The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-07 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNINCT. APRIL 7, 1842.

gotten, although if the public ceased to read, the incomes
of authors would be immediately cut off. Committees
had sat in 1813 and 1818 to investigate this subject.
Fourteen years were at length added to the term. The
Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Macaulay) was
willing to added fourteen more. He (Mr. Wakley) re-
gretted that the Right Honourable Gentleman had made
that concession. He had brought before them a long
catalogue of distinguished authors. The works of those
authors were produced under the old system. Did he
hope to get better works under a new system ?—(Hear,
hear.) They were produced at a time when authors
worshipped something of a more estimable character
than the molten calf. Authors, in the present day, de-
voted themselves solely to pelf and to the gratification
of an avaricious feeling.—(No, no.) If it were not so,
why were they now making application to Parliament
for an increase of reward ? Why were they not satisfied
with the rewards which were received by such men as
Milton, Shakspeare, Bacon, and Locke? He knew
of nothing more degrading to literary men than
such an application as the present. It was sur-
prising, if they supposed they had a good case, that
they had not sought for a Committee to obtain further
information. What was the evidence of the publishers
in the Committees ? Mr, Murray, in 1813, was asked
whether, if the copyright was extended to twenty-eight
years, the price would be increased to authors ? His
answer was, that he did not think they should, because
they could not calculate upon the value of the copyright
extending to 28 years. On being asked, in 1818, whe-
ther he thought it would be an advantage to authors to
have the contingency of twenty-eight years turned into
a certainty, his reply was, that, in his opinion, it would
not ; there was not one case in a hundred in which the
sale would continue more than 14 years. Were they, then,
to legislate for the one case and neglect the ninety-nine ?
Were they to speculate for those men who chose to be
so disinterested, and carry their minds so far forward as
to write entirely for posterity, and forget the present
times ?—(Hear, hear.) Men were not generally anxious
about what might happen when they had ceased to exist ;
their anxiety was in a great measure confined to the
events which might occur during their life-time. Men
looked no doubt to a lasting reputation, but thay were
desirous that that reputation should grow up while
they could enjoy it. It was like men who planted woods
for their posterity, while they also expected that they
would be of use to them for their own game. Now, with
regard to the alleged paucity of books, he would ask
what indications there were of such a paucity ? If they
applied at Paternoster-row, or at Mr. Thomas Tegg's,
in Cheapside, they would find there were plenty of books
to be had, and at a very reasonable price too. No doubt
there were authors, for whose productions there was no
sale. It was to be deplored that these men had suffered
from miscalculating their own powers, or the public
taste ; but no interferance of the Legislature could
ameliorate their condition. A poet, according to the
origin of the word, was a maker, a manufacturer ;
lie invented something out of nothing. But he should
like to know why any distinction should be made be-
tween poets and all other inventors. Look to Jenner,
the discoverer of vaccination. Let them compare the
works of any of their modern authors with the invention
of that man ; let them think of the hundreds of thou-
sands of human beings whom he had saved from death,
and the millions whom he had saved from destitution.
But the descendants of Jenner were not knocking at
their doors asking for a reward for his discovery. The
discovery of Jenner was made known to the public, and
thousands availed themselves of it. But, if such a dis -
covery were published in a book, no party could copy
that discovery for a period of 42 years, and they would
thus have given a privilege to the author of the
book while Jenner had had no protection whatever.
Look at the discoverer of the circulation of the blood—
Harvey. What were any of your literary men, com-
pared with him, or with Hunter, Hippocrates, and
Sydenham ? Heavens ! Was a mere writer, a thrower
together of letters, or a recorder of facts, to be honoured
by Parliament, and rewarded with peculiar privileges,
while such men as he (Mr. Wakley) had named, who
had conferred unspeakable advannages in human nature,
received no protection, no consideration whatever in that
House ? There were discoverers in medical science, who
had conferred advantages on humanity that were abso-
lutely enormous. Witness many of the operations per-
formed on the human body ; the operation, for instance,
of cataract for blindness. Human ingenuity and research
were now such, that an instrument was carried absolutely
into the globe of the eye, the very organization was
altered, the lens was carried to another chamber, the
opaque body was dissolved, and the man walked and
saw.—(llear, hear.) Yet to discover the authors of such
improvements, it was often necessary to search through
volumes of history. Look at the case of a man who tum-
bles from. a step of a house, -fracturing the mansion of
the brain, through a hone pressing on it. Now he (Mr.
