Star.
London, England, 1807-12-21 00:00:00

,! • -
ADMIRAL 77 sEssicws.

OLD BAILEY, DECEMBER. Is,. ' ' -
Mikan Mown was put to the bar, indided for
the wilful murder of John Hanlon, on' board the
Apollo brig, of which the prifoner was Captain.—
Another indiftment charged the prifoner with the
wilful murder of Henry Johnfon, a feaman on board
the Paid brig ; and a third, of the wilful murder of
John Dim, another of the Apollo's crew,• by flog-
ging and (tarring him.
PrevionTly, however, to the jnry being impannel.
led, Mr. GURNEY and Mr. AiLar, Condel fox the
prifoner, intreated the Court for indulgence for a
Ihort time, while they prepared an affidavit, on which
they Meant to move for poßponing the prifoner's
trial. The Court readily granted the requeß, and
the affidavit was fhortly after produced and read.--
The affidivit Rated, that there Learned Counfel had
very recently only received their briefs ; on pending
which, they found that Captain Brown, of the brig
Eliza, whole veld layalongfide of the Apollo, on the
coati of Africa, when a mutiny broke nut on board
of 'the Apollo, from which mutiny and its fuppreffion
the charges againß Chapman arofe, was at prefent at
Liverpool. The affidavit concluded by expreffing a
hope that the trial would not take place until the
prifoner Mould be enabled to avail himfelf of the
evidence of Captain Brown in his defence-
MY. jUIIiCC La BLANC obferved, that the trial was
,to have come on yetierday (Friday) and it would
therefore be unprecedented, were he to accede to the
application now made. That motion could not be
agreed to, unlefs by confeat of the profecutiou.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL, on the part of the
Crown, Rated, that what had been fworn to in the
affidavit, demanded the moll ferious confideration.—
The witnefs, Captain Brown, was certainly moil ma
terial to the prifoner's vindication. He was there-
fore inclined to accede to the delay requefted, in order
that the prifoner might have the benefit of Captain
Brown's tellimony, againft the evidence he fhould
adduce in fupport of the profecution. At the fame
time his duty'impelled him to Rate, that he could not
content to any thing snore than a !bort poßpone-
ment; as, were the trial deferred until the next Ad.
miralty Seffinns, Come of the witneffes for the Crown
might be abfent.
The trial was then appointed for Monday, the It al;
of January next.

LAW LvTELLIGAIvCE.

COURT OF KINO'6 RENCK, DEC. 17.

ItOWORTH
Ilk Was a cafe of literary property for piracy of
the Plaintiff's work.

Mr. Gaattow, for the plaintiff. Rated that he was
a printer, and had publithed a work entitled " The 1
Art of Defence on Foot, in the Broad Sword and
Sabre, adapted alio to the Spadroon, or Cts and
Thruft Sword." This work the Defendant, in a
compilation of which he was the publifher, called
Encic4edia Londinen/,, had thought proper to ap-
propriate to hianfelf ; and out of a t 8 pages of which
the plaintiff's book confined, no lefs than feventy-
five were literally copied by the Defendant.—
This, however, was not always the cafe; in other
parts, or in Come inflances. he had inferted words in
his own of the fame import as the Plaintiff's, and
thus hoped to elude the law. The Jury, however,
upon a moment's examination, would tee how bare-
faced a piracy this was, and how much the Plaintiff
had fuffered by ir. Mr. GAR Row then proceeded to
read various pafages from different parts of the feve
ral productions, in which it appeared that the Defen
dant had fubßituted and erafed many words, in order
to avoid detation. This, however, was not all—
for the Plaintiff, in order to render a book of this,
kind more practically ufeful, had infer ted many plates
of figures, on the attitudes defcribed in the body of
the work ; thefe alfo the Defendant had copied into
his Encyclopedia, but here again he had difplayed his
warinef. ; for, though his figures were in exactly the
fame attitudes as thofe of the plaintiff's, yet he had
taken the precaution to fill up the drefs which in the
plaintiff's book was a mere outline. Sometimes, ton,
the defendant had even done more than this : for, in
a few intlance., he had altered the drefs; that which
in one work war made a Highlander, in the other
was converted into an Auftrian ; where one had a
helmet, another was provided with a hat. The
principle of the law in thefe cafes (faid Mr. GA R.
RoW ), is perfectly clear; that no man Bull take ad-
vantage of the labours of another, without at halt
making compenfation for that advantage. On thefe
grounds, the plaintiff fubmitted that he was entitled
to recover damages for this infringement upon his
copyright.
The cafe being proved on the part of the Plaintiff,
The AT roan a y Gs N !RAI., for the Defendant,con-
tended that the Plaintiff had no right to recover.—
His client was as liberal a man as any in the profef-
fion, and was far from defining to rob any individual
of the jolt reward of his labours. The work publifhed,
by the Defendant profeired to be merely a compila
lion him Other authors; and more licence was to be
allowed in a publicati-m of that nature than in any
' other, becaufe the compiler did not profefs it to be
an original compnfition. Further, it was to be no-
ticed, hat Mr. Roworth's book was brought out in
1799, and the Defendant's not until the year 1807.
The Learned Counfel affimilated the prefent cafe to
' that of a Review, where the moll interefting parts of
a work were extracted, and which fe reed as a recom-
, datiun to the original ; but fuppofing even that the
I perfon who read the Review &mild be fatisfied, and
I not pit:chafe the original, an aftion would not lie.—
With refired to the engraving., there was one objec-
tion which would put them entirely out of the cafe.
By Aft of Parliament it was declared, that unlefithe
publifiter's name was annexed to the print, he could
I not recover damages in an aftion for plagiary. But
it this were erroneous, the Plaintiff could not main-
' tainthis aftion ; for, in a cafe brought before Lord
Kenyon refpettingtwo prints of My Uncle Toby and
3olly Seagrim, his Loral/tip had vitrified his opi.
bitm, that the party could recover only where the
main defign of an otigioal work had !seta imitated ;
I here, however, the maic defign had not been copied,
I far the gunfire was all that was taken ; and the doe's.
the princ:pal part of the plate, was introduced by the
Defendant to catch the public eye. Upon thefe
gronath, he mulled that the Plaintiff could not re-
! c• ver.

