Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

came Law. Acting as the agent of Justice, Law protected property. In those days of moral improvement, if an Indian stole a Dutchman's watch, he committed an offence, and he was punished accordingly-for, observe, a watch was now property.

Later dates brought their changes with them. The English forced themselves into the Dutchmen's places. New Amsterdam became New York. As time went on, a foolish English King, and a tyrannical Government were deservedly beaten on a trial of strength with the descendants of the first English settlers. The Republic of the United States started on its great career. With peace came the arts of peace. The American author rose benignly on the national horizon.

And what did the American Government do? The American Government, having all other property duly protected, bethought itself of the claims of Literature; and, looking towards old Europe, saw that the work of a man's brains, produced in the form of a book, had been at last recognised as that man's property by the Law. Congress followed this civilised example, and recognised and protected the published work of an American citizen as that citizen's property.

Having thus provided for the literary interests of its own people within its own geographical limits, Congress definitely turned its back on all further copyright proceedings in the Old World. After a certain lapse of time, the three greatest nations on the Continent of Europe, France, Germany, and Italy, agreed with England that an act of justice to Literature still remained to be done. Treaties of international copyright were accordingly exchanged between these States. An author's right of property in his work was thus recognised in other countries than his own. It was legally forbidden to a foreign bookseller to republish his work for foreign circulation without his permission; for the plain and unanswerable reason that his work belonged, in the first place, to him and to no other person.

With this honourable example set before it by other Governments, what has the United States done? Nothing! To this day it refuses to the literary property of other people the protection which it gives to the literary property of its own people. To this day the President and Congress of America remain content to contemplate the habitual perpetration, by American citizens, of the act of theft.

III.

Having now done with our historical survey-in plainer words, having now got our facts-we may conveniently confront the grave question:-Why

does the Government of the United States refuse to foreign writers the copyright in their works which it concedes to the works of its own citizens ?

Colonel, when honest men perceive an act of justice to be done, and determine really to do it, there are never any insuperable difficulties in the way. On the plain merits of the case-work that if you please, you will see why-there are no more difficulties in the way of international copyright between England and America than between England and France, England and Germany, England and Italy. The cases run on parallel lines; the necessity of foreign translation, in the European case, being an accidental circumstance which adds to the expense of publishing the book, and nothing more. My work is republished in America in English, and republished in French. Whatever difference there may be in the language of the republication, the fact of the republication remains the same fact in both instances.

I am very careful to put this plainly; there must be some clear ground to stand on before I can attempt to clear away the extraordinary accumulation of delusions under which the unfortunate question of copyright has been suffering in recent years. If you see any difficulty in accepting my statement of the case thus far, let us revert to first principles, and ask ourselves-What is the object to be obtained by the thing called International Copyright?

The

In answering this question I will put it personally for the greater facility of illustration. object of International Copyright is to give me, by law (on considerations with which it is possible for me to comply), the same right of control over my book in a foreign country, which the law gives me in my own country.

In Europe, this is exactly what we have done. When I publish my book in London, I enter it at Stationers' Hall, and register it as my propertyand my book is mine in Great Britain. When I publish my book in Paris, I register it by the performance of similar formalities-and again my book is mine in France. In both cases my publisher (English or French) is chosen at my own free will. His position towards me is the position of a person who takes the business of publishing and registering off my hands, in consideration of a bargain previously made between us-the essence of which bargain is, that the book is my property, and that my written permission is necessary before he can obtain his right to publish the book, and his exclusive claim (for a greater or lesser period of time) to the privilege of selling it. Why can I not do the same thing in the free Republic of the United States?

[ocr errors]

IV.

Here the Colonel lays down my letter for a while, and looks bewildered.

"The copyright difficulty, as stated by Mr. Wilkie Collins," he says, appears to be no difficulty at all. What am I to think of the multitudinous objections from the American point of view, raised in leading articles, pamphlets, speeches, and so forth?" My good friend, a word in your ear. The American objections (I say it with all due respect for the objections) are, one and all, American delusions. The main object of this letter is, if possible, to blow these delusions away. I promise not to be long about it, and to keep my temper though I have lost some thousands of pounds by American pirates.

