Weekly national intelligencer., 1854-05-06
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.

on this topic we did not presume that our ideas re-
specting what seems to us the true foundation of
an authors right in his productions would be ac-
ceptable or convincing to every mind. On subject
concerning which no two who have discussed it seem
to be agreed on all points, we did not hope to con-
ciliate every difference Of opinion or to escape the
criticism of those who have already welded them
selves to theory of their own. But it was our
aim to place the just rights of authors on basis
which, if less imposing than that claimed by some
was nevertheless more solid and irrefragable; and
if in settling this basis led to found it on
the sacred rights of labor rather than of property
we wish it to be distinctly observed and carefully
remembered that our argument will still be only the
more valid in behalf Of the authors right to re-
enumeration the world over, if it should be made to
appear that in disputing his proprietary rights we
had done him partial injustice No one can deny
that the author is laborer in the public service,
and that as such laborer he is, by every considera
tion of honor, and honesty, and gratitude entitled
to his just and adequate remuneration. Ii now it
can be shown that the author by virtue Of his pro-
ductions becomes only aborer for the public good
but also perpetual propertyholder in the fruits Of his
TOLL should only have to admit that fresh strength
and superadded force had been brought to forty
conclusions while if those who support the authors
claim to be protected in his rights and yet refuse to
found it any other ground than the sacred idea of
property shall prove unable to maintain their position
it would to leave the author at the mercy Of his
plunderers through the njudcious conduct of his de-
tenders themselves.
Having in previous article think, satisfactorily
shown that the author aborer for the public benefit
is entitled to full and fair remuneration from every
public that far recognises the value of his services
to avail itself of them might be content to dismiss
the further consideration of the subject until argu
,pf no hol
by who have ventured contest the right of the
European author any recompense at all from the Ame
rican community We have disposition to split hairs
dispute subsidiary points with the friends Of Inter
national Copyright when there is to be found large
number who array themselves against the principle itself
OF what to evident act Of justice and moral
right. Yet if the professed friends Of such healing
measure shall seem by their arguments in its favor to be
framing weak inventions for its enemies shall not,
it ishoped be deemed untrue to the authors if we
seek to point the into which the advocates of
literary property have sometimes fallen through an
excess Of ZEAL which, however, disposed to
admire than to rebuke With these Introductory obser
vaons we submit the following communication, which
has been addressed to in anmadvcrsion of certain
opinions recently expressed by this subject:
Gentlemen Editors ofthe Intekigeacer:
With reference to your remarks upon international
copyright, given in your weekly issue of March 25th l.
for one of your readers NTH you that yoa hare not
ooerestmated the Importance Of the subject Of those remarks
an deuotng so much Of your space 10 is consideration At
the same time am forced by my convictions to take
stand with the 0ho may differ from you the vieao
eaich you haze taken of "hterary properly" Will you
allow your columns for few direct questions
upon the point of erence And will you further favor
me with direct answers to such questions
You say The author according to our idea is not by
virtue of his works propertyholder in the
as is the proprietor Of farm. No may arrogate to
himself the exclusive faculty Of thinking and
may legitmatey say Here certain thoughts Of mine
in which have an exclusive and perpetual right for
we reply to him, thought is free to ALL free in its very
nature and eseence free to be exercised free follow its
own sweet will. Neither may lawfully assert an
exclusive and perpetual proprieorship certain thoughts
for the following reasons He is not in the frst place.
the sole proprietor of the words he for these he is
vastly indebted to his predecessors Thought being free
and the instrument of its being the and in
aenable possession of all, has the right to lay
perpetual embargo any collection either of words or
ideas" WE'LL is thought any more free or language
any more the common inheritance Of the world than
the atmosphere and the rains and the dews which dsti
from it STILL does not the farmer the ingredients of
that atmosphere and of those rains apd dews which he
has drawn and incorporated by his labor the produc
ons of his farm If so then why is not the literary
producer equally the of such ingredients of Ian
guage and of thought (which thought though ree take
notice, the free eiiuence of has mind he has
drawn and incorporated by his labor into his bookss
Although literary matter may not be "real estate" it
nevertheless has certain tangibity about it which
of You say that the provder Of such matter has
the right to the exclusive of it for term Of years
and that at the expiration of that its belongs
the world Well suppose you have written and printed
ork Instead of distributing copies of this work among
the public you retain it in your private possession dur
ing the time allotted you to it exclusively Will you
be bound at the end Of the allotted time give the pub
lies publishers to the work. that they may copy
and circulate it? If not, then have the public whit
more right to reprint and distribute the work if
found upon your booksellers counter in the dwelling
Of your neighbor?
In the March number Of Putnsm's Magazine there is
"Leter to the Editor" written by myself in which
think have presented terary property in its true
into your paper. Respectfully,
APRIL u, 1854 G. W. EvELETH
We could wish that critic, in doing the honor to
quote portion Of remarks iu the article above al
luded to- had been good enough to give in its integrity the
passage from which he has made his selection Without
we are sure any intention his part garble the para
graph in question: must be permitted suggest that
his ngmentary excerpts from connected series of
tences do not represent the full force if there be any,
augmentation, which, to be fairly rebutted and
futed should be met in its entirety In the earlier por
on of the article upon which critic anmadverts
undertook to ascertain and define the origin and const
tuents Of property in general and next proceeded to in
qure whether authors ,eors fulfilled the logical
dtions which lie at the basis Of property, when consider
ed either in respect to its nature origin and the
result of such inquiry to the conclusion that the
author by virtue of his productions prouretor
hn ,ot a. Ln,,.