604 Literary Property. [June, 
lectures to his pupils, but if there were no Lancet to report them, how 
should we ever have heard of an injunction for their protection ? 
Antecedently to the year 1777, under the selfish regime of an imbe- 
cile noblesse, the law of France contained no positive recognition of 
literary proprietorship ; and copyright enjoyed only that sort of security 
which was involved in a state license obtained for a particular work. A 
royal decree of that year established its existence, but, by a whimsical 
caprice, while the decree bestowed a copyright in perpetuity on the 
author, so long as it remained in the hands of himself, or his descendants, 
the very act of assignment to a bookseller, restricted the period of enjoy- 
ment tothe author's life. The right accidentally perished at the revolu- - 
tion in the comprehensive blow which the National Assembly struck at 
all “ privileges,” but it was revived by a decree of 1793, which, inclu- 
ding authors of every description, composers of music, painters and en- 
gravers, gave an unqualified power of disposition to the author, and his 
representatives, for the life of the former, and ten years after -his death ; 
and a decree of 1810 continued the copyright to the widow for her life, 
and to the children for twenty years from the death of the survivor. Still 
these repeated extensions were insufficient to satisfy the growing convic- 
tion of the French nation of the necessity of affording to literature further 
protection. Struck with the spectacle of the descendants of those who 
had enriched the literature of the country by their labours, being left in 
a state of destitution because the law did not allow their ancestors to 
transmit to them the fruits of their labours, the people became desirous 
of having the whole matter placed on a more liberal footing. The sub- 
ject was again, accordingly, brought before the legislature, and, at the 
close of the year 1825, a commission was appointed to revise the whole 
state of the law of literary property. The commission was composed of 
twenty-two members of the council of state and of the institute, with the 
Duke de la Rochefoucault at their head, the president of the department 
of fine arts, four literary men, and two booksellers. They proceeded in 
their task with great spirit, and the whole matter underwent the most 
thorough discussion. It was originally proposed to establish an absolute 
perpetuity ; but some practical difficulties appeared to the committee to 
oppose themselves to this, and it was finally resolved to recommend the 
extension of the period to fifty years beyond the death of the author. 
The draught of a law, conformably with this principle, was appended to 
the report,* but we believe the sanction of the legislature yet remains to 
be given to it. The commissioners state in their report, in reference to 
the law, “The regulations which it contains are the most favourable 
that have ever existed in any country for authors and their families. They 
will encourage men of talent to compose great and serious works, by the 
certainty that their families will possess in them, for a long time, an 
honourable patrimony.” If duration of proprietorship be, however, any 
criterion of favour to authors, the committee were in one respect mis- 
taken :—in the majority, we believe the whole of the German states, the 
right is enjoyed in perpetuity. ‘ 
Though in modern times the French have thus outstripped us, in the 
zeal they have displayed for the interests of literature, the literary 
labourer was, in England, placed under the protection of the law at a 
much earlier period than he was in France. It is fortunate, however, 
* Jurist, No. 1. 