Let us begin with the delusion-the most extraordinary in the whole list-that the American people have something to do with the question of International Copyright.

An American citizen sees a reprinted English book in a shop window, or has it pitched into his lap by a boy in a railway train, or hears from a friend that it is well worth reading. He buys the book, and reads it--and, as I can gratefully testify from my own personal experience, he feels, in the great majority of cases, a sincere respect for literature and a hearty gratitude to the writer who has instructed or interested him, which is one among the many honourable distinctions of the national character. When he has done all this, what in Heaven's name has author, publisher, orator, or leading-article writer any further right to expect from him? When I have paid for my place at the theatre, and added my little tribute of applause in honour of the play and the actors, have I not done my duty as one of the audience? Am I expected to insist on knowing whether the author's rights have been honestly recognised by the manager, and the players' salaries regularly paid without reductions once a week? It is simply ridiculous to mention the American people in connection with the settlement of the copyright question. The entire responsibility of honourably settling the question in my country rests with the Legislature. In the United States the President and Congress are the guardians and representatives of American honour. It is they, and not the people, who are to blame for the state which book-stealing has set on the American name.

Let us get on to another delusion which has amused us in England.

We are gravely informed that the United States is the paradise of cheap literature, and that International Copyright would raise the price of American books to the inordinately high level of

the English market. Our circulating Library system is cited as a proof of the truth of this assertion. There can be no two opinions on the absurdity of that system-but, such as it is, let us, at least, have it fairly understood. When a novel, for example, is published at the preposterous price of a guinea and a half, nobody pays that price. A deduction of one-third at least is made. An individual speculator buys the book, and lends it to the public. Even this man, as an annual subscription, demands the nominal price originally asked for the book (a guinea and a half), and he will send you at least three novels a week, for a whole year. If this is not cheap reading, what is? But you will say THE public may want to buy some of the best of these novels. Very well. Within a year from the date of its first issue, the book is republished at five or six shillings (a dollar and a half); and is again republished at two shillings (fifty cents). Setting the case of stolen literary property out of the question, are these not correct American prices? But why should the purchaser be made to wait till the book can be sold at a reasonable price? I admit the absurdity of making him wait. But is that absurdity likely, under any conceivable circumstances, to be copied in America? England the circulating library is one of our old institutions which dies very slowly. In America it is no institution at all. Is it within the limits of probability that one of your citizens should prefer lending a novel to a few hundred subscribers, when he can sell it to purchasers by the thousand? It is a waste of words to ask the question. The one thing needful, so far as works of fiction are concerned, is to show you that our popular price for a novel is the American popular price. Look at the catalogue of "Harper's Library of American Fiction," and you will find that the prices range from two to three shillings-fifty to seventy per

cent.

In

Turning to literature in general let us consult Messrs. Harper again. I am away from home while I write, and I have no means of quoting from a more recent catalogue than the summer list of 1878. However, the prices of less than two years ago in New York cannot be obsolete prices yet. Here are some specimens:

"The Atlantic Islands." Illustrated. 8vo. Cloth. $3 (twelve shillings).

"Annual Record of Science and Industry for 1877." Large 12mo. Cloth. $2 (eight shillings).

"The Student's French Grammar." 12mo. Cloth. $1.40 (say five shillings and sixpence).

"Art Education applied to Industry."

[ocr errors]

Illus

trated. 8vo. Cloth gilt. (Sixteen shillings.) Harper's Travellers' Handbooks for Europe and the East. $3 per volume (twelve shillings).

