efforts of James B. Pinker, literary agent, of Ezra Pound and above all Harriet Shaw Weaver to find an English publisher—and later, when the firm of The Egoist Ltd. had been founded for the very purpose of publishing A Portrait, to find a printer in England willing to take on the novel in book form. The search[3] ended only when B. W. Huebsch of New York undertook both to publish A Portrait in the United States and to supply The Egoist Ltd. with the sheets for 750 copies[4] which became the first book edition published in England.[5] In its course, successive lots of tearsheets of the serialised Egoist printing were sent across the Atlantic, corrected and uncorrected, and in complete sets of the text as well as in units of two or

three chapters. What has survived of these several dispatches to America now forms three separate complete sets of tearsheets in the Slocum Collection at Yale University.[6] One of them—EC-A—gains its integrity as a set from having served as the printer's copy for the Huebsch edition (H).

The library of the British Museum in London holds a fourth set of tearsheets. It came to the British Museum from the possession of Harriet Shaw Weaver in October 1951. Following Anderson's sigla I shall call it EC-W. This set does not enter the transmission of the text of A Portrait beyond the Egoist serialisation, but it clarifies some aspects of the transfer into print of the typescript, which itself is largely lost, by providing evidence that none of the censoring cuts which affect the Egoist text in its published form were made until the last moment before publication. In its substantive readings Joyce's text was set up as unimpaired as the typescript transmitted it by the compositors of all three printers employed by The Egoist during the serialisation of the novel. The EC-W tearsheets prove that printinghouse editors must be held responsible for the cuts.[7] EC-W contains as an insert the left column of a page-proof of p. 289 (The Egoist, Aug. 1, 1914) which begins Chapter III of the novel. It has the entire five-paragraph passage in print which is then seen to have been removed from the subsequent published version of the full page. A short poem, spaced widely so that it corresponds in length to the excised Portrait passage, seems to have been inserted as a filler where the August 1 installment ends at the bottom of the left-hand column on page 291. Similarly, after the published version of p. 128 of The Egoist, August 2nd, 1915, part of a galley proofsheet is inserted which corresponds to a large section of the text found on p. 128, second column, and p. 129, first column, and contains in print both the brief piece of dialogue censored in publication and the twice-repeated word 'ballocks' subsequently replaced by asterisks. Of particular interest in EC-W, moreover, is the fact that all of Chapter IV is in galley-proof. Herein also the two sentences near the end of the chapter which to Joyce's recorded dismay[8] had disappeared from the published text are found in print. Their removal caused some respacing and resetting of lines and indeed introduced

one new substantive error in the published Egoist text. Further collation shows that the galley-proofs of Chapter IV are wholly uncorrected and that, while their correction before publication removed many printer's errors, it also introduced new errors into the text.

EC-W, Harriet Weaver's set of tear- and proofsheets of the Egoist serialisation of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, is now bound in hard covers in a volume of 60 leaves which but for three exceptions—fols. 3-4, 5-6 and 30-31 being conjugate—are separately mounted. The binding was done after the set's accession to the British Museum, and there are signs that before binding it consisted of three, or rather four, individual parts. The text itself came in three separate bundles, with Chapters I and II each by itself, and Chapters III, IV, and V together in a brown paper folder. The British Museum shelfmark is pencilled on each first leaf of these three sections. Because of a bookbinder's decision, moreover, one leaf and two once-folded sheets of errata to Chapters III and IV (with one single erratum for Chapter V) in Joyce's own hand must now be regarded as the fourth section of the set. These manuscript errata lists, although never an integral part of the set of tear- and proofsheets, once accompanied it in a green envelope, as is stated in a note in Miss Weaver's hand on the brown paper folder to Chapters III-V. After binding, the volume as a whole may now be described as follows:

Seen as a whole, EC-W contains three further sets of markings which should be recorded. In Chapters I-IV, there are two partly concurrent sets of line-counts. One of them is in short marginal strokes in thin black ink marking every hundredth line of printed text. Starting afresh at the beginning of each chapter, it is almost faultlessly accurate; but it is also purely mechanical, as is shown by the count for Chapter III which begins in the column of page-proof and runs on into the first column of the published text without allowing for the repetition here of lines already counted. The other set, which is present in Chapters I, II and IV only, is in pencil. In Chapters II and IV it, too, marks off roughly every hundredth line, though it is less accurate and usually deviates by several lines from the line-count in ink. In Chapter I the corresponding divisions in pencil fluctuate between 82 and 151 lines in length. In each of the chapters where they appear the pencilled divisions are serially numbered. In Chapter I and II, there are also a few accompanying additions of figures to be found in the margins. In Chapter V there are no line-counts. The tearsheets for this last chapter, however, are the only ones to show a few traces of correction beyond the restoring of censored passages. On fol. 43v, a pencilled marginal note specifies 'dashes all through not inverted commas'; on fol. 46r the twice-repeated misprint 'Epitectus' is each time corrected to 'Epictetus', and in close to 20 instances spread over several pages 'aesthetic' is corrected to 'esthetic' in accordance with Joyce's orthography. Finally, there are throughout the text marginal markings in pencil and indelible pencil which draw attention to a series of apparently undesirable passages of text. None of the restitutions of Egoist censorings are so marked, but there is a clear connection between all the markings in pencil in that they note passages which have to do with urine and excrement—beginning, indeed, on the first page with the sentence "When you wet the bed, first it is warm then it gets cold."—or else might be considered to have a blasphemous ring to them.[11] The markings in indelible pencil, present towards the end of

Chapter II and in Chapter III only, stand against two instances of Stephen's sexual phantasies.[12]

Fols. 17 and 27, the front and back covers of Chapter II, give the initial clue to the interpretation of the evidence set out above. The tearsheets for the first two chapters, as was seen, are separately claimed to have been prepared, with the careful pastings and markings in green crayon described, by James Joyce himself. Corroborative evidence that Harriet Weaver's repeated statement to this effect means what it says comes from the nature of the covers. On closer inspection, they prove to be the two halves of a broadsheet-size thin white cardboard with printed text in Italian which has been pasted over with white paper.[13] Against the light, the entire text of the two halves put together, though cropped at the top, is clearly legible as four columns of print setting out the rights and duties of tenants of apartment houses: when to pay rent; the duty of heads of families to provide separate bedrooms for children of different sexes over the age of six; strictures on sub-letting, on keeping pets, etc., etc. The text ends in one line of type across the bottom of the four columns: 'Il presente Regolamento venne approvato dalla G[iu]nta municipale, nella seduta del 6 Febbraio 1912.' and is signed 'IL CONSIGLIO DIRETTIVO.' Being printed on one side only of a sheet of thin white cardboard, it looks much like the general regulations for tenants such as one often finds affixed somewhere near the main entrances of apartment houses in countries like Germany, Switzerland or Austria. In Italy, apparently, the imposition of such rules has never been, nor is to this day, customary. But Trieste in its authoritarian Austrian days may have had them.[14] Thus, from the handmade covers to the tearsheets of Chapter II, it would seem that it was indeed James Joyce himself who carefully pasted up the installments of Chapters I and II of A Portrait, and that he did so in Trieste, shortly after July 15, 1914, when Chapter II ended in The Egoist. Thereafter, although Joyce did not leave Trieste until June, 1915, he would not have been able to attend to the subsequent chapters in the same manner. For, as we learn from his letter to Harriet Weaver of

July 24, 1915 from Zurich (Letters, II, 355), he received no copy of The Egoist in Trieste subsequent to the issue of July 15, 1914. The letter of July 24, 1915, itself an acknowledgement of the receipt of the copies to date of The Egoist for 1915, specifies that Joyce had "not yet seen the numbers for 1 and 15 August, 1 and 15 September and 15 December [1914]".[15]

