Star.
London, England, 1821-11-07 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, NOVEMBER 6.
This being the first day of Michaelmas Term, the
Loao CHANCELLOR met the Judges in Lincoln's...lnn-
Hall at eleven o'clock, and came into Court at one.
MURRAY V. RUNDELL.

and not in substance. He was convinced that, ont
of a Court ofJustice, no two persons could be tiond
to differ about the intention of Mrs. Rundell, when
'she gave the work into the hands of Mr. Murray. It
had been said that Mrs. Rondell gave the copyright
to Mr. Murray only until he should reimburse him-
self for his expenses; but how could this be recon.

His Lordship called upon Mr. Sliadwell to proceed cited with the letters which paced between the par-
with his argument in this case, which stood over ties at Edinburgh ? Mr. Murray expressly stated in
from Saturday last. Mr. Hone informed his Lord- his letter, that he made her a present of £l5O on the
ship that Mr. Shadwell had no farther observations ground that his profits from the work were very large.
to offer. Mrs. Rundell did not then reclaim the copyright, and
Mr. /helm then addressed the Court for the de- say that her publisher had been reimbursed. Quite •
fendant. He would make a very short reply to the the reverse: she said in her letter, that she had given
pleasant speech of his friend Mr. Horn. The work the profits of the work to him; that she had 1:0 light
of which so much had been already said, was gene- to the £l5O, and that she would only receive it in
rally admitted to possess considerable merit. Even the light of an honourable testimony of her abilities.
the reading of it did not fail to give one an appetite. This circumstance made it evident that Mrs. !Lundell
The LORD CHANCELLOR.--a Then pray hand the had not given the copyright to Mr. Murray only until
book up to me, if it has that effect r he should be- indemnified, because she knels, that he
The book having been passed to his Lordship, I was indemnified at that time ; and also, that he was
Mr. HEALD then proceeded to argue that therehad about to publish a second edition of the book, from
been no legal assignment of the work to Mr. Murray, which he would derive larger profits, and yet she
because, as his Lordship knew, the Act of Parliament never intimated the least desire to gain possession of
required the assignment to be drawn out in writing, the copyright. The question to be decided was, not
and attested by two witnesses: and in that case the what Mrs. Rtmdell's case was at law, but what it was
assignment would hold good for only fourteen years, in equity. Mr. Pepys had said there was no doubt
unless renewed at the expiration of that term. There- of his client's case at law; it was so clear that nothing
'fore, if there had been a regular assignment of the could be said against it. If this were so, why did
work to Mr. Murray, instead of a gift, as in the pre- the Lady prefer to struggle its a Court of Equity,
sent case, the right of publication would have de- where her right was not so clear, instead of proceed-
volved to Mrs. !Lundell at the end of fourteen years. ing at once in a Court of Law ? If her right was so
How, then, could it be contended that Mrs. Rundell clear at law, so also was her remedy, for the terms
was placed in a different situation from the effect of were synonimous. There were many cases even where
la gift than it there had been a legal assignment ? the legal right was clear in which a Court of Equity
The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that all Mr. would not interfere, and the present. was a ease of
Murray's injunction implied was, that Mrs. Rundell that description. The Court would hesitate before it
had no right to publish the work with Mr. Murray's determined to grant relief to Mrs. Rundell, who now,
embellishments. The question was, whether Mrs. for the first time since 1805, having in the interme-
Rundell should publish the work without the embel- diate time allowed Mr. Murray to print and reprint
lishments, or whether Mr. Murray should publish the the work at his ors n expense, sought to obtain an
embellishments without the work ? It might be ne- injunction against him.
cessary to consider in this case whether Mr. Murray The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that the Court had
bad a right to exclude Mrs. Rundell from publishing interfered in some cases to prevent the infringement
the work? and in the view of the case which he at of copyrights, in order to relieve the possessor of the
that time took, it appeared to him that though Mrs. copyright from theexpensive remedy of bringing ac-
Rundell might not succeed in restraining Mr. Murray tion after action for every particular act of piracy,
from publishing the original work, yet that Gentle- There were also cases in which the Court refused to
man could not succeed in restraining her, or any grant this extraordinary relief, on account of the im-
other person, from publishing it. proper conduct of the patty applying for it. Mr.
