New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1885-08-02

Almost the only new character introduc ed by
Mr.. Gibbon is Sarah Burnett, who Is betrotheo 10
Hewitt the actual murderer, and she is really but
a double of her lover ne cessarily brought In be
cause since the sex of the rival heirs had peen
changed it would not do TO make girl the assas-
sin. So Sarah Is represented as being an accom-
plicc in the attempt to suppant her sister as Car
g,lls heir but she is supposed to know nothing OF
The murder her lover has committed to smooth her
nath. This change, and indeed nearly all the
changes made by the English writer, is Tor the
worse Gaboriaus story proceeds strongly, ana
with close and subtle connection from beginning
TO end Every point has its significance. every oe-
tail has its fitting place, and the plot develops
smoothly and skfully. On the other mana, Mr
Gibbon has done all his original work with clun-
s,ness so marked that it is easy enough to see
where he is sustained by the original and where he
trusts to his own invention. This however, is one
of the fatalities of plagarism-or adaptation
Shakespeare could take rude novel or play, pass
it through the alembc of his genius, and
produce version immeasurably supe-
rior to the original that the charge OF
plagiarism at became preposterous III his case.
Bat there has never been sec0ad Shakespeare,
and when INSCRIPTIONS authors undertake to strut
ia borrowed plumes they are always liable to ex-
posnre through the sharp contrast between the
matter they have purloIDed and their own dull
first class but he is much better writer than Mr.
Gibbon. and this is unfortunate for the latter.
The servility of the copy is even greater than we
have indicated. There are hundred minute de-
tails in which the Conveyance has been COM
pletc The French conceptions of the principal
characters are all reproduced. Mr. Cargiil. 1t is
true is the Comte de Conmarin turned, SO far as
externals CO. into Scotch millionaire manuiact-
urer but lie retains the traits Of the old French
aristocrat, and they do not sit naturally upon him
The whole episode of Madame Gerdy. even to the
detail of her rising in her death-bed, pointing at
the real murderer, aud depouncing him in the word
"Assassin!D gasped with her last breath is. we
might almost say, simply translated into English.
Bat the plain intention of the English author has
been TO make such changes as would support the
false pretence of originality. Common thieves,
when they steal marked goods, always take care to
remove the marks as quickly as possible. Literary
plurderers find this by means so easy, for In
purloining the plot situations aud characters of
novel 1T is not possible so to disguise the pilfered
matter that it will defy recognition.
II is certainly strange that any one should think
II practicable to steal thus wholesale from so popu
Lar an author as Gaboriau with impunity, yet a
moro greedy and shameless appropriation of liter
nry property has seldom been perpctrated. Nor Is
II possible for Mr.. Gibbon to justify or paiate his
1aqrant offence against literary ethics, for thcdc
berae intent to deceive his readers stands plainly
ont all over bis work. Did he sell "A Hard Knot"
to his publishers, original novel; If So they
may have substantial ground for action against
him. OF course. If he published the book at his own
risk, it is the public alone whom he has deuded.
Il might be said that the public would be the gain
ers If they obtained novel by Gaborau in place Of
one by Gibbon but in this case, Gibbon has so far
altered Gaboriau us to detract considerably from
the value and interest of the latters work, and
therefore this compensation cannot be availed of.
"EAGaire Lerouge" is capital novel of the SEN
satlona school; indeed it belongs TO the best work
of that kind "A Hard Knot is so largely q copy
of the French that it cannot be unnteresting. but
II is less interesting than in the original,
and Mr. Gibbon has done his part
of the work clumsily that he
actually commits the almost incredible bunder of
marrying his hero and heroine twice over, appa-
rently having forgotten that they were married
with witnesses before the interview in the garden.
No doubt this strange oversight is one Of the re-
suits Of appropriatng the work of another writer,
the appropriation naturally having but asluggish
and defective memory for that which bis own brain
did not conceive or develop.
1t must be said that the case IL very bad ono,
and its cold-bloodedness and elaboration Is the
worst phase of it. 1t matters little whether such
work IL called plagiarism on sdaptation. Under