The Joyce correspondence, besides allowing some inferences as to how EC-W as a whole came about in its present make-up, makes it possible to trace with some accuracy the history of the first two chapters therein, and incidentally explains the care with which they were prepared. They were the first part, submitted by Joyce himself, of the copy for Grant Richards who, on the basis of the contract for Dubliners, had first refusal of Joyce's books until 15 June, 1919.[16] On July 3rd, 1914, Joyce wrote to Grant Richards: "I shall of course, as agreed between us, give you the opportunity of publishing [A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man] next year in book. If you cannot find the papers I could send you my copies." (Letters, II, 335 f.), and on April 30th, 1915, to Harriet Weaver: ". . . the first half of the book was forwarded to him by me last July."[17] In an undated letter, probably late in January, 1915, Joyce further informed Richards: "My friend Mr Ezra Pound will send you the fourth, fifth and third chapters of my novel so as to save time" (Letters, II, 336). Richards had apparently undertaken "to give a definite answer within three weeks after the completed MS was in his possession",[18] and Joyce was anxious to press his decision, as in the meantime James B. Pinker had made an offer to act as Joyce's literary agent. Ezra Pound was to negotiate an agreement with him on Joyce's behalf, and Joyce wrote to Pound on March 17, 1915: "The rest of the Portrait of the Artist had better be sent on to Grant Richards as soon as it is ready. . . . If he decides not to publish . . . I am quite willing to entrust the disposal of the rights to Mr Pinker."[19] On March 24, Joyce wrote again to Richards (Letters, II, 337) saying he presumed that the complete copy of the book was now in his possession, but the next day he wrote to Harriet Weaver:

Ballantyne, Hanson & Co., the printers of The Egoist since the February issue (in which Chapter V commenced) had not yet, however, set up type beyond the issue for April 1st. To oblige Joyce, and in order to enable Richards to reach a decision on the book publication, Harriet Weaver therefore, late in March, 1915, risked parting temporarily with the pages of the Chapter V typescript which had not yet been set up.[20] This was technically possible because for the May issue, which was a special Imagist number, the serialisation of A Portrait was to be interrupted. There was consequently a time lapse between installments of two months. On April 22nd, Harriet Weaver informed Joyce accordingly, specifying when she needed the typescript returned.[21] Joyce replied on April 30th, (Letters, I, 79 f.), and on May 7th he wrote to Pinker: "The fifth chapter of my novel must . . . be returned to The Egoist not later than the 20 May as it is needed for the June issue" (Letters, II, 341). On May 18th Richards rejected the novel,[22] whereupon the disposal of the book rights went to Pinker. The copy which Richards had received piecemeal between July, 1914, and April, 1915, must also have gone to Pinker. Certainly the tearsheets Joyce had sent him from Trieste of Chapters I and II did, as is witnessed by the Pinker business card on the front leaf of Chapter I in EC-W.

How much of the rest of EC-W originally belonged to the Richards-Pinker copy is less easy to decide. Chapter V stands apart in the set because it alone has the deletions of extraneous matter in blue crayon and contains no line-counts. Chapters I, II and IV are linked by the line-counts in pencil, not present, as the ones in ink are, in Chapter III. Chapters III and IV in turn are linked by the orange crayon used for cancellations and marginal annotations, and, in addition, by the

original title inscription in faded black ink on the brown paper folder: 'A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. Chapters III,IV', to which a dot in the centre of the line and the roman numeral 'V' seem to have been added later. (A yet later addition on the brown paper folder are the words in permanent black ink: 'from The Egoist. see Mr Joyce's corrections to chapters III+IV in green envelope'.) As the handwriting is apparently Harriet Weaver's, the brown paper folder still extant may well have been the one in which she originally, in February/ March 1915, gave Ezra Pound Chapters III and IV for Grant Richards' perusal, but whether both chapters in EC-W are still in the identical sheets Richards read them in is another question. The absence of line-counts in pencil in Chapter III suggests that only Chapters I, II and IV have survived in the present set from the earliest discernible point in time of its previous history. There is a possibility that the line-counts in pencil are traces of Grant Richards' deliberations over the novel. This would put the galley-proofs of Chapter IV among the material gathered together by Ezra Pound for him. It would also mean that an earlier set of tearsheets of Chapter III was replaced by the present set (which has no pencilled line-counts) some time after EC-W left Richards. On the other hand, Chapter III shares the line-counts in ink with Chapters I, II and IV, but not with Chapter V. Logically one would therefore assume that Chapter III in its present state became part of EC-W before Chapter V in its present state did.

