The Fremont weekly journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County, Ohio) 1867-1877, 1867-08-23
THE DICKENS CONTROVERSY.

lEIOhf su0 wow VIA AEtouHS Sunc Sop AoOfs
The importance OF au international copy
right law has lately received memorable IL.
slpstration from a sharp and unpleasant con-
troversy between certain American publish.
ing firms about the reprinting of Mr.. Char
les Dickens novels. The quarrel seems TO
have sprung outo of letter from the author
to Messrs. Ticknor 4 Fields, in which appears
this sentence: "In America the occupation of
smy life for thirty years is, unless it besrs
'your imprint, utterly worthless and profit
fless to me-. Messrs. Peterson d Brothers
Of Philadelphia, in a letter which we pub
Iish elsewhere, reply to this statement that
Mr.. Dickens has received at various times
from Harper d Brothers. Cd, 800 for advance
sheets of five of his novels that they have
purchased from the Harpers the stereotype
plates and good will of those editions, and
have also bought of Carey, Lea d Blanchard,
Stringer d Townsend, and other firms, the
plates of several earlier works; and that
consequently they are by the customs and
courtesy Of the trade gths only authorized
apublisher in 4nerica Of the works oof Char
lies Dickens" In view of these facts Mr..
Dickens letter ID characterized as "ungen-
f'erous If not dishonest" We do not think
the letter very pleasant In tone, or very hap
PLY expressed but dishonest it certainly is
not, inasmuch as the writer expressly alludes
10 the transaction with the Harpers, and gen.
erous there is no reason why it should be.
Mr.. Dickens meaning is plain enough: it
is than Ticknor d Fields are the only pub
fishers who pay him share of the profits on
the sale of his works in America. If he has
received certain sums from other houses, it
is not in recognition of his rights as an auth
or, but as an equivalent for certain specifi-
ed service, that is TO say, for his furnishing
copy of his book 10 them sooner than to any,
body else. The Boston 6rm say in effect TO
Mr.. Dickens @We make money of the pro.
i'duct of your brain, and lit 10 only honest
sthat you should have part of it." The
Petersons say: somebody ID sure TO take
your book let US take it first and we will
give you SO many dollars" To pretend
that payment like this is in the nature of a
c,ryright, and that Mr.. Dickens, having sold
the advance sheets of book to, one house,
has no right to consent to its subsequent
publication by another, is simply absurd. !.
SO much for the authors share in the con-
troversy. As between the Aessrs. Peterson
and Messrs. Ticknor d Fields, the quarrel
resolves itself into this: What is the court
esy of the trade? and how far is that court
esy binding rule? There is sort of 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 in
PRODUCES an English author to an American
public, and, SO to speak, makes his populari.
ty in this country, shall have the exclusive
privilege of printing that authors later
works. But no rights" to separate works
acquired under the ffimsy Courtesy of the
trade have ever been held to debar firm
from manufacturing a complete edition of the
writer's of a popular standard author and it
would be public misfortune if any such
understanding should obtain general aecep-
tance.
In point Of fact, however, the courtesy of
the trade has no foundation in equity or
politeness; it it nothing more than the law
Of retaliation. As rule it is only observ-
ed between those who are afraid of each 9TH
er. 4. says to B., "If you interfere with
Amy Dickens l will run foul of your Thack-
"eray; let me devour my prey in peace, and
''tou may devour 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 writer's were in question, and there
was lively competition for the spoils, it has
never been kept at all. Neither Dickens,
nor Tbackersy, nor Bulwer, nor Macaulay,
nor any other great light of English litera-
ture, has ever been recognized as the proper
ty of any particular American publisher.
Tickncr 4 Fields have been looked upon as
the soul legitimate reprinters of TeDnyson,
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 over those who pay nothing, though
it may not in law nor in the muddle known
as the courtesy CODE"
Itwould be better for all parties if that
code were swept out of existence, and the
honest plan of paying percentage to the
author were adopted in its stead. Then we
should haven more disputes about "auth-
orized' editions, no more serambling to push
books hastily printed, earelessIy bound, and
half corrected, into the market; and if the
number of English reprints were in conse-
quence considerably reduced, we are by no
means sure that the public would suffer from
the reduction h-s