EDITOR'S TABLE. 



267 



an equal chance with the English pub- 

 lisher, which he could not have if this 

 measure is put upon any other basis. 

 We say let the English publisher come 

 over and compete with us if he wishes 

 to. All we ask is equal terms, and that 

 he shall not be given that fatal ad- 

 vantage of us which he would get by 

 an unrestricted copyright. 



But it may be said that tins is an 

 illiberal policy ; and that, when all the 

 tendencies of international intercourse 

 are in the direction of freedom and ex- 

 pansion, such a scheme as this is nar- 

 row and obstructive. The "Times" 

 virtually charges this, in saying " the 

 gross delusions of protection may ex- 

 tend to cover the book-selling business 

 as well as the making of cotton cloths 

 and the forging of iron." And yet the 

 burden of English complaint for the 

 last fifty years has been that our trade 

 in English books is quite too free, and 

 our policy liberal and lax to a most 

 scandalous extent. What they have de- 

 manded is, that we contravene this free- 

 dom of commerce by restrictive legis- 

 lation. Copyright is the antagonist of 

 free trade. Were perfect liberty of com- 

 merce proclaimed to-morrow between 

 nations (as it now exists between the 

 States of this nation), international 

 copyright would make books an ex- 

 ception by protecting them from all 

 competing production and open traffic. 

 The author by his copyright invests his 

 publisher with a monopoly, by which 

 he controls and restricts the trade in 

 his book to any extent that pleases him. 

 With an unqualified international copy- 

 right, and the fullest freedom of trade 

 otherwise, the London publishers would 

 rule the market in this country for all 

 the works of English authors. Ameri- 

 can publishers would be excluded from 

 competition with them. We hold that 

 the principle of copyright is wise, as it 

 is the only practical way yet devised by 

 which an author can have secured to 

 him the available right of property in 

 his book, and we demand that English 



authors shall have the full benefit of it, 

 but on no principle of liberal trade ar- 

 rangements can we be asked to subject 

 our book markets to the exclusive con- 

 trol of English manufacturers. 



The " Times " says that the great 

 American houses have been driven into 

 this position of favoring an international 

 copyright, by the interference of " some 

 Chicago men" who are cutting into and 

 underselling the established firms of 

 New York and Philadelphia. That cut- 

 throat proceeding, as it is a natural con- 

 sequence of the existing system, is cer- 

 tainly a valid reason for condemning 

 the system and putting an end to it. 

 But the " Times " misrepresents the 

 facts in saying that this is the origin 

 of the plan of international copyright 

 now under consideration. Its own col- 

 umns might have been consulted for a 

 confutation of the statement. The pro- 

 ject of international copyright, in be- 

 half of English authors, was urged long 

 before the Chicago raids referred to 

 were undertaken, and it was explicit- 

 ly presented to the English people by 

 ah American publisher writing in the 

 "Times" as early as 1871. 



The writer objects that, by the plan 

 proposed, "the English author is not 

 to be allowed the rights of an ordinary 

 possessor of property." But does it 

 expect that the Americans will go fur- 

 ther than the English themselves, in 

 protecting the rights of their authors ? 

 Is it not now, and has it not long been, 

 the policy of the English Government 

 to deny to its authors " the rights of an 

 ordinary possessor of property " in his 

 literary creations, and does it not pro- 

 tect them as mere favors and transient 

 privileges which are left to expire after 

 a few years ? Again, the writer in the 

 " Times" accuses us of robbing the au- 

 thor of half his rights. He may, if so 

 minded, take the remainder, as "half 

 the recognition of a right must have 

 some value." To be paid the full price 

 for his work, according to contracts that 

 he may make with any publisher among 