It was in July 1915 that Joyce's London friends and agents were most urgently pressed by the author to enter into negotiations about the book publication of the novel with nothing but a wholly unexpurgated text. On July 24th, Joyce read the end of Chapter IV in the January issue of The Egoist as forwarded to him in Zurich and discovered that whole sentences had been left out. He wrote immediately to Harriet Weaver to complain about the carelessness of the printers, adding: "My MSS are in Trieste but I remember the text and am sending the correct version of [the] passages [in question] to my agent. The instalments printed by Ballantyne, Hanson and Co (February to July) are of course carefully done. I hope the other printers did not set up the numbers which I have not seen. . . ." (Letters, II, 355). But they had done so; and when, a week later, Joyce had received and read the remaining issues for 1914 (August 1 to December 15), he wrote even more urgently to Pound:

Already, however, there was a reply to his letter of July 24th under way from Harriet Weaver, explaining the textual corruptions and reassuring him that the censored passages were not lost. Harriet Weaver wrote on July 28th:

The deletions of January 1, 1915, were in print in the Chapter IV galleys, and the Chapter III deletion of August 1, 1914, is contained in the column of page-proof prefixed to the Chapter III tearsheets in EC-W. From the absence of pencilled line-counts in these tearsheets on the one hand and the mechanically uniform application therein of the line-counts in ink on the other, it seems probable, indeed, that Harriet Weaver, acting upon Joyce's letter of July 24th, supplied Pinker with a complete new set of Chapter III tearsheets plus the additional column of page-proof for the beginning of the chapter (rather than with this page-proof only) for the actual purpose of his submitting the novel to Secker. At the time, however, she may hastily have entered therein pencil markings only, now partly erased or over-ruled in orange crayon. The orange crayon markings in their turn, which provide a firm link between the extant sheets of Chapters III and IV, would seem to be later than the pencilled deletions of extraneous matter in Chapter III. They were doubtless made by Miss Weaver also, but at a time when both chapters as they survive were in her hands at once. As the main function of the orange crayon is to mark and draw attention to the censored passages, she may not have applied it to this end until EC-W eventually passed into her hands and was sent by her to various printers and at least one publisher.

After the return of the Chapter V typescript needed as copy for the

forthcoming June 1—September 1 installments, the Richards-Pinker copy, then in the hands of Pinker, was incomplete. But the Egoist printers appear to have had the entire chapter in type by the end of July. Pinker was able to reassure Harriet Weaver, who feared otherwise after the renewed interference of Ballantyne's in the August 1 issue, that he had submitted to Secker not the expurgated but the complete text in galleys of the last two fifth chapter installments.[23] The proof-markings in the galley-slip still extant among the Chapter V tearsheets suggest that Pinker got the galleys from the printers at the end of July when, with the corrections made, the pages for the August 1 issue of The Egoist had been imposed. There would have been galleys for him, too, specially pulled, for the portion of the text to be published in September. The February-June installments would have been in the complete issues of The Egoist for these months, as was the case with the copy submitted to Richards (see above, fn. 20), or else already in tearsheets, as in the present EC-W. The present Chapter V tearsheets, however, with their blue crayon cancellations of extraneous matter, were in all probability assembled in Pinker's office after the publication of the last installment on September 1st, as the blue crayon markings therein are uniform throughout. At the same time, the absence of line-counts in ink suggests that the tearsheets which now make up Chapter V in EC-W are not identical in any part with the state of the copy for Chapter V at the time when the inked line-counts were made. It seems possible that the inked line-counts were made by Martin Secker & Co. in August, 1915. When they refused to publish and returned the novel to Pinker, the makeshift copy for Chapter V was replaced by the present uniform one, incorporating a galley slip for the censored passages only, which would thus be all that remains of the Chapter V copy as submitted to Secker.[23a] But with Chapter V replaced, EC-W as it now survives was complete. It would thereafter have been the copy which Pinker circulated among the London publishers whom he hoped to interest in Joyce's novel. The set passed from Pinker to Harriet Weaver in April 1916, presumably, when Pinker finally consented to the proposed publication by The Egoist Ltd. and the agreement to that effect had been signed by author, agent and publisher. Harriet Weaver duly noted on the title-pages of Chapters I and II that they had been "prepared by Mr Joyce" and changed the return address from Pinker's to that of The Egoist Ltd.

