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

Gentleman, he considered that either of them would he a great
extension of the present law of copyright, and that by either
of them, if carried, the legislature would be conferring a con-
siderable boon on authors by that extension. He must say that
on principle he preferred the proposal of the Noble Lord, and
he had not been convinced by the arguments of the Right Hon.
Gentleman. After hearing the arguments he had used there was
no doubt that, taking the great ornaments of literature, both
in•this-and other countries, as a body, it would be found that
the best, works were produced during the latter part of the I; ves
of the authors ; both fer the reasons he had given, and from
the illustrations he had given, he considered the position of his
Right Hon. Friend seas unassailable. The Noble Lord had
adduced some instances to the contrary, yet he had not taken
away. anything from the truth of .the proposition. That pro-
position, though true, was not, however, a ground for leg sla-
tioi. It was not a ground for the Legislature to proceed upon,
that autho a generr'ly produced the finest poems and their best
works at the latter tnd of their lives. In calculating the ex-
istence of the copyright, therefore, it seemed to him much
better to go on the very simple principle of giving authors a
copyright fir their lives, and a terminable period afterwards.
The reriod should not be altogether less than twenty-
five years,
arid if an author died soon after the pu:dication of his book it
0-.ould be extended to twerity.eight. This was very simple,
and would not require them to tamper with any proofs as to
whether the production tolk place at one period of the author's
life or another. At the same time, lie thought that as the pr,:-
positions so nearly resembled each other, it was to be lamented
t hat there should be a division.—( Hear.) He could wish thct
his Hon. Friend would concede the point as to the seven years
additional, as it did not seem a very great concession. The
effect of the alteration would be this; suppose all the works his
Hon. Friend had alluded to had been produced in the eight or
ten years before the death of the authors, then, from the
time of their death, their works would be entitled to forty
years' pro'ection. It would be a very rare case in which an
anchor would live for 42 years after the copyright of his work
. obtained a value. Such crses must be rare, and would not
apply to such productions as some of the worthless plays of
Dryden, it must be the case of a man producing a work of ex-
traordinary merit. It would not be a very great change, if the
lion. Gentleman wor'd corsent to the proposed addition of
seven years.
Mr. MACAULAY said he must feel unwilling to carry his
own views of the case against the general opinion of the
Honse. But, he must confess, he had already gone a great
way. He thought it much better to have forty-two years cer-
tain, than to have seven yes -5 added to the term of life. If
the decision of the House should be pjainst him, and the
Noble Lord could induce the House to take the modified pro-
position they had been speaking of, he could only say he should
not offer any obstruction to the measure, but would do what
he could to facilitate, though, of course, he should be less sa-
tisfied with it than with his ow a proposition.
After a few words from Sir R. Peel, Lord Mahon, and Mr.
Aglionby, during which conversation strangers were ordered to
withdraw three times, the House divided.
The numbers were—
For the Amendment . tit%
For the original Motion
Majority for the Amendment —l2
Lord MAHON then said, that as he was defeated on the
proposition of twenty-five years, he would propose a peric 1 of
seven years after the author's death.
Mr. MACAULAY opposed it, and would take the sense of
she House on it.
A division took place, and the numbers were— •
Ay es
Noes
Majority
Mr. AGLIONBY would now object to the proposition of
forty-two years.
Mr. NIACAULAY defended it, and the Committee divided,
when the numbers were—
For the Motion .
'Tor the Amendment .
Majority, for the Motion —79
The period of forty-two years was, therefore, ordered to be
the term to which the copyright is to extend.
The question having then been put, that the clause, as
amended, should stand part of the Bill,
Mr. WAKLEY said, that he thought the amended clause so
injurious to the public, while it would confer no benefit upon
authors, that he should divide the Committee against its
adoption.
The Committee divided—
For the clause
Against it ... 17
Majority in favour of the clause
Oa the next clause being read,
Mr. WAKLEY moved that it be omitted.
After a short discussion, strangers were ordered to withdraw,
and the Committee divided, when there appeared—
For the clause ....... .. 69
Agains' it
Majority for the clause....• ...... 13
Clauses from 5 up to 14 were then agreed fo with sane
verbal amendments, after which the House resumed, the Chair-
man reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on
Wednesday-next,

101