The Sun.
London, England, 1870-10-08 00:00:00

1 LIE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1876.

! settle. However it may be, other alarming
facts are established beyond dispute. The
massacre was no spontaneous outburst of
a furious mob. The murderers were some regu-
larly organised body, and evidently did their infernal
work with system. If the authorities or officials at
Tien-tsin did not assist, they, at all events, did nothing
to prevent the dreadful deed. Further, no steps
worth mentioning have been taken against the
criminals. Only a dozen of the rioters have been ar-
rested, and their crime vet awaits both trial and punish-
ment. The rest are at large. The European diploma-
tists in China have made strong representations ; but
though the period which has elapsed since the massacre
—three months—is amply sufficient to satisfy even
Chinese habits of procrastination, the afihir remains
where it was.. On the other hand signs of hostility are
appearing against foreigners generally, and the Go-
vernment is making preparations for war, as if

resolved to defenl the murderers by force. This
is a situation which does not admit of neglect.
The offence is one that cannot be overlooked, and it
would be absurd to plead that England has no direct
interest at stake, for of all European nations we
have most to lose, both of life and property,
in the Empire. The duty of demanding an
immediate understanding is clear. If the Chinese
Government on final pressure identify themselves
with the massacre, the English residents must
either be amply protected against a similar
fate, or all connection with the country be given up,
the latter course being in no way probable. If on
the contrary, the authorities at Pekin yield to a
decisive appeal, and disavow the outrage, Europe
will need both satisfaction for the past, and security
for the future.

TOPICS OF THE DAY.

THE FREE-SHOOTERS IN FRANCE.

appeal will meet with an immediate response, and that
during the cold weather they may be sheltered and
trained preparatory to emigration in the spring.

PHOTOGRAPHIC COPYRIGHT.

A case of considerable interest, involving a ques-
tiin of copyright, has been tried in London. Mr.
Brooks, the well-known fine-art publisher, some time
ago became the owner and copyright holder of the
original painting "Grace Darling." He also pur-
chased from Mr. Ernest Gambart the exclusive
right to publish and to sell photographic copies of
the pictures " Patient in Tribulation," "The
Reaper," " Obedient to the Law," and he was
owner of the original oil painting " Erin
Farewell." Mr. Knight, photographic artist, was
accused of pirating or selling pirated copies of these
pictures. He was visited by the complainant's as-
sistant, who gave him an order for certain photo-
graphs of the pictures enumerated. The defendant
told him he had not got them in stock, but he
intended printing some from the engravings which
he had. On a subsequent occasion the assistant
purchased the copies, which were pro-
duced in court. In defence it was con-
tended that some of the copies produced were
issued by Mr. Brooks, but the name had been cut off;
and a witness was called who affirmed that he had
taken the name of the complainant off the pictures,
alleging as his reason that he believed Mr. Brooks
was laying a trap for Knight. The magistrate
thought the witness had set a trap for his friend,
the defendant, if that were his only reason fur cut-
ting off the name, and informed him that
ho had nearly laid himself open to a charge
of conspiracy. The defendant was fined in each
case, or in default of payment to suffer imprisonme]t
for ten months. Mr. Brooks stated that his trade
was being ruined by such men as Knight, and it
may well be believed that he suffers great pecuniary
loss by piracy seeing the immense sums he gives for
the copyright of works of art.

A correspondent of the Standard calls attention o

the " Frauc-tireurs," or Free-shooters, and says that
there is a strong determination on the part of the
Prussians to treat them as mere lawless freebooters
and assassins who deserve no consideration whatever.
As some English journals have adopted the same
view of the question, he deems it expedient to state
some of the rules which were laid down for the
Landsturm by the Prussian Government. Among the
rules contained in the Royal Prussian order for call-
ing out the Landsturm it is said that they are en-
gaged in a fight for existence which sanctions
every means that may be employed. The
object of the Landsturm is to arrest the
march of the enemy, to annoy him incessantly, to
surprise him by night, and in short, to harass, trouble,
and molest him in every conceivable way, and to
destroy him singly or in detachments, whenever or
wherever it may be possible. The Landsturm is
not to wear a special uniform or dress, because it
would betray the wearer, and render him more liable
to pursuit. After quoting these paragraphs, the
writer thinks that comment would be superflous. All
readers must judge for themselves what right Prussia
has to find fault with the Free-shooters, or treat
them as beyond the pale of military law. The Land-
slurn2 is a term synonymous with the levee en masse
in France, in consequence of which the Free-shooters
have sprung into existence.