SCIENCE. 
201 
SCIENCE: 
A Weekly Record of Scientific 
Prog r ess. 
JOHN MICHELS, Editor. 
Published at 
229 BROADWAY, NEW YORK. 
P. O. Box 3838. 
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 23, 1880. 
The recent discussions on the proposed interna- 
tional copyright have served to display the prejudices 
and animosities of those engaged in the controversy, 
rather than a true exposition of the actual principles 
involved. 
It is not difficult to discover that under the plea of 
maintaining the rights of authors, leading publishing 
houses on both sides of the Atlantic are manoeuvring 
for a “ literary treaty ” which shall result in their own 
benefit only. 
How little the author has at stake as a result of all 
this agitation may be gathered from a statement by 
one who writes on the subject, perhaps not in the in- 
terest, but undoubtedly under the patronage, of one of 
the largest New York publishing houses. 
He says : “ If the author’s interest in a book is rep- 
resented by 10 per cent, the publisher’s interest is 
represented by 90 per cent.” It is not, therefore, sur- 
prising to find these champions of author’s rights 
feebly contending for the protection of the works of 
literary men, but strongly united to secure a mono- 
poly of the business interests involved. 
The American publishers who previously were unwill- 
ing to concede to foreign authors even their “ ten per 
cent, interest,” give at length a tardy consent to a 
copyright treaty, provided their “ 90 per cent, inter- 
est ” is made secure, and their possession of the mon- 
opoly rendered impregnable by law. 
The New York Herald , on the 4th of October last, 
stated this case as it now stands with admirable judg- 
ment, and we are glad to find the powerful influence 
of this journal taking ground which is in perfect ac- 
cord with the view we maintain on this important 
matter. The Herald says : 
“ The corner-stone of the proposed treat}' is that protec 
tion in this country be given to British authors on condi- 
tion that they republish here within three months after pub- 
lication in Great Britain, and on the further condition that 
the work be issued here by an American publisher. On 
like terms British copyright is to be extended to American 
authors. 
“That this scheme would work to the profit of the larg- 
est publishing houses in this country, if not of American 
publishers generally, there is little reason to doubt. It 
would be a protective measure in their interest. It would 
create a monopoly in their favor. It would compel foreign 
authors to come to them or pay the penalty of piracy. It 
would have no material advantages for the great reading 
public in either country, and so far from being favor- 
able to either British or American authors it would 
work against the best interests of both. It would drive 
both, in order to get foreign protection, to deal with pub- 
lishers three thousand miles away, and to bear the expense, 
loss of time, labor, and inconvenience of republication. 
Still more burdensome and unjust would be the condition 
requiring the author to republish in the foreign country 
within a short time after publication at home or lose all his 
foreign rights and claims to protection.” 
No impartial reader can peruse the above extract 
without admitting the justice of the writer’s conclu- 
sions ; he rips off the thin disguise which covers this 
ridiculous treaty, and reveals the true purpose of 
those engineering the movement. 
The intemperate language employed by the organ 
of some publishing houses on this question should be 
noted. The Editor of Popular Science Monthly as- 
sails Wilkie Collins (who advocates the only right 
principle of international protection to literary prop- 
erty) with uncalled for severity; he is called “a com- 
mon-place scold,” and his temperate and forcible arti- 
cle on the subject is termed “a blast, which did not 
amount to much,” and as “ a perverse and unhelpful 
utterance.” Was it in good taste for the same writer 
to tell Mathew Arnold that “he was devoid of 
sense?” But the conclusion of this article de- 
mands more than a passing notice, as it conveys a 
threat, expressed in language which is very 
significant considering the house from whence the 
publication emanates, and maybe taken in the light of 
an ultimatum from the publishing interests to their lite- 
rary patrons. 
It may be remembered that Wilkie Collins simply 
asks that an author may possess “ by law (on condi- 
tions with which it is reasonable to comply) the same 
right of control over his property in his book, in a 
foreign country, which the law gives him in his own 
country.” This is what the New York Herald advo- 
cates, and we would concede to authors of all coun- 
tries. 
The Popular Science Monthly states that “ if Mr. 
Collins [and of course all other authors] has any idea 
of getting it, he “ had better possess his soul in great 
patience,” for he will assuredly have to wait a long time 
before he gets what he wants.” 