bird Ectsasoaavam Paid, that this aaioa rlai

• •
. . .
brought under the flatute of Qneen Anne, which
gaSe to authors an exclufive coppright fur 14 yeatt,
in cafe of their being alive, for x 4 years longer.
Whatever indulgence the Jury aught be difpo'ed
allow•the Defendant as a compiler, he was a .1 by
that means to injure private individuals, by copying
.their.ptiblications ; for if fuch a permiffion were to
be given.• it would be difficult to fay where the ovae-
lice would. end. Even in the cafe of a Review, if fo
much of the swot k wet e copied as to induce Wiwi-
duals to be contented with that, and not to purchafe
the original, an anion would certainly lie. As to
the plates, the outline in a work of this nature is un-
_doubtedly the main defign, for it is the attitude
which is principally required. If the Jury Souls!
,rhink the Plaintiff entitled to a verdict, they would
give the damages upon the letter prefs and the engra-
vings feparately, as there might be a quellion as to
thelatter.—Verdi3 for the Plaintiff, damages for the
letter.prefs yol. and for the engravings 301.
J•tfIRAY o. nuaorx.
The Almassy Getrattat. Rated, that this was an
*Rion on a Policy of Infurance on the flip Mentor,
/ram London to Surinam, Demerara, and Berbice.
In the coutfe of the voyage the fell into the hands of
the Dutch, and was carried into 11.1 avia. On her
voyage home to Holland. with a valuable cargo of
fpice, flue.was retaken and carried into Guernfey. He
fhould prove the was completely found at the time,
though the defence, he understood was, that the was
not fea worthy. She was examined at Guernfry and
repaired by Capt. Stephens, and went nut again to
Demerara for a cargo, and quitted that place for
Surinam. In coming•out of the Paramaribo, on her
voyage home to London, fire Bruck with extreme
vi dence on the bar. and Ruck fail till the tide made
her float; when the got over the bar into deep water.
Her fiernpoll was broken. 'nd, on trying the pump,
four feet water were fo, ad in the hold. This was
entirely owing to the accident in palling the bar. She
continued very leaky afterwards, and the crew were
employed in pumping night and day during the
voyage back to Demerara, where the was Purveyed
and condemned.

Mr. Gaaaow for the defendant (aid, that the Tel:
fel was not fea worthy, and that the plaintiff was
alto completely aware of that fa& He would prove
by the letters of the plaintiff himfelf, that he was well
aware that the Mentor was completely unfit for fea ;
and he had declared to his agent Captain Steven•
fon that the was good for nothing ; and when the
former mentioned the fubjed of repairing her by
patting a new falfe keel, the plaintiff wrote to him,
4, Do not touch her falfe keel, for it will colt she
Devil and all to block her up again. Pray do not
attemprto repair it." ast
Captain Stevenfon depofed to thole fees, after
which the Jury confider/cf. for a few minutes, and
returned a verdict for the plaintiff of tscl.