The New York herald., 1845-10-16
The Butler and Hoyt Corresp0ndence--Deci-
sion OF the Vice Chancellor on the Motion
to DlssOlye the inf

The Butler ard Hoyt OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES
sion OF the Vice Chancellor on the Motion
to Dissolve the Injunction.
The Court Room, at its opening yesterday morning,
densely filed the decision the Vice Chan.
celor the motion TO dissolve the injunction prohibit
ing the sale of the book containing these ceebrated let
ters deathke stiffness prevailed during the delive
ry oil the opinion and every word which iell from his
Honor was caught with the greatest avdity.
His HoSoa commenced by saying that the motion was
founded entirely upon the bl and that therefore, all
matters OF ac stated in the bill for purpose Of the
notion must be considered true; and the rights Of
the complainant are to be considered growing OF
the matters stated In the blu. will sndeavor said his
Honor to explain views of the law relative to the
right Of property in manuscript and literary property
ami after giving my views, will look into the rights Of
ton to the jurisdiction of this Court the subject Ac
coIdng to my apprehension there may be two distinct
rights oil properly in literary productons-a right IN the
manuscript, or material upon which the manuscript
impressed, and the right of property in the composition
itself It may be, therefore, the right Of property in
the manual labor, and the right of property in that
which emana from the mindthe thoughts. the argu-
ment and In history the narrative sc. 1t to be
considered in adudicated in England and this
Court to be difficulty in understanding the rights of
property particularly IN relation to letters This right
of property may exist in letters in eatises compos.
ed by writer Where the subject matter is literary
and sent by individual in another there is right Of
sheets him by whom it is intended thew are to be re-
ceved hes entitled to that paper and the words
ten on that paper. The transfer Of letter from one in
d'vidual to another is in the nature Of gift,
the gift is consummated by delivery therefore, what
is the paper and the sheet ITSELF becomes the proper
/ IL
that property that special property called chae and is
the same as any other property which has been acquired
The receiver OF letter as laid down by Judge story
is entitled keep that letter to use IL and 10 Keen in
his possessions and il coners upon him any rights he
Is entitled to produce in Court of Equity may
10 others to be read by them and may make the same
use OF It as other property he NAV become possess
ed Of In relation the right opropery the writer or
composer OF letters the distinction have alluded to
II the writer OF book, he ma, have in composition
thoughts embodied in letter. has right of property
that intended for publication may have right;
| ha wi rite
IS secured to him by act Of Congress The only
to print that he be secured in that right after pb
fishing his book II he publishes il without ring the
copy right any person may take up his work snd multi
ply copies OF The copyright exists independent OF
tho act Of Congress- and the Of Congress is to secure
that which he has right that this copy right to
which party entitled does not depend uron his taking
measures secure that right exists be-
fore that security is obtained The right exists
ent OF the statute And although there has been
deal OF discussion the point apprehend the right qx
lists independent OF any statutes and is only
TO resort to the statute to secure him in that right which
Is not 10 DC taken by third person without his
This copyright exists in letters that man NAV have
written ami sent to another although the paper
eon8s TO the received yet il the object of writing those
letters was for sale right of multiplying
copies belongs to the author Of the letters These are
the views entertain the subject and which are the
/ same as Judge Story held in similar case The
of the case led Judge Story to Investigate
the subject In the case before him, bill was filed in
the equity side OF the Supreme of the u States TO
protect the publication of a life of Washington by
Sparks and he complained in his bill of the pating Of
his copyrights the question as tho violation of the co
py right in letters OF Washington-leners taken from
Sparks composition and transferred 10 the book of the
defendants II Is unnecessary TO through the whole
OF the opinion of Judge Story, who was clearly master
OF the whole subject and hold the views which | hold
myself Let us see for moment, what the bill in this
case claims II ses out by showing that Hoyt the COM
Plainan is the author of three letters. 10 Mr. Van
three such letters and had preserved copies and that
those copies were placed by him in chest under lock
ed the chest aiming these letters in the Custom
rouse which ne deemed safe place That sometime in
the year s44 the chest broken open by one Of The
defendants and the letters ahsrscted and taken possess
ion Of which letters constitute part of tho book
which has been published by the defendants or some of
them Now relative to those three letters there seems
TO me to be no doubt in the right OF property of oyt in
them and that he is entitled to the of them If
they were intended for publication the right Of
could not be infringed upon with puny and the right
OF property as copy .rghtwou without the act Of
lished he had the right to multiply at any time; and
when he proposed to publish, man could take his
right Such the right Of property in Hoyt these three
letters now in regard to the other letters which were
written 70 Hoyt by ~ individuals the originals of which
were IN the chest and taken by violence and forced
papers audulently obtained and made
public In regard to those letters received by Hoyt the
for the writer's The bill therefore, claims the rish,
Of property, in the composition of those letters to b.