Wakley) recollected a case, which he should never forget;
several years ago a farmer fell off a load of hay, and
fractured his skull. He was taken into his house,
speechless, motionless, and perfectly insensible. He was
surrounded by his wife and nine children, and the scene
of woe that ensued he (Mr.Wakley) should never forget.
The family believed that every instant the man would
breathe his last. The surgeon, with whom he (Mr.
Wakley lived, was sent for. When he arrived he ex-
amined the depression of the hone, cut down the scalp,
introduced an elevator, raised the bone that had been
pressing on the brain, and in less than five minutes the
man was sitti'ig up in the bed receiving the caresses of
his wife ar.d children.—(Hear, hear, hear.) But who
was the in.ssentor of this operation ? He (Mr. Wakley)
knew something of the history of his profession, yet he
declared that at that moment he could not tell. Such
was the tretiring and unselfish disposition of great me-
dical men. Yet these men who existed in thousands,
these great discoverers, did not find that their pursuits,
any more -than those of literature, were the paths of plea-
sure. How did these men acquire the knowledge and
the humanity that enabled them to dispense those bless-
ings on humanity at the bedside of the feverish, the
dying, and the sufferers from contagious diseases.
After des.th they had often to follow their patients
to the charnel house, to make farther and most
dangerous observations to complete the skill and firmness
that enabled him to relieve other sufferers. Did those
men petition the House for protection ? No ; they
were glad to be able to contribute information for the
benefit of their fellow creatures. Sometimes sordid
wretches. 'did arise in the profession, pretending that
they had! a remedy, but would keep it a secret. But
those usen were spurned and scorned by the com-
munity of medical men, as unworthy to belong to
their 'profession. They were set down as paltry
quacks.. But what was the House asked to do
with the poet who had but one idea, which he
worked over 500 pages ?—(Hear and laughter.) Very
often he (-Mr. Wakley) had read poetry without finding
even one idea.—(Laughter.) The poet says I have
written al beautiful poem; it is beautifully printed and
bound, stud all the world ought to give me a guinea.
each for it, ; if they don't I'll go to my friend Mr. Ser-
geant Tab iburd, and tell him that I am a very ill-used
man, and ; beg of him to get me protection from
the State.--(0h, oh.) This was the truth, and he could
prove it before a Committee of the House. New, he
had a .specimen of some of this poetry in his hand.
The poets asked for protection. He should like to see
how much would satisfy them, for their line of appro-
bation
nn
wet uncommonly strong and uncommonly deve-
loped,generally they had very large organs of ielf-
esteent.-I:Laughter.) He was unwilling to read
poetry to the House, but lie must give them a
specimen of the kind for which protection was asked.
That which he was about to read was exquisite poetry.
It was fi yin a book entitled " Beauties of the Poets."
The books contained 1,000 pages, and consisted of selec-
tions fro tit the most illustrious and celebrated living
poets—a Le obscene ones were left unnoticed. It was a
curious fa-sct that the present law was most stringent in
its protec do nof authors. In this very work there were
28 pages e, .tracted from the works of a living author,
and that nut hor had on that account applied to the Court
of Chancery for an injunction to restrain the sale ofthese
two large v Armes, and he had made a solemn affidavit
that he believed that the sale of those 28 pages would
injure the tale of his own works. Why, it was utterly
incredible,. if the poetry were good, to imagine that the
sale of th, use 28 pages would injure the sale of his works;
on the co ats ary, one would imagine that the reading that
small por lion would make persons more anxious to pos-
sess the r en:minder. He was now about to read to the
House a s ample of those works which they were called
upon to pro tect—he was about to read some of Mr.
Wordswoi -Lt.'s poetry. He had not done this on any
previous o cc asion, but he felt now that he was forced to
do it.—(C he ers and laughter.) Surely, if they were so
anxious toe xtend protection to authors, it was but fair
that they sit .ould know what it was they were about to
protect. -1.1.ie would now give the House one sample of
this exqui Oise poetry. It was entitled to "Louisa," and
was as fol :—(The Hon. Member here read Words-
worth's ws .ell -known "Lines toLouisa," with an air of quiet
sarcasm, th at elicited repeated roars of laughter. In
reading th Le second stanza the Hon. Member was pecu-
liarly felicitous
A .nd she had smiles to earth unknown."
