, 1875-09-27
TIE TWO ORPHANS.
TCt1go Druminond's Decision on
Shook & I'nlmcr's Appli-
CntlUn.
moKoo Rankin Must Keep His Hands
or Of Jackson's Version,


|
before Judge Drumn,pnt'. Ncerly two lmur
wsr' occupied in reading tho bill, nassor. mi
Hl'asl:s, Mr.. Emmnns thcn Objected to IT,
aneson Of tho ailltlavits of Hhools 4 raime
on tho Fr'nn'i that they woro irregular, no
l'cing entitled III anY raso wion t!,oy wcr
a""rn to. HI TINT perjury could not bo asbigne,
oil them.
ARGUMENTS
Mr. Tost thereupon began his argument
claiming that Tho ntnsato OF Now York, ,vhero
suit OIL Hhcok 4 pslncr'A ntdnyits mus
necessarily bo bronght provided thai
tho onl'sHion or misatatcfnent OF tho tilt
Of causo in affidavit would not vitato or H.
validate TIC affidavit. Tho counsel then went OF
to state tho fa.ss OF Tho casc, arguing that n
1isrt Jnckson wna tho author nf tho traf,slaton,
that ho WA enti!!cl to copyright, aud that II
tho defendants Ind lono anything wl,ic., worl'l
infringe the authors rights IL would also ill.,
| fringe .EacksosI's rights.
AIR. Van Sctlsaclt aud Mr. Enlmons occupfe1
TIN afternoon in arguments for tho defendants,
claiming that ,laek.nn Eal llo right to copy
right. ntiti that oscn if he had tliny wsre int
damaging cofnpsinants, us they wero using Tho
serHion n,atlg by John Dxcnfoitl.
| ''HttSo urn1nnnld limitHd tho discussion ina
trrtaIlY hy remnr.ting that th:ro wns not enousE.
evidence III regard to D1onfords translation to
mako IL necernary to Include 1t in tho discussion,
nnd 1t Hoensd tutnlly sil!Torcnt TRANSLATION, by
comparison. from that nf IackRon.
Tho argument VIA concluded ubon. o'cloc!i
| aid
THE JunGE THEN nELIvEl:Ep Il1a pEc1~,os,
lio Rail l1lt it acGlots to him that tile comraip-
anita worc entities! 10 nn injunction to prevent
tho 'escndants from per forming Tho work which
1Ma s,i., beea translated from tho F'tonch Of
JEnncry atl Curmon by N. II1rt
.1aclsson into English, and adapted BY linn Tor
| representation OH thu Atuga of this country.
| rhn Court c31id 60 ao further in deciding tito
motion III tho plefent raso tlsln tho proufs In
thu caze clearly warranted. Tho iacts. whici,
Wrre beyond runttoversy. wern TINT D'Euncry
| and Cornlon were tue nuthon{ Of ra,na III tls
French !anguaGo called ''.Lcs neu7 Orplte!incs,"
TINT JAcHbo4 translated TINT lrama into EugI.Hl,,
nid adapted It for representa- ou tic stage in
THU country. That was t!oilo with tho conbent
| OF tho RutiiDrA Of the Froncll play. After this
| hnd hecn aa!tc, lie applied rtder tho Inv for .
! copyright, and the question was whether that
veH
AM VALID 0nJEcrIcx TO Nts oDrAIS1:;u A cory
HIGHT
Ct tho rlay which Ito h:lI thus translated from
tho French Into l:ngt'sh aud adapted for repro.
BcNtaiion on tho stago. 1tle Court could not ane
any valid objection. 1lo could not sco Why uu-
dor tl,o low, ho could nut appiy FOR anil obtain n
coryrlEht. llo waA q Translator OF tho play no
adaptcd it tu representation OH tho slage, autt
was, i'l tho tcnro Of tho INV. tho author uI that
for which Ito was ontitled to copyright. No
ono could complain hut tho a,,thors OF tho NAV
III tho Froncl lanEuage. md it ailirn,etiyoly mr.
poarod shat they assoutod to thu. action oil tho
Tho Judge could not SEQ, therefore, willy ho
Taa not protected u,lder tho law for tho work
which lo Ind dono and OF which It might bn
sa!d lo "s'I author. TLcn that bo!us 10, lie had
the right m well ulslo1 tho stat1lts an nccotnl:
to tho common Inv tractieo, TO protection. 1t
waA hta worH. thh. Ii to its appearance III Eu-
Rllsh under tho na.uo Of tho "Two Orphnns as
translated by him antt Rda!tea fur representation
on tug stage; it was his work In tlIe uoHo of tho
law, tho study and production of Ills brain, and
he WAN in both respects entitled to protection.
That bong no, tho Question waH
WHETHER THE pEfESpANTs 1sFnlN0Ep
on hts rlghta by performing tho drama? Iha
only polns 10 determine to ttoci1o that, WAS to
dotcrmnn tho effect which Was 10 bo given to
s!lndry a1tldayits which Ind BEEN Introduced into
the case. Ihosc wero luado by Shook tt
Palmer aud Jackson'B at'ltlayts, anl It would be
proper fur tho Court to review tho eyidcnco to
ascortan tue purpose for which tEuy had boon
filed. It waa vol known that courts sYero, Mt
the presomt day much moro liberal than they
Ind been IN former tin1es. Ihoy did not 1oioct
a!tldaslts ainlpsy bocauso tllura might be somo
clerical clror,
in THE PRESENT oAsE
1t appeared afairnatiyely that tho alitlayitB in
question wofc made for tho purpose uf being
.sed ~ tho ,pfehont caso. and though thoy did
not as tho tlm0 they wero tnalo eo1ltuin tho
proper title n the cauo. still toy weto forwarded
aud given to their counsel. who gaya tllom M it
Wcro u certain validity. 1t would DO adopting u
very rigid rule md ono hardly In accort,nnoe
With tie boral spiItt OF te present day, to re-
ject aitldavl:s lccauHo Tiny wore not marked
with Tho name Of tho caso. That being 40,
and tho a!iidayss bong received. there
could be no doubt that tho tlofonlants- il,
tho principal defendants who had boon perform.
Ing the p'ay-haa becn rising Mr. N. Hart jack
aona translation. which Waa adaptea by him |
for representation OH tho atngo. Iloy acauirod |
shat familiarity with il IL. consequence OF tic ac-
ton OF the translator aud his nsagueos aud It !
"oald be harliy falr. suldcE tho circumstances,