Daily evening star. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1852-1854, 1853-09-15
International COPYRIGHT.

is disposed to get US into general dis
cussion of the policy of granting inter-
national copyrights on the part of this
Government. Though believing that it
will be much best to postpone full
consideration of this important question
until Congress shall have assembled-as
we anticipate certain necessity for
taking it up then-we may essay to clear
away the mist with which he would sur
round our recent few remarks on this
subject
He processes to be incapable of under
standing the difference between tax for,
and one upon the diffusion of knowledge.
The former is contribution levied upon
persons or property, to cheaper the means
of increasing society useful information;
while the latter is a contribution e1acted
from all who would become better inform
ed, as practical penalty for seeking to
increase their stock of useful information.
We are for the former, and against the
latter, as we remarked day or two
since.
We have to say further, that the Clipper
is in error in assuming that the privilege
to tax American readers of their writings,
is natural right of foreign authors.
In truth, all rights under copyright laws
are artificial, not natural; granted by So
ciety, principally, for its own benefit.
The question, then, is, will this country
be benefited by taxing itself for the privi-
legc of reading valuable books written by
foreigners The Clipper thinks it will
be; while we think it will not be. The
Clipper argues that the abss.nCe OF an IN
ternational copyright law tends to pre-
vent the circulation Of the writings of
Americans, which are always copyright
ed, and to increase the circulation in this
country of those of foreigners, who are
not thus protected. This is true. Yet we
see no evil in it; inasmuch as we hold to
the opinion that an author who enjoys
the right to tax the reading portion of an
enlightened and book-devouring popula-
ton of 100000 of souls for the privi-
lege of reading him, is sufficiently pro-
tected, in all conscience, even though he
has to contend against state of the laws
under which American readers are left
free to read foreign authors in preference,
without being taxed for that privilege
The Clipper is unfortunate in selecting
Colts case-him who invented the repeat
ing fre-arms-as an illustration. The
editor conceives that it would have been
rank injustice in England to have refused
him patent right in that country for
his invention. We do not Mr.. Colt
has already made more than million of
dollars at home, out of his invention. He
has thus been more than abundantly paid
for his labor and expense in getting up
and perfecting his fire-arm, and we think
England wrong in failing to avail her cit
liens of his machine upon the cheapest
possible terms.
Now, we are willing to tax society at
large for the benefit of inventors and
writers, only in so far as such taxation
may eventuste to the benefit of society
itself. With us, to improve the fortunes
of the latter is the incident, and not the
principal; and we are an advocate for so
benefting them, only in so far as it is the
interest of society so TO do. The spirit
and theory of patent right and copy
right laws inculcates the propriety of
thus taxing the community, only so far
as may be necessary to encourage the
making of inventions and books likely to
prove generally serviceable. Our neigh
Dor is wrong in discoursing wildly about
abstract justice between man and man,
III any such connection. Laws are made
for the good of nations-not individuals;
and special legislation departing from
the principle of keeping in the mind s
eve the interest of the whole community
as the first great interest to be protected
in all acts of Legislative bodies,) converts
the machinery of State into sort of mill
to grind out hvors for the few at the ex-
pense of the many.
We are, emphatically, ''fornenst" class
legislation of all sorts, believing it to be
productive of corruption, injustice, un-
equal privileges and unequal taxation.