Now may have begun the copy's round not of publishers, but of printers,[24] and it was for this purpose, as suggested, that Harriet Weaver emphasized the censored passages for restitution in Chapters III and IV and marked the exact positions of insertion in all three chapters affected by cuts. This seems to have been done in two distinct stages: the markings in orange crayon in Chapters III and IV are earlier, and some at least of the marginal notes and positionings in black ink are later, as witnessed by the black ink superinscription over orange crayon at the end of Chapter IV. Lastly, the manuscript errata lists in their green envelope were included in the set after May 25th and before June 9th, 1916 (see Letters, II, 378-379), and note taken of their presence in permanent black ink on the brown paper folder for Chapters III-V. The pencilled notes on Chapters I and II, finally— 'No corrections here. H.S.W.' and 'Nor have I [a] copy of those of first two chapters. [H.S.W.]'—were obviously also made in two stages, and while the latter would seem the counterparts to the note about 'Mr. Joyce's corrections to chapters III+IV in green envelope', the former may refer to corrections in the sense of reinsertions of censored text and thus correspond to the markings of omissions in Chapters III-V. Again, the latter notes also suggest that EC-W was out of Harriet Weaver's hands when the marked-up tearsheets of Chapters I and II arrived with a letter from Joyce of June 9 (else she might have transferred the authorial corrections to her copy). By this time the publication of A Portrait in New York (and first by John Marshall) was under consideration, to be printed from other copy than EC-W. This set was once more at hand when William Heinemann had been persuaded to read Joyce's novel for himself and Ezra Pound on July 12th urged Harriet Weaver to send him the complete text.[25] She mentions in one of her two letters of September 7th to Joyce that she had sent Heinemann her copy containing "the deleted sentences" and that he had not yet given it back (although he had declined to publish by August 19th). When the set finally returned to her it could serve no further purpose, for the book publication of A Portrait was then firmly in the hands of B. W. Huebsch of New York. There is some reason, incidentally,

to suspect that most of the observed markings of undesirable passages of text are William Heinemann's (presumably those in pencil, at least, if not those in indelible pencil), on the grounds that if they were the marks of an earlier reader they would not have been left standing in the margins to catch a later reader's attention. EC-W remained in Harriet Weaver's possession until she gave it to the British Museum in 1951.

As a document relating to the publishing history of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, EC-W is thus of considerable interest. In terms of the textual history of the novel, its relevance, while specific, is yet narrowly circumscribed. Of greatest potential value and importance for the establishing of a critical text are its authorial errata lists. Their position must be assessed in relation to the documents central to the textual transmission, and in particular to EC-A, the printer's copy for H. This entails a reconsideration of the nature and date of EC-A.[26] Anderson describes EC-A as fully and, except for some additional markings clearly made in the printinghouse, uniformly corrected in Joyce's own hand, and identifies it with a set of tearsheets dispatched by Harriet Weaver on March 31st, 1916—and described by her in a letter of that date—to E. Byrne Hackett. Hackett in his turn sent it on to B. W. Huebsch in portions, beginning on May 4th, 1916 (Lidderdale, p. 122). By June 2nd Huebsch thereupon felt able to make a provisional offer, and on June 16th he proposed firmly to publish the book (Lidderdale, p. 123; Anderson, p. 189). But the copy in which he read the text cannot have been the one he eventually printed it from: EC-A cannot be identified as the Hackett copy. For it is a fact that Huebsch not only agreed to printing "absolutely according to the author's wishes, without deletion" (Letters, I, 91), but also made great efforts to obtain copy with Joyce's own corrections. Had he been in the possession of EC-A from the outset, the lengthy exchange of letters about the author's corrections between him, Harriet Weaver and James Joyce himself, extending over more than four months from June 16 to October 24, 1916, would have been pointless.[27]