" I wonder lwhat sort of smiles those are 2" said the
Hon. Gentler nan, amidst shouts of laughter, which con-
tinued cwcrio g the whole time the Hon. Member was
reading. A' c the conclusion, however, some Hon Mem-
ber exclai the ,d " Oh, oh.") No person in the House had
any right to be angered at his reading those lines. He
had not (14 )ne so from any invidious motive. No person
could ente rte Lin a higher respect for the character of Mr.
Wordswor tb . than he did, but he argued that if it were
called upous I'o give protection to literary men, the men
of science id ,o had conferred blessings upon humanity
had much hi gher claims upon the legislature, and they
would not be doing their duty if they gave protection to
the author.,, c ,f such poems as the "Lines to Louisa," and
suffered sc Lie ntifie men to go unrewarded.—(Cheers.)
He would n ow read " Lines to a Butterfly."—(The
Hon. Men tbt it here read Wordsworth's " Lines to a But-
terfly," in th e same happy vein in which he had before
given the " 1 Ines to Louisa.") Give a poet dew, and a
poem.
rivulet
'that:hanadt:; a garden, and straightway there was a
' was all very pretty, but could not everybody
do the same:,

on which they should act. Was that the principle which guided
them? In the case of inventions a man takes out a patent for
fourteen years ; ,then, if h's invention were one of
a very superior character—if he had not made a
great profit by it, or if he were dissatisfied, he had
the power of going before a Judicial Committee of the
Privy Council, and asking for an additional term, and they
would give him seven years more. Why was not that applied to
the writing of books? If a thing be superior, what matters it
whether a man has impressed his mind upon paper, or upon
copper, on iron, steel, brass, or the finest India paper? It
mattered not ; in each case there was the same amount of
labour; nay, in the sciences there was much more labour re-
quired than in the production of such poetry as he had referred
to, for in them there were no poetical licenses allowed—all must
be reduced to perfection with the greabest nicety. But the
greatest men were not those that came here to ask for an ex-
tension of the copyright ; and bad the Noble Lord had any
communication with Heraohel upon the subject? That was a
name not of inferior importance—that was a national name.
Take his work on Astronomy, why it was worth more than the
whole lot of poetry books put together. Did he come there to
ask for protection? Did he say that literary men were
not protected ? He (Mr. Wakley) was sorry to see the bent
which the House seemed to be taking on this question. The
country required amusement and instruction ; the gaols were
full of people who could not read or write. Was it the way to
improve the condition of the people, by gi .ing to authors the
exclusive right of publishing their works, and at their own
price?—and every one knew that authors did not place a small
value on their own work. He held in his hand a list of the
prices paid for various works, under copyright and out of copy-
right, which he would read to the House:—Smollet's " His-
tory of England,"at the cheapest copyright price, was 31. lOs ,
the cheapest non-copyright price was IL ss. ; Robertson's
" Works" fell from 31. 4s. to lU. 4s. ; Tytler's " Elements of
History" from 11. Is. to 4s; Scott's "Last Minstrel" frost 21. 2s.
to Is. 6d. ; '6 Marmion" from 11. I Is. 6d. to 10d. ; Gibbon's
6* Rome " from 61. 6s. to 18s. ; Paley's, " Works " from 6/.
to 7s. 6d. ; Pope's " Works" from Si. 14s. to 9s. ;
The " Spectator," from 3/. 4s. to 10s. lOd. ; " Johnson's
Dictionary," from 3/. 3s. to 2s. 6d. Every one must be de-
lighted with such falls as these. Now, allusion had been made
to the distress of Dr. Johnson ' • there was no doubt but that
he was in great difficulties, but he laboured with great zeal and
overcame them. But what was his opinion ? He said that
were an author's right in his book to be perpetual, no book;
however useful, would be circulated amongst mankind, should
an author take it into his head to restrain its circulation. The
moment a book was written it should become the property of
the public, for which the author should receive some return,
and to this end the copyright should be secured to him for
some years. Nolloubt that was correct. He had now a
copyright for 28 years, and he (Mr. Wakley) must say that he
thought those who called for a change in the law should make
out some ease for that change.—( Hear.) They said authors
had not sufficient encouragement ; he (Mr. Wakley) thought
they had too much. He had already said that Scott received
upwards of 250,0001. for his writings. No one could have
grudged it, and if it had been ten times as much he
(Mr. Wakley) should have been glad; and be was very son-
th. _

Mr. M. A it GATES—Try it.—(Cheers.)
