, 1876-04-22


----~----------->-S ~---------------.
Concerning the charge of " literary pi,
rucy" on the part of Mr.. Richard II. Dana,
Jr., in connection with. his edition of Whea
toms Elements of International Law" the
Boston Transcript says:
"The history Of the case is well know
hecabout. A suit is now pending in the
United States Court, having been referred
several years ago to the Hon. Henry w
Paine, as Auditor in Cbanccry, to determine
Eow for Mr. Dansis liable, if at all, for lit.
erary piracy. 1t was formally agreed be.
tween Mrs. Wheaton and Mr. Lawrence, in
consideration Of some negotiations by which
Brockhaus of Leipsic, was to pay the for
mer 5000 francs, that she was to make nc
use Of Mr.. Lawrence's notes in new edi
t!on (of Wheaton's Elements) without his
written consent, and Mrs. Wheaton will
give 10 Mr. Lawrence the right to make any
use he wishes of his own notes This
agreement was ratified by the payment Of
the draft. In 1868 the seventh edition o.
the Elements appeared, with Mr.. Lawrence's
notes and annotations, entitled Lawrence's
Wheaton, Second Annotated Edition. The
title of the book was thus changed, without
the consent of, and to the Indignation Of
Mr.. Wheaton's representatives, who owned
che copyright. Furthermore, the editor had
embo,iied as the owners alleged, his own
peculiar views of political economy, which
were adverse to the then prevailing senti.
1hents of patriotic Americans at home and
abroad. 1t was time when the National
Government was hard pressed by the Rebels
in the field at home and by secret emissaries
at foreign courts. Questions Of nterna-
tional law were constantly arising; our home
and foreign policy was passing through its
most trying ordeal, and the authorities at
Washington refused to sanction, by purchas
ing the usual supply for the foreign offices
work whose editor was pronounced Cal.
hounist, and whose views to considerable
extent permeatcd the notes to the standard
volume of international law. In this di-
Ietnrua the representatives of Mr.. Wheaton
sought new editor, who after some soici-
tation, was found in Mr.. Dana. In 1864 his
work began laboring progress was made
for two years, and late in 1865 the eighth
edition appeared, with his name as editor.
The edition was favorably received at home
and abroad, and has since occupied high
standard position, having been used by both
parties at Geneva. The compactness of the
notes and citation has rendered it far more
desirable than the bulky references and quo,
tstions of Mr.. Lawrence In many cases
authors are cited who are not named in Mr..
Lawrence's notes, but who were easily ac.
cessible at the time and in the evidence
before the Master, Mr.. Dana has shown a
vast amount of labor and research, for all Of
which he received only about what would
be the fee tor a single argument in court.
Mr.. Dana had no knowledge of any agree
ment between Lawrence and Wheaton's rep
resentatlves, except the one above quoted ;
and the whole claim of Mr.. Lawrence rests
on The question whether Mr.. Dana had the
right to cite the same authority on given
topic that Mr.. Lawrence did, and at the
same place. In rendering his decision,
Judge Clifford decided some points in favor
of both parties laid down the principles of
law applicable to the case, and referred the
whole matter to Mr.. Paine to report upon
the annotations. Mr.. Lawrence never OBJ
tanned an injunction, the whole edition has
been sold, and the parties are thinking Of
getting out another. The question involved
arc purely of private nature, relating to a
contract which Mr.. Lawrence alleges was
mado with him by the Wheaton's With
which Mr.. Dana had nothing to do. Mr..
Dana Is but one of the parties to the suit,
which must, from the nature Of things, ul'
tin,ately be decided by the United States
Supreme Court and no issues are involved
which imparc his fitness tor the position to
which lie has been nominated
49,