New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1853-02-12
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
ssxICHxs By THOMAS q. MAcAULAY, vols
~. ID. los, col Rec6eh

HYmfeo DptcCutb oic oseo4sy WIZ V~Ao'S
iiad Of reading Spoken for special pur-
pose, their interest passes away with the oc-
cssion that called them forth. Nor in most
eases do they fairly represent the ability ofthe
sathor. Compared with the elaborate pro-
dactions Of his pen, on topics Of permanent
importance. they are apt toll fagd and barren
Although this rule applies to the present Gun
eetion-the speeches being Of far inferior vaiae
70 either Macaulay's History or Esssy'-.nes
deserved the compliment Of reprin'ms !"
sep.rate edition. Many Of them are quite
Characteristic Some are on subjects Una. SUI
challenge attention. ALI are important in re-
f.,ence to their bearing on the history OF
modern English politics. They are here
BROUGHT together for the first time, from the
,snorts in Hansard's Parliamentary Debates.
Thew embrace the whole of the authors career
m the House of Commons, from 1880 to the
present day. His celebrated speeches on the
Reform Bill. including the memorable passages
an the lessons of the French and English Ke-
volutions are given in chronological order.
Perhaps none Of bis speeches are Of more inn
mediate interest TO readers in this country
than those on the Copy Right, in which hes
places the right Of literary property on the
ground of eIpediency. We do not coincide in
bis views On this point, believing, as we do, in
the inherent rights Of man to the products OF
hisown labor, but quote them for the eloquence,
ingenuity, and variety Of illustration with
which they are urged. The following is from
his speech in Feb, l84l.
The first thing 70 be done Sir is 10 settle what
principles the question 70 be argued Are we free to
Iegslse for the public good, or are we mott u TINS
question 81 expediency or IL "a queston OF rightt
Many Of those who have written and peutlonea agahst
the existing state of things treat the question rs one OF
night The law Of nature according 10 them, gives 70
every man sacred and indeeasibepropcrty NE own
ideas in the fruits OF bis reason and imsglnsaon
The Legislature has indeed the power 10 take away tns
properly just has the power 70 pass an act OF at
tainder for cutting of an innocent mans head without
trial But as such act Of sttainder would be legal
murder would oct invading the night OF al author
10 his copy be- according to these gentlemen legal rob
berry Now Sir, II this be 80, let justice be done cost
what II may. ! am not prepared, Ike my hon ana
learned Friend 10 agree 20 compromise between rgnt
and expediency to commit injustice Tor The pubic
convenience But must say that his theory scars far
beyond the reach OF my faculties IL IL not necessary 70
20 the present occGsicn into ne;aphyeicai inquiry
about te origin Of the right OF property and certainly
moth but the strongest necessity would lead me 70
discuss subject go likely 10 be dstostefu 10 the House
agree own with Psley in thinking that property u
the creature Of the law aud that the law when creates
property can be defended only this ground that II u
law beneficial 20 mankind. But IL h unnecessary 70
debate that point For even If beloved IN natural
right Of property independent Of utility and anterior 20
leslaton should sui deny that this right could survive
he pNtN n rVgn
The point In ssue IT, how long after an authors death
the State shs recognise copyright IN his representa-
tives and assigns and eau. think hardly be disputed
by any utoa man that thls "a point which the legs-
nature free 10 determine In the way which may appear
to be Inosi conducive to the general good, We may
now. therefore think descend FROM those high regions,
where we IN danger Of bone Lost IN the clouds 10
finn ground and clear Light Lee Us look at ths question
like legslstorp ana aeF fairly balancing conveniences
and inconvenience, pronoance between the existing
law of copyright and the law proposed 10 US The
question OF copyright, ST. like most questions 81 civil
prudence, is neither black nor white, but grey. 1he
syfiem OF copyright ba great advantages, and great ds
hdyuntsgcs Bnd Il Is our business 10 ascertain what
these ore, and then To make an Arrangement under
which the advantages may be ~ far possible secured
and the disadvantages 40 far possible excluded. The
charge which bring against my hon and learned
Friends BIN ihs-hat leaves The a1yanages neaTy
what they ~ present and increases the
a, eat four foil The advantages airing from stem
Of copyright are Obvious II u desiTabe that we ah0ald
have supply OF good books we cannot have such a
and the ege, objectionable WY o! TemuneIahng them
IL by Of copyright. You cannot depend for
literary instruction and Amusement on the leisure OF
men occupied IN he pursuits OF active he. Sach men
may occasionally produce pieces of great merit But
you must not look % them for works which require
deep meditation and long research. Such works you
can expect only from persons Who make literature me
business of th-ir ves or these persons few viii he
found afnCnr the rich6nd the noble The rich and the
noble are NOT impcilei 30 intellectual cNcrOn ny neces
sity They may ha iupccd 20 intellectual cNaruoh ~
- lfr., ~ ~ - Ia
sire Of bencitng the community. But Il IL gene~ally
within these walls that they seek 10 AgnhGo taemo'Ves
and 60 their fellow creatures Both their AMBITION
and their public eprit in country Ike thls naturally
take political turn. u j. then on Ecn whose pro'es
sion l. literature and whoee private means are n0i II
pie, that you must rey for supply u valuable hooks
Such men mas be rcmunersicd i'i laer literary iSoof
And there are Ouy two IN which meg can ne re-
nunegued One o those ways ia patronage; the other
l. copyright There have been times In which insn oil
letters looked net 20 the public, but 90 the Government
20 few great men, ior the reward OF Their eNcitons
Il was hus in the time of Meoeuos snd Polio al Rome
Of the Mcdic AZ Florence, OF Louis F0uFteea'h IN
France, Of Lord Halifax and Lord Oxford IN tls
country. Now, Sir, VIII know that there are eases
in which IL Is 6t and graceful nay In whioht Is sacred
duty reward the merit or o. rvheVe the distress ot
men OF genius by the exercise OF this specie 81 oeral'
~. but these are exceptions. cau CONCEIVE no
system more fatal 10 tie integrity and independence OF
literary tSn under which they should % taught
10 look their daily bread C. the favor 81 ministers and
notles can conceive no sysicn more certain to turn
nose minNs MEiCN tIt lofintN pN hauIt 10 &c tic
blessings AID ornaments Of species into rs scandal
and lie pest We have then only one resource len We
mus, bCisko Ourselves % copyright be the inconvcs
iencts Of copyright what they may, Those inconven'
fences, in truth ere neithev few small Copyuyht
IL monopoly and produces all the eaec,s which tho
general voice Of mankind attributes TO monopoly.
Thus rhen stands the case Il is good that authors
should be remunera;od; and the least eNsepscnab.e
way OF remuneroting them y by monopoly Yet mo-
nopoy u an evil For the cake OF the good We must
submit The evil but the ev ought not 10 last day
longer than necessary for the purpose Of securing tie
good. Now, viii not affirm, that the existing law Is
perct taa IL eSscty hits The point II which ths nonop
Oily ought 10 cease but this confidently say that II Ia
very much that point than the law proposed by
my honorable and learned friend Fer, consider this
the evil effects of TIE monopoly are proportional 20 the
length OF IFS GurS;ion But ihs good eec,s for the
sSke q which we bear with the evil e1ecis are by no
means proporuoned b. the length OF is duration
monopoly Of sxy years produces twice a. much evias
amonopOly OF Thirty yeSTs. AMI thrice Is much evil as
a. -. -. ~