Mr. WA; ,EY—The Hon. Member for Pontefract
had tried it; , k e had succeeded; he was a poet; he had pro-
duced exce lle at poems, and he (Mr. Wakley) only wished
the Hon. 1' .nber had produced something more useful
to society-- • -(Cheers and laughter.) Why, a man
might go ear. - writing such poetry as that he had quoted
for hours tc gE ther; he might spin such lines by the mile.
His " Lines to the Stock Dove" were similar. When authors
such as these• ci une to that House and asked for an extension
of the copyri .gb t, he (Mr. Wakley) would ask the House in re-
turn if they be lieved that any Act of Parliament they could
pass would evi ir give to such authors any peculiar advantage ?
But suppuse,th ey could do such a thing, onght they not also to
recollect tl sat there was a public—a people whom they were
called on to . is struck ? and would they give to authors the right
of shutting up t heir ideas, and making them sealed works to the
public for forty or fifty years ? What said common sense ?
Why, corn mon s iense said that as soon as a good thing was dis-
covered, it ough t to be given to the public as soon as possible
without inj Airing the inventor. That ought to be the principle

pose that the words, " from the time of the death of the author"
be omitted, and that the term of 42 years or for life be inserted in
its stead. He need hardly tell the House that he did not in
any manner concur with the Hon. Member for Firnbury. He
should not detain the House with any further expression of
opinion on this subject, hav:ng already addressed the House,
but he must say, that having listened to what had fallen from
Hon Members, he had not heard any refutation of his argu-
ment. He believed that his proposition would confer greater
protertion to the author than that of the Noble Lord. He,
therefore, moved the omission of the words and the substitution
of those he proposed, •
Lord AIAHON said he could not think that the plan of the
Right Hon. Gentleman would confer greater benefit than his
(Lord Mahon's).
Sir R. PEEL said he did not wish to give a vote without
stating the general conclusion he had come to, from the argu-
mentshe had heard on the subject. He had alwas felt great
doubts on the subject. He had not hitherto given a vote upon
the subject, but he was resolved, from the impartial arguments
he had heard, to form a right conclusion upon them. His im-
pression hitherto had been, that no further protection was re-
quired (as was understood). He thought that if additional
protection was given, a discretionary power should be given to
some public authority to extend the term of copyright. How-
ever, as it appeared to be the general opinion that some altera-
tion should be made, he should not press his own views.
Having heard the speech of the Noble Lord and the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite, he thought that the argument of the
Right Honourable Gentleman, with respect to the period
of forty-two years, or for life, carried conviction with it.
He had, he thought, proved that the later works of an author
would be superior to his earlier ones, and the conclusions he drew
from his argument a fortiori, were borne oat by facts, The Right
Hen. Gentleman had referred to the best authorities, and had
proved that, speaking generally, the works produced in the
later years of authors were better entitled to protection as far
as the interests of the public were concerned, than those pro-
duced at an earlier period. At the same time he thought
there was great force in the argument drawn from
the position of the family of an author, immediately
after his death. He thought that, in some cases, an
additional period of seven years might be combined with the
proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman. If he had to
decide simply between the proposal of the Noble Lord and the
proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman, deciding from the
arguments alone, he thought be should give his vote for the
proposal of the Right Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. MACAULAY said he could not adopt the suggestion
of the Right Hon. Baronet for an additional seven years. He
thought the arguments he had urged all bare in some small
degree on the contingency of the time of life. As to the
argument of an author dying and leaving nothing for his
family to depend upon, if it took place early in the term of
forty-two years, they had the remaider of the term.
A book to be a valuable copyright after that term,
must be a classic, anti became a standeard in the
language ; if it did remain valuable after that time, he could
not see why the author, who had enjoyed the copyright for
forty-two years, should not, like other professional men, have
effected some provision for his family by saving out of it. He
• .h

dig out. ... ... .
