New-York tribune., 1867-06-25
THE DICKENS CONTROVERSY.


THE DICKENS CONTROVERSY
The Importance of an international copyright
law has lately received memorable illustration
from a sharp and unpleasant controversy be-
tween certain American publishing firms about
the reprintng of Mr.. Charles Dckcnss novels.
The quarrel seems to have sprung out of
letter from the author to Messrs. Ticknor a
Fields, in which appears this sentence: :" In
America the occupation of my life for thirty
"years is, unless it bears your imprint, utterly
worthless and pToftless to me-" Messrs
Peterson a. Brothers of Philadelphia, in
letter which we publish elsewhere, reply to
this statement that Mr.. Dickens has received
at various tines from lIar, er & Brothers E3,0OO
for advance sheets of FIVE of his novels; that
they have purchased from the Harpers the ste
reotype plates and good will of those editions
and have also BOUGHT of Carey, Lea q
Blanchard Stringer g. Townsend, and other
firms, the plates of several ealier works; and
that consequently they are by the customs
and courtesy of the trade the only authorized
publishers in America of the works of Charles
Dickens In view of these facts Mr.. Dickens's
letter is characterized as "ungenerous II not
dishonest We do not think the letter yoIy
pleasant in tone, very happily expressed ;
Int dishonest il certainly is not, inasmuch as
the writer expressly alludes to the transaction
with the IIarpers, and generous there Is no reason
why il should he. Mr. Dickcns's meaning Is
plain enough il is that TicknOr & Fields are
the only publishers who pay him share OF the
profits on the sale OF his works in America. II
lac has received certain sums from other houses,
i. Is not in recomtion of his rights as an
author, but rs m equivalent for n certain Specl-
fed service that is to say, for his furnishing u
COPY of his book To them sooner than To any 20
body else Tie Boston firm say IN effect To
Mr.. Dickens: I'VE make money of the product
d" Of your brain, and il is only honest that you
should have n part of it.' The PetenonS
say: Somebody is sure TO take your book
" let us take it first and we will give y0n
80 many dollars" TO pretend that pay
ment like this j. in the nature of II copyright,
and that Mr.. Dickens, having sold the advance
sheets of a book to one house, has no right to
consent 10 its subsequent publication by
another. is simply absurd.
SO much for the authors share in the contro-
vcny. As between the Messrs. Peterson and
Messrs. Ticknor & Fields the quarrel resolves
itself into this: What is the courtesy of the
trade and how far is that courtesy binding
rule There is n sort o. tacit understanding
among publishers that when one firm has bought
advance sheets of foreign book, no other firm
shall reprint it, and that the publishing house
which first introduces an English author to the
American public, ard, so to speak, makes his
popularity in this country, shall have the eX-
elusive privilege of printing that authors later
works. But no rights to separate works ac-
quircd under this himsy courtesy of the trade
have ever been held To debar firm from manu-
featuring a complete edition of the writings Ola
popular standard author and it would he u
public misfortune if any such understanding
should obtain general acceptance.
In point of fact, however, the courtesy of
the trade has no foundation in equity or polite
ness it is nothing more than the law of retail
alton. As q rule il is only observed between
those who are afraid of each other. A. says
to b., "If you interfere with my Dickens, l
"will run foul of your Thackeray; let me
devour my prey in peace, and you may deyour
"yours" So with the books of second and
third rate authors some such compact as this,
some tacit partition treaty, has usually been
kept. When very popular writers were III
question and there was a lively competition
for the spols, it has never been kept
at ALL Neither Dickens, nor Thackeray, nor
Bulwer, nor Macaulay, nor any other great light
of English literature, has ever been recognized
as the property of any particular American
nublishcr. Ticknor g. Fields have been looked
upon as the sole legitimate reprnters OF Ten
nyson, not because they were first in the field,
but because they paid part of their profits to
the author That gives them right in equity
| o,or tbose who noy nothing though it NAV
not in law nor in the muddle known as the
]" courtesy code"
| Ii would be better for all parties If that
code were swept of existence, and the honest
plan of paying percentage to the author
were adopted in its stead. Then we should
have no more disputes about authorized" edi-
TONS no more scrambling to push books
hastily printed, carelesSly bound, and half cor
rected, into the market; and if the number OF
English reprints were in consequence consid-
erably reduced, we are by no means sure that
the public would suffer from the reduction.
|