Mr. HEALD said, he would be satisfied for his part Murray asserted that he possessed the copyright of
to take what had fallen from his Lordship as judg- .the work; but the Court had nothing to do with that
ment in the cause. He called upon his Lordship to question. He (the Lord Chancellor) was not aware
maintain the injunction on the saw.: arguMent which of the state in which the recipes had Leea delivered
he had before urged ; namely, that if Mr. Murray to Mr.'Murray by Mrs. Ituudell. If that Lady had
had obtained a legal assignment of the copyright, collected a number of recipes, and embodied them
the right of publishing would have returned to Mrs. in a new arrangement, she might have a copyright.
Rundell at the end of fourteen years. The Learned But if she merely got the recipes together in order
Gentleman then observed, that Mr. Murray had been to be arranged in the form of a book, it would be
fully remunerated for every expense he had incurred difficult to say that there ever was a copyright. But •
in publishing the work, though it would appear thin it was necessary to look at the manner in which -the
he had not yet satisfied his craving appetite. work was given to the world, in order to discover
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that the question whether the person collecting the materials for the
was not whether or not Mr. Murray possessed the hook ever intended to have a copyright. Here his
copyright, but whether Mrs. Rundell ought not to Lordship teed the author's advertisement, in which
obtain a remedy for. her alleged grievances, at Law, she said she gave the book to the Public, without in-
instead of Equity ? With regard to what had been tending to derive any emolument from it. It night
said respecting the profits which Mr. Murray had ob. be said that all authors gave their books to the Public,
tained, it ought to be considered not only what ht but all authors expected to receive some emolument
had gained by the expense and-trouble he had em- from their works, though they were often disap-
ployed in that work, but also what he might have pointed. The letter which Mrs. Rundell wrote to
gained it he had employed the same trouble and ex- Mr. Murray, upon receiving the cheque for £l5O,
pease in another work, exclusively his property. contained only expressions of gratitude tor a personal
Mr. PEPYS also addressed the Court for Mrs. Run- obligation, without advancing any claim with respect
dell. He observed, that when Mr. Murray's case to the work, and yet he could not see why she might
came originally before his Lordship, it stood on quite not have prayed for the Injunction then as well as
different grounds to those on which it was now sup- now. A Court of Equity, though it never granted
polled. Mr. Murray in his bill had stated that one an Injunction except where the right was clear, some-
fourth of the book was his original composition; but times refused one even when the right was clear, on
being called upon by Mrs. Rundell's answer, to point account of the improper conduct of the party. Under
out such parts as were written by him, he was tom- all the circumstances of the case, without deciding
pellet to acknowledge, that his whole work was the whether Mr, Murray possessed the copyright, or whe.
production of the title-page, the index, and the table titer Mrs. Rundell or the Public had a concurrent
of contents. The title-page was Mr. Murray's greatest right to publish with him, he felt it necessary to dis-
achievement. He said that he believed the sale of -solve the Injunction. A Court of Equity was not the
the work depended in a great measure on having an place to discuss the question of right between the par-
attractive title; and then he described the manner in ties; strict law must decide that point.
which he, with infinite labour, composed the title- , COURT OF ICING'S BENC 11, NOVEMBER 6.
page. He (Mr. Pepys) could fancy he saw Mr. Mur- HAYWARD R. HORSIER.
ray, rising from the completion of his arduous task, Thil cause was tried before the same Learned
Judge, at the last Assizes for Essex. It was an ac.