~ as baiee or trustee for the authors the same
tune cannot be denied that Hoyt has chattel inter
them and that is right recognized aud protected by
stealing is larceny But with regard to the rieh, Of
properly as baee IT is right claimed in the bill to have
! possession nd he
claims competent for him to get the Of
the Court Of Chancery in the enjoy of
ne may retain them 10 his to be used
SION may requires and il is stated in this way he
ceved the letters from the writer's thereof in the trs,
and confidence that the same would be kept private
secure ana ever since their receipt he has had tn,
rght to the possession and control OF M balee o.
trustee for the authors. claiming the specific right
property as bsilee Well, in that character he )ul
have the right of property them and to keen the
custody OF them but if the writers authors should
any time wish make them public the right 10 nublsh
/ NOT haIo
TO oyt yet he has the right to keep the sheets of paper
on which they are wrtten and consider them pro-
perty Such, then, consider Mr. Hoyts rights and he
has filed his bill to obtain protection the right TO the
enjoyment OF this property and to restrain defend
already made And now comes up the question the
power Of this courthow far the Court of Chancery will
that reg ard the three letters written by Hoyt the
Court has jurisdictions because the copyright existed in
right to claim the protection of the Court of Chancerv
IN regard to the violation Of that right II has been said
ina. these letters were not to be considered literary
compositions that they are not vested with any the al
tributes OF composition intended for the public eve That
may De; but still whether intended for publication or not
ne party 10 whom they belong has right to the proec
ton OF the Court Of Chancery in violation Of his right of
property chattes and his In the case Of the
letters OF Lord Chesterfield written to his SON. which
were attempted to be published the Court of chan
Gerry interfered; those letters certainly were emit.
tied to the consideration of literary production and al
though they written his natural SON aud not in
tended for publication, still they had the attributes Of
literary productions so IN the case of the letters Of p
and Swift, the Court of Chancery intererad On ,p
ground OF the right OF property literary productions
and in those cases the interference of the Court to PIE
vent the publication by injunction was exercised-aIso
in the case of Lady Perciva when the publication oi
certain private letters was threatened the Court inter
fered on the ground Of chae interest and not on the
ground they we're literary productions intended for
me public but the right BY property in the letters a.
chattels-so in the of Gee VS. Picbard when tba,
lady filed her bill against publication OF letters OF
private and confidential character the publication OF
@ Wn'Sn IN Tended to disgrace her in the opinion of the pub
c put 10 both cases the Court proceeded the GROUND
Oh the violation OF the right of property in the Irish
case referred to by the counsel bill filed by Lad,
Iyren who had humber of letters written to her and
Wnicn, upon reu uruing from her residence in Dnb-
! nn, she neglected to remove with her, which Ie,.
ters came into the possession of one Duncan. mi.
LADY died in the country, and after her death the
aeehdama Duncan, advertised the publication OF
them. The executrx OF Lady Tyrrell filed bill to pre.
vent ne publication OF them the ground that the right