New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1853-03-22

/ only ask you ON this point, what your Clif-st.
friends must think of your logical demOnstrs-
tons that International Copyright would
transfer the American book manufacture to
London, ruin our printers, &c, &c, if they
are really Indifferent to or divided on this
question
The Times asks The Tribune to answer these
three questions:
al Whetherit considers il proper snd in accordance
with the spirit Of the Constitution thus 20 make lars
directly affecting the interests property and sentiment
Of the American people By ysay instead Of the ordi
nary mode Of Legislation by Congress-
% Whether it is In favor Of the confirmation OF the
resy with the provision concerning reprints referred to-
u whether Il wizhes to he understood Aintain-
ing that the confirmation Of this rreaty AL 10: increase
the cot Of such books may be published under II 70
| their American readers
"When we can get from The TriSsHe direct aud ex'
phcif statements these points abuse
we hope we shall be sbe 20 make discussion OF the
question with that paper useful 70 the public and
I less diagTeehbe TO ourselves
To which The Tribune replies
/. We have already said that We should pre-
fer to have the Rights of Foreign Authors
recognized by our Government otherwise than
/ by Treaty., if the choice we're offered US. Yet,
as We hold the right of Dickens or Macaulay
to a copyright on his works to be just as clear,
extensive and indefeasible as the right of any
/ farmer to the grain be has grown any mechanic
/ to the pillow or wagon he has constructed, and
deem our present denial of such right crying
injustice, we advocate the rightiRg the wrong
in the earliest and resdiest way Our choice
would be the abolition of all Copyright Laws
and the passage instead of decaratOry act in
FIVE lines and this only needed because of the
long prevalence Of adverse usage) that the
Author of any book who sees fit TO give fair
aud adequate notice that be regards IL as a
property, shall be protected in his copyright
at common law, Just as in any other property,
the product of his brain and hand. Thea if
any nation saw ft 10 buy out an Authors Copy
right and make his writings free TO all, there
would be no difficulty in so doing.
2 We want no provision for Reprints by
Treaty or otherwise We can and should make
il the interest of each author whose works
are extensively read here to have the printed
here; but the Tariff is the place wherein to
secure that, and not a Copyright Treaty or
Act
3. international Copy right will increase the
cost of some foreign books reproduced here,
While il will reduce that of others There are
many works of great and permanent value
which could be proftably reprinted here by
any one holding the copyright, but which it
would be rash to undertake in full view of the
fact that to issue them and advertise them
adequately would cost large sum. while any
one who chose could get out a rival edition as
soon as the work had thus been rendered pOpu-
lar A publisher might well afford to buy
the copyright Of Humbodt'S works for in
stance, rather than face this risk of competi-
ton, even though a low price were inevitable.
SO of many others. And if publisher here
we're fully protected in the copyright Of Bull
wer's or Dickenss novels he would be con-
strained by selfinterest to sell them az a low
price, as only thus could he secure for them
that universal currency which is the only sure
basis of large profits. On the whole. new
British novels would be somewhat dearer
among us than they now are, but the more sub
stantial class Of Foreign works would not be.
And We feel just as sure that it is the true
interest of our people to accord international
Copyright as that it is expedient for man
who wants The Times TO subscribe and pay for
it rather than watch his chance to pick it from
under neighbOr's door.
And now to The Times's retOrt upon us,
which We choose TO present in full-as fol-
lows:
I'VE made no such charge he repels we said
merely that the Editor Of The Tribune might be draw
ing from bis experience In talking gbly about
Editors being pad for Their opinions and ready
70 back thar With Whatever specifications II may need
lie has very possibly rgotten The notice published
some years sRO az the head o. his paper Offering Educ
rial notices OF articles exhibition at the Far of the
American Institute, at so much line. He has probably
forgotten also hls letter since published 20 Dr. TdbO.
Watts, offering give him for dollars his opinion
OF the Nervous Anndote. And perhaps he thinks that
the public Is not Of his direct interest in Quartz
Mining Companies, Railroad Stocks ZINC speculanOns,
and other projects, upon which becomes his duty
journalist, from time 10 time 10 give the public din-
tcrested and reliable Information. We charge him with
no vensly, with nothing dishonest in any Of these
matters He has already stated, in bis own vinicatOn,
that he does not consider such private interest in
stocks or such offers 10 give opinions for pay ncon-
sent with bis position and duty the Editor Of pub
lie journal That Is a matter which he must settle with
those whom he expects TO rely upon the dsnterested-
ness OF what he writes. All we have said about IT,
that he has right impute his practices in this
matter TO his brethren in the profession.
4 -Whereunto The Tribune replies:
l. We never offered to sell our opinions on
any terms whatever; but We have said what
We now repeat, that any person desiring to Oc-
cupy space in our columns, whether to promote
bis own or some others private interest. ought
topGy for it, and we wish that fact distinctly
understood by all. So if any one solicits de-
yoti0n of our time and efforts to his personal