422 THE LAW OF COPYRIGHT. 



a brachycephalic race, the result should be a hybrid skull of intermediate form ; 

 whereas the modern Anglo-Saxon head is essentially longer than the continental 

 Germanic type.' 

 (After reference to the first edition of Dr. Wilson's Prehistoric Annals, 1851,) — 



" I leave it to your Lordships now to judge of the originality of the plaintiff's 

 theory in this branch of it, viz., the origin of the modern English long-head, and 

 of his idea of employing ' hatters,' as well as of the nature of the depositions 

 made by him and his friends, C. Blake and Dr. Beddoe." 



So far, therefore, it does not appear that there is anything to retract 

 in reference to what was the essential point of the article in question, 

 in its bearing on the authorship of opinions in dispute. Neither can 

 we be expected to retract, or apologise for, the publication of Vice- 

 Chancellor James's judgment on this important question of literary 

 copyright, although, at a date subsequent to our publication, the highest 

 court of appeal reversed his decision. How far that reversal absolutely 

 oversets the previous judgment, the reader can determine for himself. 

 But Dr. Nicholas tells us in his pamphlet that " fully a third of the 

 Vice-Chnncellor's judgment consists of a careful statement of the 

 plaintiff's case, in the supposed words of the plaintiff himself. There 

 is no corresponding adequate representation of the argument on my 

 side. This at once indicates the leanings of the judge." The leanings 

 of his own counsel were, it would seem, in the same direction; that of 

 the London morning papers, and of scientific and literary journals, much 

 on a par; so that any chance of our catching an impartial glimpse of 

 the case would seem to have been hopeless enough. 



But objectionable assertions and admissions, referred to in the daily 

 press, reported at some length in the Anthropological Review, and 

 left uncoutroverted, it would appear, in the Vice-Chancellor's court, 

 came under review before the Lord Chancellor, and are dealt with, in 

 part at least, in his final judgment. "We accordingly comply with Dr. 

 Nicholas's appeal for justice, so far as this journal is concerned, by 

 printing the following abstracts of the judgments pronounced by the 

 Lord Chancellor and Lord Justice Giffard. Both these extracts, and 

 those previously produced from Dr. Nicholas's own pleadings, are given 

 verbatim, as furnished by him, and include all that he has seen fit to 

 forward to us. As has been already observed, he undertook his own 

 case in the Court of Appeal, having met, as he believed, with scant 

 justice at the hands of his counsel in the former trial ; and to this the 

 Lord Chancellor makes complimentary allusion in the opening sentence : 