.rat he shciuld ever have felt pecuniary difficulties ; but it could not, with any satisfaction, make any further concession.
seemed that it was a love of gain which brought him to that Alr. WYNN thought it was not worth while to give pro.
difficulty. Had he not turned bookseller, those difficulties pro- tection to works of an inferior description. The copyright of a
bably would never have come upon him. Then, again, Pope, book that was of no intrinsic value, after the death of the author
for his translation of the "Died" received 5,3201.; Lord Byron, could be of no imports, ce whatever. He should not enter into
though he died young, received 23,050/. for his works; Sir J. any controversy as to the case of a venerated living poet. He
Mackintosh 5,0004 for his: Dr. Lingard 4,0001. for his ; Wil- would allow the lines the Honourable Member quoted to
berforce received 4,0001. for the Life of his father ; Moore re- be as bad as he described ; and if so, the passing the
ceived 3,000/. for " Lalla Roekh," and Southey 1,0001. for his Act with respect to them was neither good nor bad.
" Life of Cowper." He knew that in many respects the It is argued, are authors such slaves to pelf as to look to money
world was slow to appreciate merit. He had been an author only and not to fame ? Why, in the case of Dr. Johnson, did
himself in an humble way, and he never complained of the he undertake the " Lives of the Poets" mefely for his own gra-
treatment he received, and yet Le looked to the present time, tification ? He undertook them for the booksellers in his
and left posterity, to look after itself.—( Hear and laughter.) declining years. He would recommend to his Noble
He did entreat the Noble Lord even now to relinquish this ob- Friend the propriety of combining the two proposi-
noxious measure; he asked it not as a private individual, but tions. With respect to ephemeral publications, they
because he thought stwould act against the public,and be of not the have lost their value the week after they are pub.
slightest benefit to authors. If the House passed a law for the lished—legjslation was useless. With respect to the works
protection of literature, they must expect that men of science alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman, it was of very little conse-
would come there too—they were, in fact, entreating of them quence whether their copyrights had expired at the time of
to do so—and ask for protection. Did they believe that, under the author's death, as they were, some of them, called into notice
such a state of things in that House, they could benefit the at a subsequent period. Instead of a period of 25 years after
community ? He put that question to the House, and, he the author's death, he thought it better to give an additional
would ask, did they believe that men of science, who often period of seven years after his death, or an absolute term of
perilled their lives in the cause of science, would see them do forty years. Alluding to cases of scientific discovery, he was
this, and not give them protection ? He Could assure Hon. surprised to hear it stated that, in the case of Dr. Jenner, no
Members that he had not quoted those fragments of poetry at reward was obtained. He had a Parliamentary grant of money,
all in an invidious sense ; nothing was farther from his desire and he hoped future Parliaments would follow the example in
than to inflict pain on any party, and he would be the first to similar cases.
bestow, on that author a grant of the public funds if he could Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he wished to explain, in a few
meat with a deserving case. But he did say that if protection words, the vote he intended to give, if the House should be
were given to such a class of works, it would inflict a called on to divide on the amendment. With regard to the
great injury on the people, and would confer no be- principle involved, with the exception of the Hon. Member for
nefit on authors. He should support the proposition Finsbury, no one had spoke against it; and, therefore, it was
of his Honourable and Learned Friend, who had unnecessary he should enter into that argument. With regard
favoured them with such an excellent and argumentative speech to the propositions of the Noble Lord and the Right Hon.
on the subject, because he believed it to be the best of two Gentleman, he considered that either of them would he a great
evils. He believed twenty-eight years quite long enough, and extension of the present law of copyright, and that by either
he thought that any change must operate most disadvan- of them, if carried, the legislature would be conferring a con-
tageously, and in no way whatever could it operate to the siderable boon on authors by that extension. He must say that
advantage of the public.—( Hear.) on principle he preferred the proposal of the Noble Lord, and
Mr. MILNES said, he should only detain the House with a he had not been convinced by the arguments of the Right Hon.
