New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-12-04

the promise or the reality OF popularity IN ts coun
try Il has already been admitted that SO long as
The Observance of the rule of trade courtesy Sc
cured to authors and publishers the substantial peh-
Gifts Of legal enactments. American plDllSheib were
willing 10 allow matters to remain on that basis an
had il rested with American publishers, tnab op-
servance would still have been the unwrCten law
Of precedent in their dealings with foreign authors
IL was left to the cOmpatriOts of British au hoIS 10
break over that Observance Parties from the Bit
ish Provinces started in York, Chicago, ana
elsewhere the business of reprinting English DOCKS
in disregard of the arrangements winch nad oeen
made for them between their authors ana American
publishers just on the bOrderline printing eStab-
liqhmenf put in operation for the same purpose
Tie chief sufferers by THIS procedure OF their fellow
subjects were the English authors. 1t was no longer
feasible except in the case of long serial
stories for American publishers to pay
he thrown upon the market at an al
most nominal price before the ink of the authorized
editions was dry. In the absence of legal or moral
means TO remedy the evil resort to International
copyright became necessary. The situation was
frankly accepted by American publishing houses
which had hitherto opposed international copy
right in tn form in which il had been presented by
British pubshers-n t by British authors. Under
tins head must be classcd the proposed Clarendon
the writer's hearing to be an instrument mainly for
the benefit of British publishers in America. In re-
sponSc 10 numerous and pressing appeals from Eng
sh authors, the draft OF new treaty, based on the
Clarendon, nj without its objectionable features,
was drawn up and circulated for criticism among
the authors of England and America II was
printed side 10y side with the Clarendon treaty, for
The purpose of ready comparison, and was approved,
as already stated almost without exception by the
leading authorsoi both countries.
CHANGE or TONE ~ ENGLAND.
But suddenly q not unexpected obstacle was en-
countcrcd. British publishers who for years had
been dcclaiming AGAINST American "piratcs" in the
most offensive manner and oscnshly in the
interest Of British authors, discovered that the draft
made no provision for extending their business in
the United States and at proclaimed their hos
tility "a any form of treaty which did not admit
them ~ we'll the authors 10 the American market
Not content with their own lucrative market, they
want to control their authors in that Of this country
also and bccause this crashing aud ayarcious de-
Inand is firmly withstuod. they Extensively sG-
Matte the position of American publishers rs sell
fish" lScc Mr.. Nar-ton's letter 10 The LODd0n Times
and IHE TRIBUNE -poudcnts comm nts there
onl II would be difficult To discern wherein con-
siSts the generosity Of their own. Virtually,
they say 10 British authors " You shall have no
American profits ~ which do not share The
niIcd rs just and liberal by BillSh authors. grants
To those authors the same measure Oi protection
which Is cujoycd by Americans. within the rcstrc-
tons which copyright laws CRATE IN every county.
Much obje ton Ina, been made 10 the " three
months clause in hat drf ; tut only because lt5
design has been entirely inexperienced. S.c1d
of being limitation on the author in the matter
# arr ,ngiug with American puulshCls, us elect
il simply to afford The British publisher
the dNaut1gc of three months priority m ms own
market The Briuah author who dies res - publish
in IN" United Stat = can take ali the tine time he
ch us-. prior 20 aud for three months after puhIra
non i'm his own country tie may run his nrgOtia-
ton. through months or years II me- see 't 20 do 80,
until hr has made satisfactory terms and no author
Ia whom the American market would Dee Of any
value will ever 20 begging Tor an American pub
usher. But aii"r he has m1dr ms arHn-cmrHis
with an American publisher, m The same way that
he may have done with dH English publ, shcr, ~ ~
hardly fair 10 American Uaurrs That 'uc book
80, lac a. H hero Ia re
m advance. Ia this Wow of the case, some Amcrl-
can houses have begun to considcr whether any pTl-
uIity Whatever Shou b. allowed. and II ~ would
NOT bc moscj just to require simultaneous pnbA'a'ioh
IN both countries.
Mr. Rae admits that 81 matters nothing 70 an
author where hi book Is printed, provided the
workmanship is good nor where 10 Is sold, provided
hr get IA adequate return Tor lbs labor but he
-.,ts a singular and wholly impracticablr mode
OF settlement for the question 10 dispute.
He proposes that tOngr S7 should impose su'h =
duty upon books imported from Europe as would
compel iIr alien author, ~ arrange with lulicd
states publisher for the reproduction Of his work
The mpwclicabIhty 0i TINS proposition need not
tc pointed OUT bat Mr.. Rae oEerioohs a very sef.
ou, objection. which would affect an important
class oi foreign works. There certain books, !
chiefly of q scientific or scholastic character lur
which the American demand would Justify limited !
Imp urtdubn, but NOT republication. 10 smut "uINS
OF ;hI, character out OF the country by me Hhpos-
ton OF prDDibi'Ory duty would Dee an INJUSTICE
both 90 the uihpT and 90. American purchaser 10
IS hilh The public would not submit.
UNwoEruY IEEATHrNT RI BRITISH PUBLISHERS.
Nr iiac leafs his subject with The fairness and
consideration which become the discussion Of an
important puDlic measure Ii is pity that British
do not follow his example. Years ago a
prominent American publisher predicted III letter
io The Loudor Iu,s that IL the question of interna
fIoual copyright ever came before the public IN a
practicable form. ~ foremost opponents would be
found among British publishers The event has
justified hi- prediction. hc negotiations were in
rf, ,,.g ,o become treaty. The draft WAS ~ al |
r,a.I. stated acceptable 10 most authors m both !
r,yrfrI,- n. provisions were ac' uoweIgrd Ia bc |
liut British publishers, who had shouted |
piracy $50 loudly and 80 lorS lhl'" the weight al
their uHu,uc. against u, and Iu manner So oitcu-
,, and insulting chat. for the tlmr American pub
1-rri- from sheer disgust, allowed IN" matter t. |
drop one prominent London publisher su TAR for |
,,t tho claims of drccucy aud h9 own longtime
Il, inI- win American publishers as Ia lHsiuuatc |
In a puhshcd letter chat tar insertion oi the threc
Iuguf ~, clause yu,a trick tO enable the American |
rtbIr.IyI4 tO steal tine buutn OF British authors 10y
,,,,rI, rrIrliuIug from rurlutlug them until the |
,uir.,tiou of the limit With only one exception,
American publishers met this wife lnsinuotlou VI h |
the silent contempt when A. mcrltrd.
Nh lac. IN common with American publishers, |
d,.irr. tn s,. the question OF inter atIOuI copy
rIght settled ina just and pmcuoablo manner, by |
which author, may reap au adequate coward for |
their laburs i'm whatever country turr WORKS may |
be- printed H. may rest assured that the An. RI !
can rcnul, are ready 10 discus, the question ia Il |
mir and liberal spirit ana 90 accept that settle
lu,ni which shall extend the protection OF cqult- |
able Avs to all interests concerned. lie need not |
address lrrumcut rapp"nl to the people of the !
United S atr- The opponents al the mcasu, - are |
ln 10 his own door. W hen hr Sh III have converted
L.f, Ia his views which are also the views of the |
rrcni bod, of Brush authors, he may consider the
utroycisy settled and International copyright an
accom- llShrd TACT. . p CONANl'
Nar- IoJk, Nov. %, 1851.