The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-01-01

The Privileges of Authors and Publishers
AN interesting case has been progressing
for the last few days in the Southern
District ofNew York, in which Messrs. HURD&
HoUGHToN, owners of the Cambridge presses
appear as defendants, and SHELDON g. Co.
OF New York, as plaintiffs. The suit is most
interesting one, both to the readers and pub
fishers of our land. 1t involves the whole
system of republishing foreign works, and, we
regret to say, will act as a hindrance to lite
rary enterprise, II it does not cause an almost
total suspension of the plan Of issuing Ameri-
can editions of foreign authors. 1t would
seem that in 1861, o. W. WRIGHT projected
the publication of that series OF DICKENS
works now known as the "Riverside Edition.
and that HoUGHToN agreed to furnish the
stereotype plates, while SHELDON & Co.
paid half the COSTS attended to the sale, and
derived hall the net profits. The contract was
to last for three years, and only to be nullifled
after one years notice on either side, when
arbitrators were to be appointed to settle the
claims OF each party. Such were the main
conditions. On the 9th Of December, 1854,
HoUGHToN gave notice of his intention to
terminate the contract, which accordingly
expired on Wednesday last. They declined,
however, to appoint arbitrators, and the con-
sequence of which refusal was to give them
the goodwill OF the edition, as the works bear
their imprint, and thus totally remove SHELL
DON 6 Co. from all future participation in
the profits.
SMITH SHELDON thereupon commenced
suit against HoUGHroN to recover $4,000
damages, or the equivalent of their share OF
the goodwill. The case came up in the Dis
trict Court on Wednesday. The plaintiff, in
his allegation, reveals the existing code of
honor among the publishers of the land, and
states that by the custom of the trade of
booksellers and publishers in the United
States, where any person or firm engaged in
that business has undertaken the printing,
publication, and sale of book, not the sub
iect of statute copyright, and has actually
printed, published, and offered an edition of
such book to the public for sale, other per-
sons and firms in the same trade, having
respect to the trade priority SO acquired in
the publication and sale of such book, refrain
from entering into competition with such pub
Usher by publishing such book in a rival edi-
ton, and thereby, and by reason and opera
ton of the custom aforesaid, the publication
of such book becomes a goodwill in the
hands of the person or firm SO first publishing
the same, where such book is one for which
there is an extensive popular demand, and
especially in the case Of foreign authors of
established reputation, whose works are not
the subject of statute copyright in this coun-
try, and that such goodwill is often very
valuable, and is often made the subject of
contracts, sales, and transfers among book
sellers and publishers"
1t is also averred in the bill shat such Gus
tom is a reasonable one, and tends to prevent
injurious competition in business, and to the
investment OF capital in publishing enterprises
that are of advantage to the reading public"
Notwithstanding the assertion OF the plain
tiff, and the evident usefulness of the custom,
the Judge decided that although the courtesy
Of the trade demanded that the contract
should be fulfilled, the law on the subject was
not sufficient to restrain either party who
desired to break the agreement, and therefore
the injunction prayed for by the plaintiffs to
restrain the defendant must be refused.
1t is with the sincerest regret and alarm
| that we read such an action on the part of the
Judiciary. II has long been the custom OF
our publishers TO issue at oncei upon the
arrival in this country of valuable British
or foreign work, an American edition, by
means OF which it could be furnished to our
people at a much lower rate than foreign
copies could be procured. That firm which
by enterprise issued the work first, acquired
the goodwill. In the absence of all interna'
tional copyright provisions, honorable pub
fishers sent a remuneration to the author ior
the work. BY this means the cause of lite.
rary enterprise was Justly encouraged and
protected. Now, however, firm as powerful
and popular as that of MeSsrs. HURD &
HoUGBToN, has seen fit to violate such q
conventional agreement, and the law has been
obliged to declare itself powerless to protect
the plaintiffs. Hereafter our publishers viii
hesitate ere they reissue foreign work, lest
some other house seizes upon the goodwill
and by a rival edition Injuries the first fruits
OF tho enterprise, Some steps are emphatically