I am quite ready to believe that every one of these books is well worth the price asked for it. But don't tell me that American books are always cheap books, and let it at least be admitted that English publishers are not the only publishers who charge a remunerative price for a valuable work, which has proved a costly work to produce and which is not always likely to command a large circulation. To sum it up, literature which addresses all classes of the population is as cheap in England as it is in America. Literature which addresses special classes only will on that very account always be published at special prices (with or without international copyright) on both sides of the Atlantic.

V.

I must not try your patience too severely, Colonel. Let me leave unnoticed some of the minor misunderstandings which obscure the American view of the copyright case, and let me occupy the closing lines of this letter with a really mischievous delusion. Just consider what this extraordinary delusion really amounts to. "We don't deny (the American publishers say) that you English authors have a moral right of property in your books, which we are quite ready to make a legal right, on conditions that we are to dictate the use which you make in America of your own property. If we confer on you international copyright, we see with horror a future day when English publishers and English printers may start in business under our very noses, and we will only give you your due, with the one little drawback that we prohibit you to employ your countrymen to publish your books in our country. Our respect for justice is only matched by our respect for our purses. Hurrah for honourable dealings with the British author-so long as there is no fear of a decrease in the balance at our bankers! Down with the British author, and away with the national honour if there is the slightest danger of the almighty dollar finding its way into other pockets than ours!"

Am I exaggerating? Let two of the American publishers speak for themselves.

Hear Messrs. Harper Brothers first. After reciting the general conditions on which they propose to grant us copyright in the United States, they proceed as follows :-" And provided further, that within six months after registration of title the work shall have been manufactured and published

in the country, and by a subject or citizen of the country in which such registration has been made." Mr. W. H. Appleton, writing to the London Times (in a curiously aggressive tone), expresses himself more plainly. "Our people," he says, evidently rejoice to open this vast opportunity of your meaning our printers and publishers, "would intellectual labours . . . But they hold themselves perfectly competent to manufacture the books that shall embody your authors' thoughts, in accordance with their own needs, habits, and tastes, and in this they will not be interfered with." (Extracted from Messrs. Harper Brothers pamphlet, "New York, March 17th, 1879.")

To argue the question with men who are of this time and mine. It we are ever to have international way of thinking would be merely to waste your copyright between the two countries we must have the same unreserved recognition of a moral right, the same ungrudging submission to the law of honour, which has produced the treaties exchanged between the European Powers. In this respect England has set the example to the United States. And, let me add, England has no fear of competition. I have put the question myself to eminent London publishers; they have no idea of intruding their trade interests into a great question of national justice. They are ready to welcome wholesale competition in an open market. If they set up branch establishments in New York, the American publishers shall be free to follow their example in London. What does Mr. Marston (of the London firm of Sampson Low, Marston and Co.) say on this subject, in his letter to The Times, published May 12th, 1879?—

"As a publisher, I trust I shall be absolved from the charge of advocating trade interests, when I express my strong conviction that the only Convention between the two countries which can possibly bear the test of time, must be one based upon the original and inherent rights of property! Let registration in Washington and London, within a month or two months of first publication in either country, convey respectively to English and American authors the same right in each other's country as in their own, and one's sense of justice will be satisfied. . . Such restrictions as those proposed by American publishers exist in no other Conventions; they arise out of a most unfounded and unnecessary fear of competition by English publishers!"

There is the opinion of one member of the representative of the trade. I could produce similar opinions from other members, but I must not needlessly lengthen my letter. Hear, instead, an American citizen who agrees with Mr. Marston, and with me. Let Mr. George Haven Putnam speak delivering an address on International Copyright in New York, on the 29th of January, 1879:

I believe that in the course of time the general

laws of trade would and ought to so regulate the arrangements for supplying the American public with books that, if there were no restriction as to volumes, the author would select the publishing agent, English or American, who could serve him to best advantage, and that agent would be found to be the man who would prepare for the largest possible circle of American readers the editions best suited to their wants. . . If English publishers settling here could excel our American houses in this understanding and in these facilities they ought to be at liberty to do so, and it would be for the interest of the public that no hindrance should be placed in their way."