In May 1916, it looked as if John Marshall of New York was going to publish A Portrait. For The Egoist Ltd. in London, Harriet Weaver was proposing an agreement on the same lines as the one which later

came into effect with B. W. Huebsch, namely that sheets of the American printing be supplied for the English edition. James Joyce was interested in the details of correction and proofreading, and an exchange of letters between him and Harriet Weaver in late May and early June establishes what copy and what corrections were available, or were made available, for Marshall. To Joyce's enquiry of May 25th, Harriet Weaver replied on May 31st: Before June 9th, when he returned the cuttings of Chapters I and II after taking less than 24 hours over correcting them, Joyce had already dispatched separately the corrections for Chapters III and IV (Letters, II, 379). There can be no doubt that what Harriet Weaver received from him and acknowledged in a letter dated June 12 were the errata lists to Chapters III and IV as they survive in EC-W. As the letter of May 25th seems to suggest, Joyce had his copy of the Egoist text of the last three chapters already annotated when he wrote, or else did the annotation while awaiting Harriet Weaver's reply, and he certainly did not spend more than a day or two over tabulating the corrections when she asked for them. The authorial errata lists for Chapters III and IV (EC-W, fols. 3-6) can therefore be dated very narrowly to the first week of June, 1916. Moreover, yet another very definite fact emerges from the correspondence as quoted: at no time between the end of July, 1914, and June 8th, 1916, had James Joyce had in his possession a full set of tearsheets of A Portrait. The set which was sent to Hackett on March 31, 1916, and was passed on by him to Huebsch, if it contained any corrections at all apart from the insertions of the deleted passages as referred to in Harriet Weaver's covering letter (Anderson, p. 189), cannot have been corrected by Joyce. It cannot, therefore, have been EC-A.

The copy which was thus assembled for John Marshall to print from was described to B. W. Huebsch six weeks later: "I have written to ask Mr Marshall to send on to you his copy of the text which contains Mr Joyce's corrections. . . . Mr Joyce would like the book printed exactly according to this corrected text (the fifth chapter being the original typescript)".[28] For a month Huebsch waited to hear from Marshall and to receive the corrected text from him and then, on August 25, wrote to him in Quebec, while at the same time informing Harriet Weaver that no contact had as yet been established. Probably still confident, however, that the Marshall copy would soon be in his hands, he added that—subject to Pinker's cabled agreement to certain modifications of the publishing contract—"I shall proceed at once with the setting up of the book" (Letters, I, 93). But Huebsch never obtained the corrected text from Marshall. In letters of September 8 and September 20 to Harriet Weaver he again specifically mentions this fact, and thereafter the matter is dropped because Harriet Weaver was supplying him with alternative copy.[29] By September 8, still without copy to print from, Huebsch decided to accept an offer Miss Weaver had made on August 19th (the day she had learnt that William Heinemann was definitely not willing to publish A Portrait in England): "request that you send me the duplicate offered . . . as I presume it contains corrections not to be found in the copy I have." Harriet Weaver had in fact anticipated this request immediately on receiving Huebsch's letter of August 25th in London on September 6th. Without a moment's delay, she had marked up new tearsheets of Chapters III and IV from the authorial errata lists in her possession and posted them that same evening. Tearsheets of Chapters I, II and V she annotated as far as she was able to from memory—that is, she entered in them the kinds of corrections she remembered Joyce had made in the copy for Marshall—and she mailed them with a covering letter to Huebsch the next day; and she cabled to New York that the Joyce corrections were on their way. But, as she emphasized to

