diff options
Diffstat (limited to '76806-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 76806-0.txt | 194 |
1 files changed, 194 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/76806-0.txt b/76806-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f457de0 --- /dev/null +++ b/76806-0.txt @@ -0,0 +1,194 @@ + +*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 76806 *** + + + Transcriber’s Note + +Italic text is denoted by _underscores_ in this transcription. Small +capitals text is displayed as ALLCAPS. + + + + + + + THE + LAW OF COPYRIGHT + + + + + THE LAW + + OF + + COPYRIGHT + + + BY + William Wordsworth + + + LONDON + PRINTED FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION + 1916 + + + + + ===================================================== + PREFATORY NOTE. + ===================================================== + + +The Copyright Act referred to by Wordsworth in the following document +was presented to the House of Commons for the first time on _April +18th, 1838_, the day upon which the poet addressed his open letter to +Serjeant Talfourd. + +The letter appeared in _The Morning Post_ of _April 23rd, 1838_, and +had apparently escaped all notice until I chanced upon it recently when +searching a file of the paper for any stray writing of Wordsworth’s.[1] +Prefixed to the text of the letter was the following editorial comment:— + + “_We feel very sincere pleasure in having been selected as the medium + for giving to the public Mr. Wordsworth’s sentiments concerning + Serjeant Talfourd’s proposed Bill for the amendment of the law of + copyright. It is a source of additional gratification to us that + the opinions of such a man as Mr. Wordsworth are so completely + in accordance with those we have already on several occasions + endeavoured to impress on the attention of our readers._” + +When he applied himself to the composition of the present letter, +Wordsworth was for the second time employing his pen in support of +Talfourd’s Bill. An earlier letter, dated _April 12th, 1838_, addressed +to the Editor of _The Kendal Mercury_, had appeared in the columns of +that paper on _April 16th, 1838_, over the pseudonymous initials “A. +B.” This earlier letter is already well known, and is included in the +_Prose Works of William Wordsworth_, edited by William Knight, 1896, +Vol. ii, pp. 375–382. Its successor, now rescued from its obscurity in +a dusty file of an old newspaper, should henceforth find a place beside +it. + + T. J. W. + + +_25, Heath Drive,_ + _Hampstead, N.W._ + + +—————————— +[1] In view of the number of contributions made by Wordsworth to _The +Morning Post_ (among which _The Convict_, which brightened its pages +on December 14th, 1797, is by far the most important) it is curious to +recall the following statement which occurs in a letter addressed by +him to Daniel Stuart:— + + “_I am quite certain that nothing of mine ever appeared in ‘The + Morning Post,’ except a very, very few sonnets upon political + subjects, and one poem called ‘The Farmer of Tilsbury Vale,’ but + whether this appeared in ‘The Morning Post’ or ‘The Courier,’ I do + not remember._” [The poem cited did appear in _The Morning + Post_ on July 21st, 1800.] + + + + + ===================================================== + THE LAW OF COPYRIGHT. + ===================================================== + + + RYDAL MOUNT, + _April 18th, 1838_. + +MY DEAR SIR, + +A strong opposition, which has manifested itself by public meetings and +petitions to the House of Commons, having started up among printers, +publishers, and others to your Bill for amending the law of copyrights, +and no other like counter-movement being made by authors on their part, +it has been suggested to me, from quarters entitled to great respect, +that it might be of service if, along with a most distinguished +literary friend, I should present a petition to Parliament, praying +that the Bill may pass, or at least one in favour of its principle. +This compliment has no doubt been paid me as one among the oldest +of living writers, and one therefore whose heirs must, in course of +nature, be injured sooner than those of younger men, if the proposed +measure be rejected. You will not be surprised if I feel some scruple +in taking a step, though so well recommended, on account of an aversion +to appear prominently in any public question, and because I am loth +to think so unfavourably of Parliament as to deem that it requires +petitions from authors as a ground for granting them a privilege, the +justice of which is so obvious. I cannot bring myself to suppose +that the mere shadows of argument advanced by printers and publishers +against the claims of a class to whom they owe the respectability +of their condition, if not their very existence, should avail with +any intelligent and disinterested assembly. Yet further am I averse +thus to petition Parliament, because I would not ask as an individual +suppliant, or with a single associate, what in equity I consider to be +the _right_ of a class, and for a much longer period than that defined +in your Bill—for ever. Such right, as you have stated in your admirable +speech, was acknowledged by the common law of England; and let them who +have cried out so loudly against the extension of the term as is now +proposed show cause why that original right should not be restored. The +onus clearly rests with them to do so; but they have not attempted it, +and are glad to take shelter under the statute law as it now stands, +which is a composition or compromise between two opinions; the extreme +point of one being, that, by giving his thoughts to the world, an +author abandons all right to consider the vehicle as private property; +and of the other, that he has the right in perpetuity, that descends to +his heirs, and is transferable to those to whom he or they may assign +it. + +This right I hold to be more deeply inherent in that species of +property than in any other, though I am aware that many persons, +perceiving wherein it differs from acquisitions made in trade and +commerce, &c., have contended that the law in respect to literature +ought to remain upon the same footing as that which regards the profits +of mechanical inventions and chemical discoveries; but that this is an +utter fallacy might easily be proved. + +From the considerations above stated I decline to petition, as +suggested, and content myself, in the silence of others better entitled +to speak, with this public declaration of my judgment, so that at +least, my dear Sir, you may not be liable to be treated as a volunteer +intruding without wish or sanction openly expressed by any one of +the class whose rights and interests you have so much to your honour +stepped forward to maintain. Here this letter shall close, its purpose +being answered, for no general arguments from me, and no statement of +facts belonging to my own case, and which have come to my knowledge +with respect to my illustrious friends Coleridge, Scott, Southey, and +others, would avail to produce conviction where that has not been +effected by your unrivalled speech made upon your first introduction +of the Bill into the House of Commons, and by reasonings which have +lately been set forth with great ability by writers in the public +journals, who were more at liberty to enter into details than you could +be while treating the subject before Parliament. + +Should your Bill be overborne, which I cannot allow myself to fear, by +the interested opposition now at work, justice, nevertheless, sooner or +later, must triumph; and at all events the respect and gratitude which +authors feel towards you and your coadjutors upon this occasion will be +cherished by them to the last hour of their lives. + + I have the honour to be, + My dear Sir, + Faithfully yours, + + WILLIAM WORDSWORTH. + + _To_ +SERJEANT TALFOURD, M.P. + + + + + LONDON: + Printed for THOMAS J. WISE, Hampstead, N.W. + + _Edition limited to Thirty Copies._ + + + +*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 76806 *** |