New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1844-02-23

=. tho nassing notice we do, had not several pa
aars both here and elsewhere, published extracts
s,,u, il, thereby giving the thing q prominence it
dies not deserve. The author not only seems ig-
no-ant of the subject he would discuss, but unac-
,ra;;nted with the most common principles Of
,oo;c. and goes houndering on through his pa1nph-
lot apparently utterly unconscious Of the somer-
coils he is constantly turning. To show that this
statement is not unjust we will let him confound
himself by quoting his own language. On page
4 in speaking of the effort TO get a copyright law
oassed, he says, " How then can SO puerlle pro-
auction, (referring to the Address of the Copy
,;ght Club he expected to induce Congress to
shut the book of knowledge to millions, in the
idle hope of replenishing the pockets of a few
writer's, and still fewer publishers % Shutting
the book Of knowledge" he regards here as the
GREAT evil to be feared from an International
Copyright Law. So on the next page, in speak
nr of our intelligent population, he asks the ques.
ton:
"Whence do they derive that intelligence. which
so honorably and happily distinguishes them abroad
in corresponding spheres of life7 Why from the
circulation to be of every species Of knowledge
in the cheapest form, put forth by rival publishers,
striving to supply the intellectual market on the
lowest possible terms
IA rather So ry compliment, by the way, to us
Americans, assif we derived all our characteristic
intelligence from foreign writers, and if they
should be excluded, the '' book Of knowledge
would be shut on US, and we should be left in
deplorable ignorance. Our intelligent working
men iIlno thank him for this compliment But
to the argument. The above two quotations
show that the great evil Mr.. c. fears, is the di-
minished circulation of foreign works, and hence
decrease of intelligence among US, and the loss
of several leaves out of the book Of knowledge.
Now hear him in page 9. In speaking OF this
law he says:
"For the proposed measure if carried into effect,
must instead OF dinliniShang, augment the number
and variety of foreign publications, and OF course
cannot do otherwise than stimulate the very compe-
titon complained Of as due to the present state OF
things.
How the book of knowledge can be " shut on
US" and our characteristic intelligence suffer
damage by law, because the whole effect of it
will go directly to diminish the circulation of
foreign books, yet the same measure "aug-
ment the number and variety Of foreign pubhca-
tons" among us, we leave it to the Z" characters
tic intelligence" of Mr. c. TO say.
Wemight drop the pamphlet here, for an argu-
;nent that so tangles up and trips itself, IS not
worth sober notice But there is one othcrpol
VIC wish our readers to look at. In speaking of
the passage of copyright law, he says
at will be taxing ourselves to pay British authors
10 write for us, and give them control over the
American press, which will enable them to circulate
in this community, to greater or less extent sucn
works as they please and which may contain scnti-
ments of an immoral OF otherwise injurious 'enoen
CIV, and which no American publisher would sane
ton with his name"
Onpage 10Th, he says again:
"Our objections are to an International Copynght
Law, which, we think ithas been shown, would give
an ADVANTAGE 10 English over American writers, lor
which no equivalent could be offered, and would
greatly and injuiously affect the current literature
Of our country and enable u foreign government TO
exert an immense influence over the pubilc NINA ana
morals through our own press, by disseminating
among us such books as interest or more ques'ioha
bic motives might dictate"
On the very next page only lew paragraphs
farther on, he says:
"Iet the principle Of natural and inherent fiSn,S'
however be universally carried out and we shal! DC
The last 10 object Let Great Britain concede TO Our
farmers ora2iers and mechanics the fullest ENJOY
ments of their labor embodied IN the form OF corn
cattle &C. in her market and we Will concede 10 tte
authors of that country, the benefit OF their talents
and industry in the shape OF books, III these oi'eo
States
Now if MIR. c.. is honest i'll his first statements
that Copyright Law would thus enable f0feign-
ers to "control our press" and corrupt our mo-
RAILS: to such an extent that "no equivalent could
be offered for it, then we say, to declare he coutd
grant Copyright lao for the equivalent con-
tanned in the last quotation, shows moral oePFa-
yity that the men he addresses we trust do not
possess For if the passage Of a Copyright law
would s.control our press and our MORALS as nc
inhmates. there is not an honest +" farmer III
or mecbanicn in the land who would not repuol-
ate the proposition Mr.. Campbell makes IN ms
last quotation. He would say NO" II the selling
ofmy corn, and cattle, ard products IN foreign
market is to be be at the price OF the morals an"
literature, and freedom Of the country, iel taell
be unsold. He would scorn the bargain MI
Campbell proposes to make for hum ihis appear
10 selfishness and prejudice COMFORTS periecty
with the spirit of the pamphlet, but 1t Will react
on the writer.
Another great objection against the passage OF
aCopyright law is, it would enhance the prlce OF
books. To say nothing ofthe unsoundness OF the
statement, Mr.. Campbell would doubtless De
ho,rifcd at the idea of a foreign nation, for the
sake of cheapness, stealing out and out SNIP
load Of paper he might chance to own Out Won Won.
ders how a reasonable man can object TO steahng
all tina, makes paper valuable, the printed matter
on it. If Mr.. C. should steal his paper ne "ouio
ind it would cost him much less than no"'