New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-11-25
INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
A REPLY TO PROFESSOR SIMON NEwcoMB.

national Copyright unnoticed. but there rcahJ 10
not much TO BE added to what you have said eui-
torially in reply to the main point Oh MS commune
cation. Mr. Newcomb's attempt TO dlscreult my
view as an English view is one OF the mistakes you
disposed of. But his letter contains another nnu-
ondo NJ q similar kind Referring first to the Eng
lisb view h. slides easily into q remark on the
English nublisner's view; and Mr.. Newcomb
means TO give his readers the impression that am
an advocate of that view. There is no ground tor
spcb an imputation and no excuse for making IT,
The English publishers view is well known In inc
letter TO which Mr. NcwcOmb replies stated that
view and attacked it. In everything nave "rlt'eh
on this subject | have attacked 1t. In sentences
which Mr. Newcomb quotes further on from inc
letter to which he is replying said We ought no'
IN consent to a treaty based that view, and GER
tainly shall not TO represent me as supporting
the scheme am most hostile to, shows considerable
arrumentative ingenuity on Mr. NewcomDS par.
Rnt il is Misrepresentation, end the fact that IL Is
made indirectly, by implication and not Dy assei-
ton. does not improve its character 80
The English publisher wants treaty which VIII
enablc him TO buy of the English author the entire
RIGHT of publishing both IN England and the United
states. and give him the right Of manufacturing the
hook in England and exporting 1t to the Unlte'
States. Sooner than assent TO such proposal Us
that | would leave matters rs they are. The ehecC
of such a treaty would be in many cases injurious
IN the English author in would it be so bene-
fetal TO him as a treaty of the Franco-Spanlsh
SORT. II would be injurious TO the American
pnblic whom it would leave i'll the hands OF Eng
Iisb dealers Ii would be an injustice 10 the Amerl-
can printers, type-founders, paper binders
and all other trades concerned Ill Dook-makihg'
repeat these we-known objections to such treaty
in order TO emphasize what ! say OF my opposition
TO il. If Mr. newcomb does me the honor to notice
again anything | say on this subject, must ASK
HIM 10 relieve me from the accusation OF fav0rIng
any such treaty this.
And further This is or the English pub
lisher's view. and known to be so. What the
" English view" rs distinguished from the English
mn blshers view is, do not know If MIR. NewcomD
does perhaps he will state IT. There are many
English views. but there is, so far as | know, no
one view entitled to be called English. The sub
iect is n complex one. Many proposals have been
mt forw ard in England, very various and often
Inconsistent and irreconcllable one with the other
The same thing is true of America. There Is no
ENGLISH view, and there is no American view. But
tbore IL a view or at any rate there or two
loading ideas which. though neither dlstinctivcy
English nor distlnctivcly American, are distlnc-
tively reasonable and honest They are, | believe
accepted very generally Ivy reasonable and honest
students of this question on both sides the Atlantic
I, Mr. NewcomD wants to label it, have no objcc-
ton to his calling this the Anglo American view.
certainly am not Indifferent to the interests of
the American publisher. lie is entitled, III my
view TO protection in far as he is manufacturer
of hooks or an agent for distributing them 10 the
publIc | would not allow him TO he crowded out
of his business by English rivals or of that pat OF
his business which should consist in II auuiacturing
a.. ,.tt.,L ,,ls
nv arrangement with the English author Bnt the
American publisher and the English publisher have
both shown themselves extremely well able 20 take
care of their own business. The interests which
journalist has chiefly to consider arc those which are
unreprosented except in the press which have not
the support Of powerful organization and long
purse the interests of the public itself and Of the
authors, who strangely enough make little use OF
their pens in maintaining their rights.
AT this very moment the American publisher has
got possesso on Of the official mind ana to extent
of the public mind with hi, draft treaty" How he
got it, how a treaty VIGOROUSLY drawn mp by
publisher and in publishers interests came to be ac-
cepted by the State Department in Washington.
transmitted to the American Legation in London.
communicated TO the British Government, and
finally published as draft treaty submitted by the
American 10 the British Goycrumcnt-how all this
happened is point on which | have before asked
for information; which nobody seeing N "A hurry tn
give At this very moment, again, We hear of an
Fnolisb puDlislcr being sent to America ~ an
agent. formal or informal Of the British Govern
ment. to assist in negotiating an International
Copyright treaty with the United States. " Mr..
Daddy" says n leading organ Of the English pub
fishers "bcing representative publisher OF sin
guar astutencss and most distinguished ability the
trade will of course feel unblundcd confidence IN
his sagacity and prudence, and an absolute Ger
tainty that their interests will be safe ia such able
hands" | do not complain OF that either. | would
have every interest Represented. II is perhaps
hardly less odd that the English Government should
choose to be represented by a publisher and pub
Usher only than that the American Government
should have laid the basis for negotiation by
treaty in which the views of publishers, and pub
fishers only were put forward. But mention the
one as | mentioned the other, solely 20 prove that
publishers both Eng ish aud American show such
vigilance in watching over their Interests in
connection with international copyright, and are
able to exert such influence III high quarters as
relieves the rest of from all need for excrtlon in
! their behalf.
Mr.. NewcOmb says the canon of criticism on
treaty proposals is this: That if il can DO shown
that any party proposing an agreement is actuated
by motives Of selfish interest or is in any way 10 be
benefited by it, a serious if not insupcrabe ohjoc-
ton is raised TO their accepting it," No, Mr. New
comb, that is not an accurate statement But you
can make it accurate by slight modification. You
may say this, for example, that If the proposer Of
| a, copyright treaty actuated by selfish motives
that is a reason for scruinizing his proposal for
eliminating from it those clauses which benefit him
at the expense of the public; and for so modifying
this proposal that though designed for the profit
| Il. A. hall l.. il 1 4
| lush Justice and promote the general welfare.
| These last words do not. beg Mr. Newcomb TO un-
derstand, express purely English view They are
| words which Indicate with great force. and with
| sufficient precision, the principles which arc, UT
| nnnhI tn he the Luaia Of ,cnislnIInn ON LLia md