Daily national Democrat., 1860-12-23
Plagiarism.

Recently a very severe and unsparng ex-
position of a remarkable identity of thought
and language between Dr. Scott, of San Fran
cisco, and DR.. Cumming, of London, appeared
in the Sacramento Union, over the signature
of "Quien Sabe." DR.. Cumming wrote on
Daniel, and so did DR.. Scott, but DR.. Cum
ming wrote before DR.. Scott, and, therefore
the very great coincidence noticed in the fact
of the two minds running in the same chan
mel, is little suspicious against Dr. Scott.
The charge of plagiarism is often made, but
seldom proved, We confess that, in Doctor
Scots case, it looks as though it were proved,
but we are not prepared to say that it is, for
We have not examined and compared the two
productions in order TO see.
Plagiarism was charged az inst Edgar a.
Poe, but not proven at all satisfactorily, for,
in the crucible of his finely working genius
the original idea, no matter whence it was
derived came forth in new form, and
stamped with the impress of his own wonder
ful mind. This sort of plagiarism hardly de-
serves the title.
Longfellow has been accused OF so closely
initiating certain German writers, in many of
his productions, as to deserve for his pains
the title of plagiarist, but we think malice
has had more to do with that accusation than
truth. BE that as it may, he has certainly
produced, on home themes incidents and
traditions, more truly original poetry than
any other poet Of America. His Evangeline
and lliawatha evince a great and original
genius. The latter, at least, is an immortal
work.
In short, plagiarism is common charge
nowadays, and our reverence for several of
the English classics has been somewhat affec-
ted by the labored dissertations of certain
modern Investigators, the object OF which was
to prove that Laurence Sterne stole from old
musty books, (by monks and writers who had
passed into obscurity,) the greater part of his
finest passages, and that Milton and other
great men committed the same kind of lar
ceny, as they rummaged the dusty libraries
of their particular day and generation. A
good deal of this is merely stuff for getting
up sensation, and of piece with the recent
prodigious effort to demonstrate, by moral
probabilities and circumstantia reasoning,
that Shakespeare did not write the plays col
lected under the title of his works.
But, there is class of plagarists now-a-
days, infesting the realms of journalism, about
whose status and character there is no shadow
of doubt They are translators from the
French, Italian and other languages, who
give forth their translations as matter origi-
mating with themselves They seldom ven
ture into book form, for they would too soon
be detected but they scribble for literary
newspapers or magazines, under various non,
de pl'mes and DISCUSSES, and make money by
their thefts, for what they put forth is really
good and worth reading. This sort of plag-
iarism is going on to a very prodigious ex-
tent. The only injury which it produces is.
that it takes from native talent the reward
which is its due, for the literary thief pours
forth his wares with facility which the
original producer cannot hope to compete
with, and thus the latter is left so far behind
in the race that he can never hope even to
keep in sight. He will starve to death, or
nearly so, while the elastic purloiner laughs
and grows fat Publishers, we think, should
look to this matter and be careful for IL e
sake of the general good of literature and the
encouragement genius to give no assistance
to these literary thieves and plunderers.
ONLY one short month ago an article an-
peared in the DEMOCRAT headed Secession as
/. L.. - 4