New-York tribune., 1875-08-07

9o0ut q century. DFyuci, undeI Tue One inSnt cyS-
tem, used to receive for Stage-right about f1O0.
end for Copyright 2o-25f. But his plays were
not very popular. Southcrne, for "The Fatal Mar
riage," A. d. 1894, stage-right, two nights over
plus, f2eo. Copyright ESQ. Rowe's "Jane
Shore.r Ssage-rigit 3 nights; Copyright ESQ 10.
Rowe's .sJane Greyv Staee-TiGht nights, Copy
right fT5 Southernc's "SpGrtan Dame" Stage
right not known, Copyright f12O. A. ID. l1l".
Cibber's "Non-Juror" and Smythes " iSivr4 Modes
Stage-right three nights each, Copyright hundred
rsineas apiece from Bookseller Limot. fentohs
"Maraane," Stage-right and Copyright, totai
floo0 A. d. 1928 George BarnweiL" 10y Iiio,
Stagesiplt the overplus of three nights; Copyright
clos This Copyright Lilo assigned to Bookseller
GRAY and his heirs toyerc on the 25th November,
1875 The assignment is to be seen to this
day. printed in full, in the edition of 1slo. Ir.
Yonngs "Busiris" Stage-Iight three nights,
Copyright Gsi Lntot Copyright alone OF
Addison's drummer failed at the time on
stage) $50. Dr. Youngs Revenge" Stage-right
large, Copyright $50 "BeggaTs OPERA" Stage-right
sl coo. Copyright 9400. Polly" by the same
author: representation stopped by the Chamberlain.
Copyright 81 200. This proves little: il was p9b-
lishcd by subscription. "The Brothers" by Dr'
Young. sascighi and Copyright a 900 tn1 nlr pre-
Ry Woleroft. Stare-right fGO0; Copyright $500
s'Road to Ruinp Stage-right, 5000; Coyynsnl'
G40D. Gcldsmlths "G9oa,natu@ISd @ Man, So go
quer,b sagc-right, $500; Copyright, $500
COPYRIGHTS OF PLAYS MORE VALUABLE THAN IhOSh
OF STORIES.
Nov the other branch of fiction had but one mar
ket Copyrisht vet the Copyright of story in prose
or verse was less valuable than the Copyright OF
play. Millions Paradise Lost" was sold III 1867
for e5 per edition. which was rather less than the
Copyright of play in 1862, aud 80 per cent less
than the ght Defoe did not receive f1O5 for
"Robinson Cr1isoeD Pope's " Rape of the Lock-
first edition, f7 Second edition, ELS. DIR. JohnsonS
"Jrene.r a very bad play, brought him E3lo ;
"Rasselas., an exquisite tale, only f1OO and ms
fruo narratives and best work, The Lives OF the
Poets only f20O. Goldsmths " Vicar of Wakefield
only eco which compare with tbe CopYrgats OF
Gollsmitl's plays that nevertheless less re-
muncratiye than his Stage-lights. OF the two
properties in play, both so largely remuneTa'cc,
neither could have been an empty sound; BOOK
Copyrieht far less valuable was, we know sccnfc;
nor Is il crcditabe that tie Stagerght was legally
dissolved if the author went into print otherwise
fbe managers would have ob;octed to The dralatiSt
going into print, and the managers were c!ealiv
masters of the situation This is common sense
thing that has been toe much excluded nom discus
sions of literary property. IL
Certainly a single adverse legal case IN the
eighteenth seventeenth centuries onght 10 upsr
mere rational inierenCcS from pUbhc prices; bui
There is no law case. way or other. IN ether o
those centuries. Stage-right at common law never
tLen only into a Court OF Equity and OF the cases
only one Morris art. Kelly, Is relwIteG ana tha1
supports the above inference from prices
LAW CASES INVOLVING sTAGE-RIGHT.
The clses that are cited as bearing on Sage-right
are 50 misunderstood 10y laymen and lawyer that 1t
Unnecessary to rua through them aud show their
real effect.
Nactlin ant Richardson-A d. 1870. Mackin,
author of a manuscript farce, used to play A. bu6
neve, p7inteI. Richardson took it down Shorthand
from the actors lips and printed it. Mackiin flied
an Injunction. Defendant tried the reasoning OF
Mr. Justice Yates "Plantf had flown his bird
had given his IDEAS to the public, and no member OF
the public could be restrained from doing what be
liked with themn This piece of thieves cant failed
and the Injunction made perpetual This iSa pure
Copyright case Stage-right never entered the Discus
son Coleman dgt Bdhea, and Murray dgf. EU'soa.
were neither Copy1ight or StaGc-rght, but bastard
eases where the wrong Plaintiff came INTO court.
They arse out OF an mp ptIleci F|1 ,.Da.a.l
Of fools says Lord Bacon the sole rght "i pflhing
being represented by substantive, any mind cDnid
realize that right but the sole rlgt "i lePH
ton not being represented 10y substantive, the soit
heads OF little lawyers could not realize It's dS0int'
existence and heterogeneous character one has
only 10 s,ipuiy the subssa'tiyc, aud the Fog flies.
Coleman at. Baihea.-OKe Keefo wrote q play; by
this act he created two pUpoIos assigna5le TO dis
tinot traders. common-law night, sage-Iight ana
statutory lght Copyright he assigned the Co.g-
right 10 Coleman in terms that could moi possibly
convey the Stage-Iight. Nathen played thc PLAY
piratically at Bicbmond. This was IN infringement
of fOKeefo's S;asc-light bU, not Of CoLemans Copy
right; set had legal advisers sent not OKoofe, but
Colenag. into curt as Plaintiff. Coleman produced
in c0ul. an ASST nment Of C0pruelit, aud aN,p E Ter
fbe act OF Parliament Tor breach OF II; iut mat
statutory ;ght had never beca infrngcd. Is IoI e
Staee-Tigu t never came lio c1ur at All; IL stayed
outside with Okeefe and the common law
Ma Toy at L l5loa.-The same clror. Lord Byron,
by writing Sardanapalus" created Sage-Iigt az
common law, and Copyright by statute. lie assigned
the C0p-Tight to Murray. lie could have assigned
the Siage-light TO Morris BY not assigning il to
ANYBODY he retained it. ENprcs um facit cessarc
tacitum. Ellistcn played Sardanapalus.' If
Murray had been well advised, he would have sent
off coulter TO Lord Byron, and obtained an assign
ment of The eomm0n-law hight of representation.
Instead of that this assignee of tho Copyright went
TO Lord Eldon, and asked him to restrain piracy
upon The authors Stage-ri sht which was actually at
that monent the authors property and not Muir
rays. Now it is sworn i'll the blue book Of 1882
that Lord Eldon never refused an injunction to a
faanaGe, who had purchased Stage-ight. Bnt OF
course when not "a manager but publisher, the as
signee of Statutory Copyright. came to him to re-
strain an infringement of common law Sage-yight,
he declined to interfere and sent the Plaintiff TO
Westminster The judges decided against this Plain
tia bat did not give their reasons. That is
very unusual: but how could they give ther
reasOns7 The poor dear souls had not
cof words 10 explain with. Existing language
mere trap; they nad GOT one T wore iCr ,%9
their vehicle OF confusion, language, and dcid the
Just distraction they could not speak for want OF a
subs.antive. There is not the slightest reason 10
suppose they would have denied the title OF a
theatrical manager, armed with an assignment or
,ffA AhrifO in n