New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-02-08

.oa vii, ,ucreaae the price OF books Of science
and similar works For instance book recently pnp-
ushed IA. England. "scbellens spectrum Analysis,
sold I'm this country for S12 Under this Dill ~ nnsn'
be furnished American scholars for S Moroo'oi, ,i'
nan proposed will tend 10 stimulate the Industries OF INC
country and the intellectual exerton OF American
authors Now, If 1t be said that we are doing An MUS
toe to foreign author in thus protecting ourselves
sufficient answer Is found In the "Memoria OF SUCH
men as Spencer, MIL and Lewes.
Mr. Appleton then read the following;
MEMORIAL OF BRITISH AUTHORS SUBJECT OF COPY
RIGHT IN THE UNITED STATES. ,,,..o, ho
Harmonious relations being happily es,hunssnuu $50
tween the United States and the United h o,Icy
the undersigned hope reconsideration OF the PoS
In virtue OF which British authors as authors ENJOY ~
rights which American citizens are bound 10 res ad
Letters from influential Americans-one OF them ca
ing New-York pubsher-which have recently apPea,ea
here joined with the approval OF , ne bs desire Of tho
Americans for the conclusion OF copyrgnt sch
between country and They maintain lh ,Ss
n convention should provide for the yesting OF IN,
British authors American copyright Absolutely aaS
inaenably In him. That condition appears 70 u tbe
egntable and satisfactory. We understand that tao
demands OF publishers in this country have hithertS
been the most formidable obstacles to the @ VI
copyriRht convention. We OF opinion that the III
eress OF our publishers IN American copyrights are q
independent OF the just claims OF British authors; anu
that the latter may be fully admitted without recogn
ton of the former We think it would be grave error
II the settlement Of this matter were retarded or se
dered Impossible, in consequence OF two classes Oh
claims which in essence are wholly distinct, II not an
tagonistic being regarded by negotlatoIs
distinguish between the author, as producing tnG
IDEAS and the publisher as producing tne lnatsrIi
vehicle by which these ideas are conveyed 70
readers They admit the claim OF the BRUSH
author TO be paid by them for his brain-work. Inc
claim Of the British book manufacturer to monop
oily OF their market they do not admit To give the
British author copyright simply to agree that tne
American publisher shall pay HIM Tor work done 70
give the British publisher copyright ls c open tue
American market to him on terms which prevent inc
American publisher from competing. without dwelhns
on the argument of the Americans that such an arrange
ment not be free trade, but the negauon vi eo
trade and merely noticing their further argune NJ n,
while their protective system raises the prices Oh al o
raw materials free competition with the BRUSH pooh
manufacturer would he fatal TO the American DooK an
ufacturer Ii clear that the Americans nave strong e
sons for refusing permit the British pubhsher 10 sare
British author. We venture 10 suggest therefore, tha
responding the cordial feeling recently eApesseu ~
Americans on the subject, and duly appreclhtns tuc
force OF their for making the above ne
eotations renewed to secure copyright on the CON
dOns they specify without making u the 1Ouhdalion
OF formal claim for reciprocity OF treatment, VIC
mention the fact, that American authors nav lney
neese seeure all the advantages Of copyright III the
United Kingdom which are enjoyed by native authors
HERBERT SPENCER, j. A. fkot Dr.
SIR JOHN LUBBOCK, THOMAS CAhIlLb,
JOHN STUART MILL, JOHN hokELb1, H..
G. A LEWEs. anu manJ 0'ii0i''
The question on adopting n minority report was put
and lost and the majority report adopted by vote OF
TO Several Of the gentlemen who voted for the bill re-
ported by Committee expressed dissatisfaction how
ever with some of It's provisions. Messrs osgood ana
Collins refused TO VOTE Messrs. W. H. Appleton, j. f.
Sheldon and Van Nostrand, appointed to present
the bill at Washington.