The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-22 00:00:00

NOVEMBE,___s 1

CastleOlreet • and Square Temperance Rooms were
brilliantly illuminated.

• LITERARY PROPERTY.
The-last number of the Phrenological Journal con,
tains the following letter from Mr. Combe, " Oa the
Law cif Copyri&lt," which places the subject in a new
light !1
" it's—boring the whole period of the recent con-
troversy regarding the amendment of the law of copy-
right, I preserved silence, being aware of the ten.
dency of self- interest to bias the judgment ; but now,
when the question is settled, end is not likely to be
revived during the lives of the existing generation of
authors, I am desirous of placing on record the views
which. occurred to me on the subject, and which are
in some respects different from any which I saw stated
by the learned and able writers who took part in
the discussion. As the result at which I have arrived
seem to be directly, and, I hope, logically deducible
from the principles of phrenology, they may, perhaps,
not inappropriately find a place in your pages.
" With the view of avoiding details, which now
possess no interest, I shall proceed at once to the
main point in dispute between authors and the
public. The former claimed a perpetual property in
their works ; while the advocates of limited copyright
opposed their demand, as unfounded in justice,
and detrimental to the public interests. The oppo-
sition was maintained chiefly on two grounds, viz., Ist,
That property is the creature of the law ; that authors,
therefore, have no inherent right of property in their
works ; an.l that any extent of exclusive privilege of
publication conferred on them by the Legislature is a
boon for which they should be grateful, but which
they had no right to demand ; and, 2dly, That the
public interests require that a limit should be set to
copyright, otherwise authors, or their representatives,
might capriciously withdraw the most valuable and
useful works from the circulation, or sell them at a
price so extravagantly high that only the affluent
could procure them.
" The first argument, that authors have no inbe,
rent right of property in their works, appears to have
been drawn from an opinion of Bentham, expressed in
his Theory of Legislation. Property and laws,'
says he, are born together, and die together.
Before laws were made there was no property :
take "away laws, and property ceases.' Phrenologi-
cally and philosophically, this dictum will not stand
investigation. The organ and faculty of acquisitive-
ness arelhherent not only in man, but in many of the
lower 'aulinals,,and give rise in both to an...instinctive
sense 6f property.. Lord Kaimes justly ratriarks that
man. ‘:.iS a lid'ardilig . animal, having an appetite for
storing up tharigaaaf use ;' and Chancellor Kent, of the
Statey.Now.ACitalc; 'says 'that the sense of property le
inherent in tbejafirnan breast., and the gradual enlarge,
meld ancV,Cil.ltivition of that sense, from its feelato
form ift.the -saVagp•state to its full vigour and inatqity.,,
among_ poli4lied.",naticins, forms a very --instructi.,
portioti,in,theNstory of human society.' (Kenej
Conimentaties,.ii.; 318.) Lneed not enlarge on this
propositioh, 'because it. is admitted by phrenologists. in
general, and is placed in the clearest light,
and.very ably, l ported, in: Mr. Hurlbut's excellent
thef‘..,Right. and_ Moral Relations.:of,;,Pro•
pertY,. published in col, xv., p. 97, of yourjoUrnal; to
which .1 beg leave to refer.
"Co-exi-stenOmith this sense of property, we find
in Man organa'pf,.conscientiousness, benevolence, and
intellect, and'..thfi Corresponding mental powers, evi-
dently intended'tO serve as guides to his general con-
ductaand; consequently, to the proper exercise of his
acquisitive propensity. Human laws are, or, at least,
ought to be, simply transcripts of the dictates of the
latter faculties, enlightened by knowledge and expe-
rience. Laws may regulate, but cannot confer, any
just rights. They may legitimately expound, define,
and protect them ; but the moment human legislators
assume the power of creating rights which nature
has not previously bestowed, they commit injustice,
and prepare the way for the introduction into society
of insecurity and suffering.
" Mr. Locke observes, that ' the labor of a man's
body and the work of his hands are properly his ;' and
it seems no undue stretch of the proposition to affirm
that equally should the labour of his brain, embodied
by the. work of his hands, be his. The man who
procures from nature, or obtains by purchase, certain
raw materials,. and by his own labour and ingenuity
works them, Up" into a machine or piece of furniture,
is recognised lay all civilised nations as the exclusive
prOprietor, •-in''‘perpetuitY;. of the article produced ;
and 1 am Ate a loss to discover on what principle it
can. be maintained that an individual, who, from ori-
ginal invention, or the current science and literature
of his age, composes a book, should not possess the
exclusive right, in perpetuity, to this product also of
his labour and ingenuity.
" But it is agreed in the
" Second place, that the public interests require that
limits should be set to copyrights, otherwise authors
or their representatives might capriciously withdraw
valuable works from circulation, and thereby retard
the progress of society in virtue and civilisation. It
is a very ancient and a very sound maxim, that
nunquanz aliud natura, aliud sapientu dicit e in other
words, nature is so constituted that it is never neces-
sary to rob an individual of his just rights, in order
to promote the real advantage of society. The rights
of the one, and the interests of the other, are in all
cases compatible ; because the same great Being who
laid the foundation of society in the nature of man,
also conferred on the individual his rights ; and He is
too wise and powerful to have rendered the two con-
flicting. A few elucidations will, I hope, show that
the case of copyright forms no exception to this
general rule.
" Books may consist, Ist, Of new ideas never be-
fore published to the world; 2dly, Of the science and
literature of past and present ages, mixed up with
the author's own observations and reflections ; or,
3dly, Of the expressions of fancies, emotions, and
pa-sions, common to the human race, but invested
with a peculiar charm by the author from the man-
ner in which he embodies them. Newton's Principia,
Harvey's work on the Circulation of the Blood, and
Sir Charles Bell's Dissertations on the Functions of
the Spinal Nerves, all of which communicated dis-
coveries, may be selected as a specimen of the first
class ; Dr. Neil Arnott's Elements of Physics, of the
second; and Campbell's Pleasures of Hope, of third.
I ask, then, what does a perpetual copyright in such
works imply ? Not an exclusive proprietorship in
the ideas and reflections, in the fancies, passions, or
emotions, embodied in them ; but simply in the
author's peculiar mode of expressing them—in that
combination of words which he employs in order to
convey them to the world. The ideas themselves,
with all their consequences and applications, are left
free as air to the public, although the copyright of
the work in which they are embodied be preserved
inviolate to the author and his heirs. In our own
day, Sir Charles Bell's discovery of the nerves of
motion and feeling is transferred to every systematic
work on physiology In Europe and America, although
the copyright of the special essays in which he an-
nounced it still belongs to his representatives.
" In regard to this class of works, then, there is no
reason for maintaining that the public interests
require that the discoverer's copyright should be