few observations, but he thought that no man who had heard Gentleman. After hearing the arguments he had used there was
the speech of the Hon. Member who had just sat down, could no doubt that. taking the great ornaments of literature,. both
have felt it possible to restrain from answering some parts of in this and other countries, as a body, it would be found that
his address. He regretted that the Hon. Member had been the best works were produced during the latter part of the lives
led to make certain remarks, which he had made in so light of the authors ; both for the reasons he had given, and from
and flippant a manner ' • and he did think that a decided the illustrations he had given, he considered the position of his
intimation should be made of the. feeling entertained' by that Right Hon. Friend was unassailable. The Noble Lord had
House of the improper manner in which the works of a most adduced some instances to the contrary, yet he had not taken
delightful poet, had been brought before that House in a man- away anything from the truth of the proposition. That pro-
ner quite in opposition to the forms of that House, and he was position, though true, was not, however, a ground for legisla-
sure in such a manner as could not but hurt the feelings of the tion. It was not a ground for the Legislature to proceed upon,
eloquent and exquisite poet whose works had been thus can- that authors generally produced the finest poems and their best
vassed. Besides, those rules were not at all applicable to the works at the latter end of their lives. In calculating the ex-
present occasion ;he might as well have read poetry that he istence of the copyright, therefore, it seemed to him much
was more acquainted with and more accustomed to read—such better to go on the very simple principle of giving authors a
as the song of " Billy Taylor," or the " Cat's meat Man," copyright for their lives, and a terniinabie period afterwards.
they would have been just as applicable. The works of Mr. The period should not be altogether less than twenty-five years,
Wordsworth were brought forward with no other object than to and if an author died soon alter the publication of his book it
cast a slur on the poetical genius of that great man. It would should be extended to I wenty.eight. This was very simple,
be impossible to follow the Hon. Member through so very de- and would not require them to tamper with any proofs as to
sultory and unargurnentative a speech, and he believed the whether the production took place at one period of the author's
House must consider that the questionlaid between the Right life or another. At the same time, he thought that as the pro-
Hon. Member fur Edinburgh and the Noble Lord who brought positions so nearly resembled each other, it was to be lamented
forward the motion. The Hon. Member who had just sat that there should be a division.--( Hear. 1 He could wish that
down had talked of the question being argued in such a way his Hon. Friend would concede the point as to the seven years
that no attention was paid to the public ; yet the Hon. Gentle- additional, as it did not seem a very great concession. The
man brought forward no argument to show that the public effect of the alteration would be this; suppose all the works his
would be injured by thii measure, he did not even attempt to Hon. Friend had alluded to had been produced in the eight or
prove that books would be made dearer. There could not, in ten years before the death of the authors, then, from the
fact, be any greater absurdity than to suppose it would in any time of their death, their works would be entitled to forty
palpable degree be increasedin price by the copyright being ex.
years' protection. It would be a very rare case in which an
tended. He believed that books published under the copyright anthor would live for 42 years after the copyright of his work
were cheap. The books published by Whittaker—the trans- obtained a value. Such cases must be rare, and would not
Wiens of foreign histories, were the cheapest books in the apply to such productions as some of the worthless plays of
market ; the Waverley novels were as cheap as could be. Both Dryden, it must be the case of a man producing a work of ex--
publishers and authors had found out that the cheaper they traordinary merit. It would not be a very great change, if the
sold their books, the more profit they would make. Competi- Hon. Gentleman would consent to the proposed addition of
tion in publishing was one of the principle things which raised seven years.
the price of the books, and where there was no competition Mr. MACAULAY said he must feel unwilling to carry his
books were deer and scarce. The works of the Elizabethan own views of the case against the general opinion of the
dramatists, for example, because they had no publishers, were Hence. But, he must confess, he had already gone a great
difficult to be obtained; the works of Bacon, Fox, and many others way. He thought it much better to have forty-two years cer-
were the same ; but the best works generally fell in price after taro, than to have seven years added to the term of life. if
the lapse of some little time. The works of Sir James Niacin- the decision of the House should be against him, and the
tosh, published at 355., were sold for ss. a copy. The ques- Noble Lord could induce the House to take the modified pro-
tion of comparative cheepness had, he thought, been completely position they had been speaking of, he could only say he should
answered; and, if any doubt yet remained, he wonld refer Hon. not offer any obstruction to the measure, but would do what
Members to a little pamphlet, written by his Hon. Friend the he could to facilitate, though, of course, he should be less sa-
Member for Weymouth, called " A Plea for Perpetual Copy_ tisfied with it than with his own proposition.
right." He was sorry that the Hon. Member, who had just After a few words from Sir R. Peel, Lord Mahon, and Mr.
sat down, was not now in his place, because, when he drew that Aglionby, during which conversation strangers were ordered to
distinction which he did between men of science and literature, withdraw three times, the House divided.
he (Mr. Milnes) would tell him that there were men of science The numbers were—
as well as those to whom the Hon. Member had referred, For the Amendment . . 6S
who had thought of this matter. Sir David Brewster had For the original Motion
written on the same subject, and his opinion was directly oppo- Majority for the Amendment —l2
site to those of the men of science which the Hon. Member
had quoted. These were the words of a man of real and pro- Lord MAHON then said, that as he was defeated on the
proposition of twenty-five years, he would propose a period of
found science. The Hon. Gentleman applied to the persons seven years after the author's death.
who came to that House to ask for protection the names of Ii- Mr. MACAULAY opposed it, and would take the sense of
terary quacks. He had spoken in this way of Campbell, Miss the House on it.