I have now, I hope, satisfied you that I do not stand quite alone in my way of thinking. If you make inquiries you will find that other American citizens, besides Mr. Putnam, can see the case plainly as it stands on its merits.

Thus far I have been careful to base our claim to international copyright on no larger ground than the ground of justice. Would you like, before I conclude, to form some idea of the money we lose by the freedom of robbery which is one of the freedoms of the American Republic?

Take the illustrious instance of Charles Dickens. The price agreed on with his English publishers for the work interrupted by his death, "Edwin Drood," was seven thousand five hundred pounds, with a promise of an addition to this sum if the work exceeded a certain circulation. Even Dickens' enormous popularity in England is beaten by his popularity in the United States. He was more read in your country than in mine, and, as a necessary consequence (with international copyright) his work would be worth more in America than in England. What did he get in America for the "advance sheets?" With the pirates to be considered in making the bargain? Less than a seventh part of what his English publisher has agreed to give him before a line of his novel was written-one thousand pounds!

But the case of Charles Dickens is a case of a writer who stands apart, and without a rival in popularity. Take my case, if you like, as representative, the position of writers of a lesser degree of popularity. I fail to remember the exact price which Messrs. Harper paid me for the advance sheets of "The Woman in White." It was certainly not a thousand pounds; perhaps half a thousand, or perhaps not so much. At any rate (with the pirates in the background waiting to steal) the great firm in New York dealt with me liberally.

It has been calculated by persons who understand the matter better than I do that for every one reader in England I have ten readers in the United States. How many nnauthorized editions

of this one novel of mine-published without my deriving any profit from them-made their appearance in America? I can only tell you, as a basis for calculation, one American publisher informed a friend of mine that he had sold one hundred and twenty thousand copies of "The Woman in White." He never sent me sixpence !

Good-bye for the present, Colonel. I must go back to my regular work, and make money for my American robbers, under the sanction of Congress.

THE TROUBLES OF A BEGINNER.

Τ

66

'HE perusal of a Hard Case" in the first issue of The Author tempts me to put on paper my own experiences as a beginner. Owing to what might be called a mild inoculation of the fraudulent publisher at the commencement of my career, the consequences of my gullibility have not proved so pecuniarily serious as they were in a Hard Case"; but that has not been for lack of trying on the part of the various so-called societies, or dishonest tradesmen, who thrive on the inexperience and vanity of the literary fledgling.

[ocr errors]

I launched my first effort in the shape of a short story, under the auspices of the "London Literary Society." Their prospectus was all that could be desired. For the modest sum of one guinea per annum my literary success was assured. They undertook to place MSS. in the hands of magazine editors, who (apparently) had no other means of obtaining copy for their publications. Thus young and unknown authors were placed upon the first rung of the ladder of fame, and it would be their own fault if they did not eventually reach the top. By thus establishing a regular method of communication between author and publisher, interest and prejudice, so fatal to beginners, would be overridden, and a long-felt want supplied. So it would, -but the "long-felt want" was that experienced by the organizers of the Society.

I sent in my guinea and my MS., and waited hopefully for the result. The receipt for the money was a work of art; it was no common receipt, it was a Diploma informing me that I had been enrolled a member of the London Literary Society, and requesting that in future I would add L.L.S. after my name when communicating with the Secretary. In due course I received an official looking document which proved to be a criticism of my story. Then for the first time I knew, what I had hitherto only suspected, that I was undoubtedly a writer of merit! According to the criticism nothing stood between me and success but the narrow-mindedness and prejudice of undiscriminating editors.

The document concluded by recommending me to send my story to a publication entitled Lloyd's Magazine.