his eye glistening with rapture, and his whole frame Judge,
tion under the Game Laws, for using a setting-dos
under the effects of the inspiration which
for the purpose of killing game. In the evidence, it
had enabled him to perfect his masterpiece of corn-,
was proved that the dog had not teen used for that
position. The Learned Gentleman next stated, that
Mrs. Rundell had given Mr. Murray the copyright purpose. It was proved that the defendant had a
setting bitch and two half-bred setters, and that he
for the first fourteen years only. as a remuneration
Find been seen shooting with the setting bitch two years
for the expense which he incurred in publishing the
book; it never was her intention to abandon all fu ago, a period long before the time mentioned in the
cure claim upon the work. It was admitted that declaration. A servant of the defendant war called,
Mts. Rundell had the legal title. Mr. Murray had who
stated that his master had a setting-dog, but
never attempted to try the question at law; and the that it was dead long before the time stated in the
question now to be decided was, whether the Court declaration, and that at the period mentioned therein;
would grant Mrs. Rundell the relief she was entitled last season, e
Learned Judge held, that as the law his master never used the bitch for that
to, or would compel her to seek a remedy at law for purpose. 'The
every invasion of her copyright? then stood, no person could keep a setting-dog or
The LORD CHANCELLOR here called the attention pointer without corning within the meaning of the Act.
of Mr. Pepys to the author's advertisement, in which Mr. G melte moved, to-day, for a Rule to shew
cause why the verdict found under the direction of the
she stated that she gave the book to the Public, and
Learned Judge, should not be sit aside, and a nonsuit
expected to derive no emolument from it, and asked
the Learned Gentleman in what way he thought that entered. The Learned Counsel said, that he made
affected his case? this motion by the direction of the Learned Judge,
Mr. PEPYS replied, that he conceived the passage who observed, that he should feel great satisfaction if
to have been written only for the purpose of depre he (Mr. Gurney) succeeded. At the time of the trill
he submitted to the Learned Judge, that there ought
eating censure of the work. Mr. Murray would not
to be some evidence to :thew that the dog was kept
have expended his money in bringing out a work
which any other bookseller would have been at liberty for the purpose of killing game. At fit st the Learned
to publish. Besides, Mr. Murray did not rest his Judge coincided in opinion with him ; but be after-
claim on the ground that he was one of the Public. wards directed the Jury, who, with extreme reluc-
Mr. HORN said he felt it necessary to say a few tame, found a verdict for the plaintiff. The Learned
words in reply, in order to put the Court in posses- Counsel said, that at the time of the trial he cited the
sion of the real circumstances of the case, and to case of " Reed v. Meado,vs," in 15th East,67l. It
defeat the attempt which had been made to confound was an action of a similar kind; and it was deter-
two things totally distinct. There were two bills mined in that case, that unless a dog was kept for the
filed in Chancery; upon one of them an injunction purpose of killing game, it was not an offence under
had been obtained to prevent Mrs. Rundell from pub- the Game Laws. file Learned Jifdgc, however, left
fishing Mr. Murray's embellishments. That injunc- it simply upon the bare fact of keeping the dog, and
lion had nothing to do with the present motion, and he desired the Jury to take the law from him, and to
his Lordship's attention ought not to have been drawn . find for the plaintiff.
to it. Upon the other bill an injunction was obtained I The CHIEN Jusrice.--The ease in East was cited,
by Mrs. Rundell to prevent Mr. Murray from pub- I think you say, Mr. Gurney? and how di•lt he Learned
fishing the original work, which he (Mr. Horn) con-'Judge distinguish this case from that in East?
tended that Lady had given either to Mr. Murray or i Mr. GURNEY.-411 this way, my Lord. In the case
to the Public, and had now no longer any right to. reported in East the dog had not arrived at maturity ;
He contended that Mrs. Rundell had giver, the copy-
but in this case the dog had been used.
right to Mr. Murray; and if any one objected to this The.Crrier Jusrzor..—You may take a Role to
view of the case, it could only be on technical points, show cause.