New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1854-01-13

friends of international Copyright Resort to Treaty
because they know that the Country and the House are
muoyabl, hostile TO their project That they expect
TO succeed by arrsyng the arstocrscy OF the soush
.c.;ns, the interests and wishes of the democracy
of tie North: g. That they fear discussion. and there
fore enaeavor to crowd through their measure n dark
ness and silence A. That they THE TRIBUNE ineuded)
are seeking clsndestney to divest the people OF very
important rights There are some moro such rather
strong in putations OF motives IN Dir. Careys let-
ters and yet it seems that he is much happier
and more forcibe 10 these than in his attempts at ar
gIneut-
But let US suppress the obvious analogy between
provisops BY Treaty for the international surrender to
Justice Of depre5sOrs generally aud the uier dissus
sves now sought to be addressed 10 those who pOach
especially on the natural rights Of authors and hasten
to grspple with Mr. Carey's main argument
The popular author. he assumes, is not really an
author be only reyamps recasts, works over dresses
I'D, ideas which already common property, or
which belong more truly to the great thinkers Of all
time We reply that this is but partially true, and if
wholly 80, would only prove those popular authors I'M
entitled to property (Which they never clained) ia
the ideas and illustrations which they have drawn from
profounder thinkers the common stock Of human
knowledge, and not at all undeserving OF copyright
for the particular form yesture in which they may
Lave arranged and clothed portion Of those ideas in
their respective works We illustrated this by the
case Of public park garden wherein flowers should
be so abundant that every should be at liberty to
Gull and pluck for himself whereupon strong bully
should insist on his right 20 seize and appropriate
bouquet which some less muscular citizen had gath
cred and arranged for his own Has Mr.. Carey
broken the force Of this illustration Has he sue
ceeded in Wrestling it from our side and turning it
against US Since assertion is not likely to serve for
argument with the readers OF this Journal we are sure
that Mr. Careys response has not at all shaken our
original position.
In referring to the common stock Of facts and ideas
open and free to the of all men, we compared to
public park or garden so full of flowers that all
might pluck at will, and to public domain where
from all should be at liberty to cut timber to any ex
tent making thence flour barrels, &c, which wOuldbe
the property of the makers respectively nOtw hsand
ing the source whence the material drawn. To
parry the force of this, Mr. Carey manpulates the
case into of public domain not open to general
resort for cutting timber, to streets which ind
vduals sometimes choke up with cattle or building
materials and to the abstraction Of an undue portion
Of the public domain for exclusive possession and
by individual If there be any analogy between
these substituted and that adduced by us-id
other words, if the writer of book does really
mOnopoze and up portion of the ideas and facts
previously common property so that the treasury of
knowledge is thereafter poorer aud more contracted
than it previously was-then Mr.. Carey has helped his
but if the facts be the of these assump
tons then the public will perceive and Judge accord
ingly.
We feel that we should undervaue the good sense
Of our readers if We to make any reply to Mr.
Csreys assumptions that the authors of popular books
are mere middle or trdfiickers in other mens
deas-hs comparing them with journey nen printers
who being paid for their work, should nevertheless
la! claim because OF it to the types which they had
been hired TO compose-his attempt to assimilate
Nations Protection of its artisans by duties on rival
imported with its robbery of its authors by fill
ing its markets with productions rivaliug theirs, i'm
ported, coDfscated ard sold az every corner at
prices below those which must be charged for the
fruits Of native authorship. So when he AYERS that
TIE TRIBUNE is in favor OF inducing artisans to come
among US by profering them liberal recompenso and
shutting out rival products from their native lands
it be necessary remark that, if those rival pro-
only without duty but without payment to their max
ers, the resulting Indictment whether to immigra
ton Of artisans hitler an enhancement of wages
abroad, would be invisible to the naked eye SO the
privilege Of copying from THE TRIBUNE and Blaekoood
is never denied to the younger journals aud all
the copyright required of them is giving credit to the
sources whence their pages filed. Most journals
render this recompense freely and thus all parties
satisfied; but few prefer to steal and thus commend
themselves to the smpathies of Mr. Carey and of the
opponents of international Copyright generally
Mr. Carey asks us if the word monopoly" is not
agood one We answer, that depends on the to
which put Where Railroad Company prOcaref from
some debauched Legislature exclusive privilege not
to enjoy their premises and run tberow cars but
to hedge up the way between two great cities allowing
DO rival road to be built and practically compelling the
entire community to pay their prices and ride in their
trains that is monopoly aud very shameful, wicked
II Milton or his descendants were accorded
patent copyright which denied to all others the pri
yilege of writing poems essays treating of Fallen
Angels, Adam and Eve in Eden, and the Fall of Man,
that would be monopoly which we should oppose to
the utmost But so long every body else is at lib
erty to write those themes to his hearts content.
and draw upon The worlds common fund of ideas and
Illustrations to enrich his essays it is gross abuse
OF language to term the copyright Of author his
children in that authors works monopoly. There is
not word in the English tongue more often perverted
TO base uses than that monopoly and we have
heard it mouthed so often by charterbreakers repudi