The Express.
London, England, 1867-01-19 00:00:00

LSCEUIL

Tuts Mrnos, THE Widdloomb.—And
ROUGE ET NOIR. Maim Pechter. a.y. Cowper. Morelad,
litripetrick. When, Reynolds, Lome& Andrein, Price, c. ;
Mn. L and Mime Remade, Granite, iind C. Leclercu.

f[LND.

THIS MMHG, SEIGEBGI7II.S —liter which will be produced
a Grand Burlesque, GUY FAWKES.—aad A SUIT OF
TN YID'S,

HOLBORN

Tina wants. MY Mr. Belmar,; Muses
Foote rod Letilala —And FLYING LICUD. Mears Neville. Bel-
mar, Blake, Vollalre, dr. ; Mesdames F. Josephs, C. Saunders,
Buie Fool. Fiddes, Lassos, Bermood, tr.

BRITANNIA.

Tarn ERRING, THE PRINCG.R UP THE. PEARL ISLAND ;
OIL THE THREE KINGDOMS OF PEARL, GOLD, AND
EILVEIL Kra Lana au.l Miss Jacobs—Flrst-nas Pantomimist..
—AOd THE SKELETON CREW.

WHIT WATIM AT LONDON. BRIDOL

TEEN Day —Morels, Oh. 4.111 Malmo. lh. Ilm.
TO-NOWWW—llarnhig, lb. Wm Mormon. Zs. Sim

LONDON, SATURDAY, JANUARY 19.

THE question respecting the title of the
Be/graek Magazine, which was decided the other
day by the LORDS JUSTICES, involves consequences
which seem to demand correction by the Legisla-
ture. In that case Messrs. HOOO had registered
the title in 1863, but for three years had never
published any magazine bearing it. In June,
1866, Mr. MAXWELL, in ignorance of this remote
registration, advertised very widely, and at great
expense, a magazine to be published by him under
that name. Messrs. HOOO were aware of this,
but gase Mr. MAXWELL no notice of their prior
right to the designation. But in September last
year they published the first number of their own
magazine, and Mr. Maxwatt's followed in a
couple of months. Each party then filed a bill
to restrain the other from continuing the use of
the disputed title. Messrs. }loco relied on their
registration and first publication ; Mr. Max-
WELL on his first and extensive advertising.
The Vice-Chancellor, however, followed by
the Court of Appeal, dismissed both applications.
The Judges ruled that Mesars.Hooo had no right,
through registration alone, and that their right
only commenced when the first number was pub-
lished. But though it was then made complete,
they refused to give them the equitable remedy of
injunction, because of their bad faith in allowing
Mr. MAXWELL to proceed so far without notice of
their earlier claim. Aa to Mr. MAXWELL, the
Court laid down the doctrine that no amount of
advertising could by itself give any right in the
title of the book advertised.

It is plain that these rules open a door to a
good deal of ingenious overreaching. Since there
is no way, either by registration or advertising,
of securing an exclusive right before publication
or sale to the name of a book, maga-
zine, newspaper, or anything else, it will
be impossible to advertise a name with-
out risk that some speculator may seize upon
it, and by prior publication secure its advantages
for himself. In the case where the work is by a
well-known author, for whom the public care more
than for any taking title he may give to his
books, the injury may perhaps not bo very serious.
But in the case of a less famous, or of an anony-
mous, author, the theft of the title of the subject
may be theft of a valuable property. It may
have attracted the attention and engaged the
interest of the public, and this result may have
been attained at the cost of many hundreds, per-
haps thousands, of pounds. Here, the fraudulent
publisher stepping in with • work hurriedly got
up to secure priority of issue, may succeed in
snatching a sale to which he is in no way entitled,
and to that extent robbing the author of the work
which had really attracted the public interest.
And sometimes, perhaps, the mere threat of
such procedure may be made use of as a means of
extorting money.
On the other band, to allow a man by mere ad-
vertising to establish a property in a name, would
obviously, as the Loans dryness urged, be a rule
incapable of being worked. What could be called
advertising ? Certainly it would not do to let one
obscure notice, nor two, nor three, suffice to esta-
blish a title. It must be such extensive ad-
vertising as could be reasonably held to inform
the public. But what court or what jury could
pretend to draw the line t It is plain, then, that
we must still resort to registration in • public
office as the sole means of certifying that a right
has been secured. But, again, it would be as
evidently unreasonable to allow a man to lock up
a useful or expressive title for an indefinite time,
without making bonk fide use of it himself. If
that were permitted, we should have all con-
ceivable designations of books, magazines, and
reviews at once registered, in order that
the publisher of every new work might
find himself linable to proceed till he had paid
black mail to the fictitious owner of the name. A
limit must be fixed upon—two months, three
months, or six months—during which registration
should be effective, and that time elapsed, it should
be no longer the basis of any exclusive property.
No doubt the attempt might even then be made