Huebsch, she was at the same time sending another set of cuttings of Chapters I, II and V to Joyce, asking him to enter his authentic corrections and to post them straight to New York to avoid further delay.[30] Joyce duly corrected them but returned them to the Egoist office (Letters, I, 95), whereupon Harriet Weaver forwarded them to New York on September 23rd: "I have this morning received from Mr Joyce his corrections of Chapters I, IIτV of his novel, which I send you herewith . . . there seem to be a good many more corrections than I sent you." The receipt of Chapters I-V as marked up and sent by Harriet Weaver on September 6th and 7th (with Chapters III and IV only containing authorized corrections from the authorial errata lists) was acknowledged by Huebsch on September 20th, though he refused to begin to print from them (he apparently even believed that he had not yet received the complete text of the novel): "I have received your . . . letters . . . enclosing revised copy of Chapters I, II, III, IV and V. . . . I am afraid that it will scarcely be worth while going ahead until we have the complete copy because in the long run we will lose time by making many corrections in the chapters following those above named. I shall not go ahead until I get the rest of the book whether it be from Mr. Joyce or from Mr. Marshall, though the latter seems unlikely." On October 6th, the authorially corrected tearsheets of Chapters I, II and V had arrived in New York, and on October 17th Huebsch was able to write: "You will be glad to know that the book is in the hands of the printer and I hope to be able to get it out during the present season."

From the documentary evidence of the Weaver-Huebsch correspondence, then, it would seem that Huebsch's printer's copy in Chapters I, II and V consisted of Egoist tearsheets corrected by Joyce himself between September 7th and 23rd, and in Chapters III and IV of tearsheets

marked up by Harriet Weaver from the authorial errata lists in her possession on September 6th, 1916. Yet Anderson (p. 188) asserts that EC-A, which was undoubtedly Huebsch's printer's copy, is uniformly corrected in Joyce's hand. For the purposes of this article I have not been able to inspect EC-A in the Slocum Collection to ascertain how exhaustive Anderson's description of it is. If Chapters III and IV in EC-A are without question corrected by Joyce himself, this fact would still need to be explained. But it is true that Anderson never considers the possibility of EC-A being a composite copy, while the preceding descriptions of EC-W and the lost Marshall copy argue that it would only follow precedence if it was, and only strengthen the belief that the conclusions drawn from the evidence of the Weaver-Huebsch correspondence are sound. Moreover, even if all non-printinghouse annotation in all chapters of EC-A as described is 'in black ink by a pen with a very fine point', the possibility is not ruled out that the corrections were in fact made by two different pens. For it may be observed in the galley-proof insertion in Chapter V of EC-W that proof-marking in London (by Harriet Weaver?) was also done with black ink in very fine strokes. In addition, there is at least one piece of internal evidence from variants in compound words which would further urge a reexamination of the agent or agents correcting EC-A. Joyce's intention was to alter a majority of the text's hyphenated words into one-word compounds. But, as Harriet Weaver explained to Huebsch in a letter of May 2nd, 1917, "in most places where he had crossed [the hyphens] out, he meant the words to be joined together but the printers have misunderstood and, in many places, separated them" (Letters, II, 393 fn.). Consequently, Joyce's corrections to the Huebsch edition (and Harriet Weaver's additions thereto) contain 87 requests for joining together separated compounds. Their distribution, however, is 69 (all told) in Chapters I, II and V and only 18 in Chapters III and IV, of which only 9 are corrections to separations introduced in H. Harriet Weaver's instructions—if it was she who marked up Chapters III and IV in EC-A—appear to have been less subject to misinterpretation than Joyce's. What is beyond doubt, however, is that Huebsch's printer's copy was not the set of tearsheets dispatched from London on March 31st, reaching Huebsch via Hackett by June 2nd, 1916. Consequently, Joyce's manuscript errata lists to Chapters III and IV now surviving in EC-W, which were tabulated in the first week of June, are of an earlier date than is the marking of corrections for these chapters in EC-A. If Anderson's description were found valid and the corrections in Chapters III and IV of EC-A are in Joyce's own hand, their authority would confirm that of the errata lists or supersede it in cases of conflict. But if the marking of Chapters III and IV in EC-A was done simply by copying Joyce's manuscript corrections, these represent the only authoritative alterations to the Egoist text of Chapters III and IV in preparation of the first book edition.