Martineau, Fontblanque, Fox, Leigh Hunt, Carlyle, Dickens, A division took place, and the numbers were—
James, Rogers, and Johanna Baillie. These were persons who Ayes
yielded them pleasure, and who had exalted the country. These 33
persons the Hon. Gentleman designated quacks, when at this Majority —sB
very moment one of them, Mr. Dickens, was receiving Mr. AGLIONBY would now object to the proposition of
from the whole American nation the tribute of all the assem- forty-two years.
bliea in that nation. The Hon. Member for Finsbury, pro- Mr. MAC ‘ULAY defended it, and the Committee divided,
fessing as he did democratic principles and admiration of when the numbers were—
America, came there to insult that very class of men whom For the Motion
America delighted to honour. He (Mr. Mikes) must tell For the Amendment • 22
him that there were other professional men quite as distin- ,Noes
Majority for the Motion ' 79
guished as the Hon. Member who took a .different view of this The period of forty-two years was, therefore, ordered to be
matter. He found in that petition the names of Hope, Pro- the term to which the copyright is to extend.
fessor of Chemistry, a name well known, Abercromby, of The question having then been put, that the clause, as
Edinburgh, of the Institution of Medicine, Bird, Professor of amended, should stand part of the Bill,
Surgery, and a great number of others, all of whom enter- Mr. WAKLEY said, that he thought the amended clause so
twined a different opinion on the subject to the Hon. Member injurious to the public, while it would confer no benefit upon
for Finsbury. But he must really apologise to the House for authors; that he should divide the Committee against its
detaining them, for he must say that the sentiments of the Hon. adoption.
Member for Finsbury were scarcely worthy of serious con- The Committee divided—
sideration. One remark in answer to what the Hon. Mem- For the clause ... 96
her had said about the high remuneration of many literary Against it
men. He had spoken as if a literary career was always one Majority in favour of the clause
of prosperity and enjoyment, as if a man who worked with his On the next clause being read,
head had not just as many difficulties as the man who worked Mr. WAKLEY moved that it be omitted.
with his hands. When he talked of the rewards of Scott and After a short discussion, strangers were ordered to withdraw,
Byron, he (Mr. Milnes) would ask him whether he forgot Hip and the Committee divided, when there appeared—
enormous incomes paid to professional gentlemen ? Show him For the clause
the literary man whose income was equal to Sir Astley Coo- Against it
pers, or Sir Benjamin Brodie, and the leading professional Majority for the •• 0000000 ••• •• clause' . • 43
s
men in the metropolis. It was perfectly absurd to single out Clauses from supto 14 were then agreed to with some
a few cases where authors were largely paid, and he did not verbal amendments ,after which the House resumed, the Chair-
think in any degree overpaid, and say that therefore litera- man reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on
tore was a good profession, and did not require protection. In Weduesday next.
questions of this kind it was impossible that the House could PUBLIC-HOUSE BILL.
keep tap along debate, and he would therefor confine himself to On the Order of the Day for the Second Reading of the
a few remarks upon the proposition of the Right Hon, Member for Public-house Bill being read,
Sir J. GRAHAM suggested to the Hon. Member for West-
Edinburee. The proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman
West-
was one which was an onprovement in the existing law, but he minster, the propriety of postponing the Bill. If the Hon,
did not think the proposition so good as that of the Noble Lord. Member would consent to this proposition, he (Sir James
Under the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman, if the Graham) thought he should be able to make certain proposals
author
more
to him, to which 'he (Sir James Graham) thought the Hon.
l
..
Member would accede, on the subject of the transfer of licenses,
inwished
for
ved it. to 1
. hseelvl efe his v
e copyright
as pyfra ivgaha t
regarded he w oul d
immediate get
advantageon e sh i 1 - Th
to the author, he would derive no benefit whatever. The great a
nd as regarded the Police regulations.