Of course I was delighted. Certainly I could not remember having ever heard of Lloyd's Magazine, but then it was hardly to be expected that I had heard of all the magazines published, and at any rate I hoped they would pay well. It was probably connected with Lloyd's paper. The editor was very civil, and assured me he would be pleased to print my story, adding casually that some alterations would have to be made, and little technicalities attended to, before the MS. would be ready for the printer's hands, but that half a guinea would cover these necessary expenses. Hard as it may be to believe, I sent my half guinea! How I marvel at my credulity. But then I knew nothing of such things, and it seemed quite possible that a tyro like myself might have made technical mistakes that would entail a certain amount of trouble.

I also received a prospectus setting forth the advantages enjoyed by subscribers to Lloyd's Magazine. "Every talented author would ensure immediate appearance in print ;" this, it was asserted, would prove most beneficial in treating with editors who objected to unknown writers. "Sterling merit would be amply remunerated;" this was satisfactory, as the verdict of the Literary Society had inferred that my particular qualifications came under that head. In fact, the advantages were so great, and so plausibly set forth, that I felt I really must get into Lloyd's Magazine at any price.

Finally, the editor wrote to say that the MS. was now corrected and ready for the press, and that if I invested in twenty-four copies of the magazine, at 6d. apiece, my story should appear in the next issue! Having already paid so much, I took the twenty-four copies, thinking, as so many beginners do, that to get a story printed in anything was better than not getting it printed at all, and trusting to the promises of the prospectus as to the future. However, one glance at Lloyd's Magazine was sufficient to dispel any such hopes. To judge To judge by the calibre of its contents all the contributors must have paid as heavily as myself, to induce anyone to print their productions; and heartily disgusted I sent in my resignation to the London Literary Society.

I was informed in return that not having given three months' notice I was liable for my subscription. I sent it, and at the same time an intimation that I wished to withdraw. The following year I received a claim for my subscription, upon which I drew the attention of the Secretary to my previous communication. The only answer to this was another claim, of which I took no notice. Again, the year after I was sent a request for two years'

subscription, which was quickly followed by a letter threatening me with the law. Whether further proceedings would have been taken against me I never knew, as the Secretary solved the question by going bankrupt. The Court of Bankruptcy informed me that I was down on the books of the Society for two guineas, but on explaining matters the affair was dropped, and my dealings with the London Literary Society became a thing of the past. I think that I bought my experience cheaply.

One of the most ingenious attempts at fraud of the kind was perpetrated by a Society calling itself the "Southampton Association." Upon seeing the advertisement of a new magazine entitled Pen and Ink, I sent in a sample MS. In response, I got a letter informing me that, after looking through my MS., the Society was prepared to accept me as a "staff member" of the Association. This, at first sight, seemed all I could wish for-there is a peculiarly fascinating ring about the word "staff" to a beginner's ear. The letter, however, went on to explain what the privileges of a staff member were, i.e., "one whose contributions can be accepted and paid for," not will be "immediately proofs are passed by the editor."

The wording of this sounded suspicious, and when the epistle concluded by a casual request that I would fill up the form enclosed and return it, the said form being a pledge on my part to pay a guinea to the Society, I decided to have nothing further to do with it. My course of the Literary Society had rendered me proof against any more attacks of the same sort.

[ocr errors]

This

I was very nearly falling a prey, however, to the wiles of the fraudulent publisher. I had perpetrated a one volume novel, and sent it up to Messrs. A. and B. Of course it was "favourably reported on by the reader, and was going to make a great impression. The firm offered to publish it and pay half expenses, if I would pay the other half, the profits to be also equally shared. offer sounded reasonable to inexperienced ears, and I asked for an estimate. The answer was, that my half share would amount to £55 10s. (Reference to a little book since published by the Society of Authors will show that the entire cost of publishing such a volume is £23 18s. 9d.!) Fortunately I was alarmed at the sum asked, and declined the offer. They wrote again, offering to publish the book if I would pay £40 towards it, and receive one-third of the profits; this I also declined. They then suggested bringing it out in Is. form for the book stalls, my share to be £28 10s.

At this point, however, I became a member of the Society of Authors, and on sending the whole correspondence to the Secretary, received a letter

« AnteriorContinuar »