The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-05-19
The Hun Injunction Case.
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT ooURr.
p.fors Cht~f Tr.%f.o

Before Chief Justice Nelson.
Josephine ~ Burlhiey ost Robert N. De W.T., james
Davenport, William s. Tsdale, and Charles H. Bcale-
In EQUnY-Nonos IsJUsorIoN.-This ID . bin 6led
by the complainant against the defendants the pur-
pose Of restraining them from the publication Of certain
manuscripts Of work entitled Ny Book, The Ven
Uphed OF which she claims TO be the proprietor and
authoress and for which she has taken out copyright
The motion Ia for preliminary Injunction, and In
wolves the merit Of the controversy only far a. may
be necessary to ascertain whether not the case pre-
strain the publication till the final hearing Tbs defend
ants up two grounds Of defence-l. That the
o ss nGs the That .ns
her to be the proprietor ana authoress, Besls, one
Of the Ss, was duly 70 ,snsS
with De Witt Davenport Of the other defendants,
for such publication. As 70 the frs ground-The book
has already been printed and copy handed up with the
papers on this notion and Is now before is
Titled My Book. or The Veil UPliftsd Tale Of Popish
Intrigue and Policy, by Josephine N. Buntlsy, late
Novice at St. Joseph's Maryland. Including Narrative
Of her Residence at and Escape from that stituton'
there is al,o on one OF the ay leaves the folowing-
80 American parents and daughters, afectionats
against and to those unselfsh patriots,
who have noby dared 10 free and to the repub
lie from the dangers Of Jesuitca influence this volume
is respectfully dedicated by the author" And in an sd
marked, that "the writer would have preferred
to remain unnoticed, and to enjoy the quiet re-
position to which she is totally anaceustomed After
having effected her eEcape from the institution in which
Bne was ccnnned, and which she entered with
tntions and bright anticipstons, she would willingly
have suffered the veil OF oblivion and par don have
fallen over the transaction But, her assertions have
been denied her motives msrepresented and her good
name threatened she has alternative in justice
herself and friends but to speak the whole truth and
Her statement will be foun1 in the follow pages
she earnestly desires to impress the American peo.
PIE with OF their danger from the Controlling in
huence religion which tends to degrade the mind
and subject the will to the way Of willy priesthood
ant ne M NJ /,
We have referred to these extracts as evidence Of
the authorship of the work contained in the book It.
self; and which, as 1t respects the complainant and
the issue between them. lhsr position it, as rsspects
authoress but, the contrary that the work is the
joint production Of Beae, Of the defendants and
representing them had rshtto for the p Uhs
location, and to take out copyright. The book ITSELF
as We have seem retusss this position unless indeed
has been most unwarrantaby used 1t is said howsv-
err that she consented to the Of her nas although
harshly in court Of equity from parties who deny her
authors hip and at the time seeking to realize
suit in the sale q work om the USE s her
II the fact OF consent was shown, It would indeed
turn the complainant out Of court but it would upo
the defect OF her own case presented rather than
any merit in the defence. complete answer however
is that the consent claimed is not sustained upon the
81 the case, that there consSsraSs evidence Of Il.
authorship Of the complainant large portion OF the
work itself, and which. taken together overcome the
is admitting the complainant to b. the author, was
Bea Of the Defendants authorized to contract for
the publication Of the book With the pubshersp There Is
certainly conflict In the evidence this point. As
be tie proprietor and authoress the burden upon the
defendants to establish the authority. We have looked
with view it. proper e and must 1
The defendants, De witt = Davenport, the publish
uudo hsva
the book, and Of course have been subjected TO con-
siderable expense, and appeal has been made this
that simply between the complainant. and Bsals But
the es show that these defendants not only had
to pn or SnSsS tbs ssmn
that Beae had authority to make the contra stbs
fore they had entered upon this expense. They are
therefore, chargeable with notice OF the want of author
ty the part of Besle H. in point OF fact such
tborty existed; and are in no better situation than
Decd the proofs show these defendants after they
were forbidden to print ana publish and before they
through their friend and agent With hsr to procure
her consent and failed the ompainant insisting that
tine nRshs belonged to her ana
authority to make the contract The case Is peculiar
one The defendants seeking to print put into
circulation work In the name OF authoress which
interest and attraction the public estimation, against
ton Of her rights, but also in some respects =,
printed and sought to be published eisparagsent Of
ner ana one ana the prncipa answer to her
complaint il that she not the authoress and that the
work Is the production Of other minds. Another ground
10 that although not the authoress she consented
consideration Of receiving portion Of the profits Of che
work. that her name should be used the auhorsss Of
it, third, that being the autheress and proprietor,
and publication, she authorized Beas, one Of the de-
PENDANTS, to contract for the same with De witt
Davenport two Of the other defendants. There IL
70 ,pretence that he bad any written authority.
ii Is sought 10 be made out by verbal statements |
and eorrobora ting crcu instances This is met BY
Genial OF authority in any form by the complain
ter Hthey are to be credited Beae has psatedy sd
mitted that he had authority, had done wrong and
expressed his regret at his conduct in the business
The oepotion OF the father, who naturally must have
taken deep interest in the matter very full and par
tcular both to the relation In which Beae stood
respect to the manuscripts OF his daughter the terms
and conditions of it. and also his admissions since
the difficulty has arisen repeatedly the father
he had acted without authority in entering into the
contract for publication The book itself contains GER
tcae Of the Mayor end other public men of Norfolk Of
the character OF the father as "a gentleman Of proby
and honor" and entitled therefore, to the highest CON.
fdence We satisfied therefore, that neither these
grounds of defence has been sustained that In the
present posture of the case tie preliminary injunction
heretofore granted must be continued till the FINAL
hsaring.