I evil he (Mr. Milnes) wished to remedy was that of authors of Captain ROUS postponed the Bill for a fortnight.
great distinction and eminence, leaving their families almost Mr. WAKLEY thought the keeepers of public-houses had
totally unprovided for. It was a question interesting the great reason to complain of the regulations for the interference
families of authors more than the authors themselves. The
of the police. Under the present system a most atro-
speech of the Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh was a very cious assault might be committed in a public-house, and the
strong premium for ;literary celibacy. The Hon. Gentleman publican might send for a policeman, who, when he arrived,
who had spoken last accused the Noble Lord (Mahon) with would not have any power to enter the house for the purpose
being led away by sentimental tales. The Honourable Mem- of removing the party committing the assault, because be had
ber should have known that there was a tale of a certain not seen another assault committed. This was a grievance of
eminent literary man, an historical writer, who had which the keepers of public-houses had just cause
received from the country great literary honours, who was at to complain, and he understood that they had no objec-
the close of his life deprived by Providence of the great powers tion to call in the police on their own responsibility
oi his mind, and his family was almost entirely dependant upon whenever they might see occasion. He thought that it was a
him for support. When he mentioned the names of Ward and matter well worthy of the attention of the Government, .
Smith, these were signal instances of the defect of the present RAILWAY BILL.
arttelm. He did not know that there was anything else, ex- The further consideration of the Railway Bill was postponed
cept to congratulate them on the tone of that debate, with the to this day week.
exception of the speech of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. He CORN IMPORTATION BILL.
thought such a tone would act most beneficially on the country On the Order of the Day for bringing up the Report on the
—it would dispel the notion which had gone abroal, that lite- Corn Importation Bill be.ng read,
rature was treated with very little respect in that House. There Mr. M. GIBSON said he had a suggestion to make to the
was a certain sum of money appropriated yearly for the purpose Right Honourable Baronet. There could not be the slightest
of assisting indigent literary men, but that sum was not more doubt but that the present measure was only a step to further
than would keep a pack of hounds, and that was the only and more extensive changes.—( Hear, hear, hear.) No one
public fund in this country. In. France tit, case was different. could be so credulous as to suppose, but that before long they
The present French law was that which they wished to make must necessarily have another Corn Bill. Now, as he was
the law of England. But the French Government was not aware that the Right Hon. Gentleman had the greatest
content with that state of things, and made an attempt to alter aversion to holding out expectations which could not be f ul-
the period from 25 years to 50 years. A Bill to that effect filled, and to giving rise to hopes that must be disappointed,
passed one of the Chambers, and was rejected by the ;other by he would suggest the propriety of introducing a clause to limit
a small majority ; but there was no doubt that the Bill would the duration of the present Bill, say to one year—(A laugh)—
be renewed, and there was every probability orits being carried. for it would be only practising on the credulity of the farmers to
The effect of this law in France was to produce an harmonious pass the Bill in its present shape, and add to the distress of the
action between literary pursuits and political. The historian manufacturing interest, which had not atall been alleviated by
of the civilization of
.Europe was the Prime Minister, and the the measures of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and he therefore
historian of the revolution was the Leader of the Opposition, hoped, as the question must soon be re-discussed, that some
and it was with the hope of connecting these two pursuits that such clause as he suggested would be introduced into the Bill.
the alteration was proposed. He should therefore vote Sir ROBERT PEEL could not consent to the suggestion of
for the proposition of the Noble Lord, against the amendment ' the Hon. Gentleman for the very reasons:which the Hon. Gen-
of the Right Honourable Member for Edinburgh, but tleman had urged in support of it. He ( Sir R. keel) did not like
he would see that it was a friendly litigation between to give rise to expectations which must be disappointed.s Now
them, for he (Mr. Milnes) had no doubt that either proposition if he were to consent to the Hon. Gentleman s suggestion he
would confer benefit on the country. I should give rice to a general expectation that the Corn-laws
,
The clause was then put and agreed to, as was also clause 2.
would he repealed—( Cheers and laughter)—which he did not
'
On clause 3 being proposed, I think at all likely to happen.—( A laugh.) He attributed a
Mr. MACAULAY said it was here that he wished to prc.
considerable
portion of the present distress to the uncertainty