" In regard to the second class of books, I trust
that I do no injustice to Dr. Arnott in saying, that
all the principles of science which enter into his
treatire, pre-existed in the works of his predecessors,
and that the peculiar merit of his composition, in
my opinion, consists in the clear Arranipment and
perspicuity of elucidation of his propositions. If a
perpetual copyright wero granted to Dr. Arnott, it
is clear that th whole principles, or, in other words,
the entire raw material of the Ntark, would be left as
free to the public as they were before he wrote. The
only thing of which it would then be in his power to
deprive than, would be the advantage of that curiosa
felicita.s docendi, in which his peculiar merit consists.
But the talents which produced those results were
conferred on him, as an individual, by the Creator,
when He gave him a peculiar conformation of brain,
and a temperament characterised by fineness and
activity; and it is difficult to diseover oii what
principles of justice society can consistently deprive
him of the advantages of that gift, or limit his en-
joyment of it, while they respect the right of
property in perpetuity in tables and chairs, made by
the hands of far less talented and less accomplished
men.

" It is argued, however, that were the law to
recognise a perpetual copyright in this work, Dr.
Arnott, or his heirs, might capriciously deprive the
public of the instruction it contains. In so far as re-
gards the author himself, nature has given a pretty
ellective guarantee against such an unreasonable
course of conduct; because a brain in which the
organs of benevolence, conscientiousness, love of ap-
probation, and reflection, were so deficient as to render
the individual capable of acting in such a manner,
could not compose such a work. It is an extreme
supposition that his heir or assigns might be so in-
fatuated—it is supposing them to be insane, and,
nevertheless, at large; but as such an occurrence
might happen, I shall, for the present, assume that it
actually does present itself, and inquire into the means
which nature has provided for the protection of the
public interests in such an emergency. They are
sirnPk.
" The ideas contained in the work are public pro-
perty; and all that is wanted is a re-expression of
them in such a form 86 may supply the void occasioned
by the withdrawal of Dr. Arnott's treatise. The
power of composition depends on temperament and
cerebral development, and nature has not confined
those gifts to Dr. Arnott. She has ushered into the
world other brains and temperaments capable of
running the race in which Dr. Arnott has conquered:
and if his work were withdrawn, and the, public•
needed his ideas, other individuals would , speedily
appear to supply the desired information. In point 01
fact, every author on science knows and feels that he
holds his place only until an abler brain appears to
wrest the laurels from his brow, and the bread from