and proposing a Conference or Commission of eighteen Americans and Englishmen-three authors, three publishers, and three publicists to be appointed on each side, by the American Secretary of State and the British Secretary for Foreign Affairs-which should consider and present the details of a treaty.

They also presented, as a suggested basis of action, what came to be known as the "Harper draft," a modification of the Clarendon treaty, providing that there should be registration in both countries before publication in the country of origin; that international registration should be in the name of the author-if a citizen of the United States, at Stationers' Hall, London; if a subject of Her Majesty, at the Library of Congress, Washington; and that "the author of any work of literature manufactured and published in the one country shall not be entitled to copyright in the other country unless such work shall be also manufactured and published therein, by a subject or citizen thereof, within three months after its original publication in the country of the author or proprietor; but this proviso shall not apply to paintings, engravings, sculptures, or other works of art; and the word manufacture' shall not be held to prohibit printing in one country from stereotype plates prepared in the other and imported for this purpose.'

This draft was approved by fifty-two leading American authors, including Longfellow, Holmes, Emerson, and Whittier, in a memorial dated August, 1880. The American members of the International Copyright Committee, ap pointed by the Association for the Reform and Codification of the Law of Nations, Messrs. John Jay, James Grant Wilson, and Nathan Appleton, also memorialized the Secretary of State, under date of February 11th, 1880, in favor of this general plan, specifying within from one to three months" as the manufacturing limit. It was also approved by the great body of American publishers, although Messrs. Putnam, Scribner, Holt, and Roberts in signing took exception to certain of the restrictions, especially to the time limit of three months. Mr. George Haven Putnam set forth the views of his house in a paper before the New York Free Trade Club, January 29th, 1879, afterward printed as Economic Monograph No. XV., "International Copyright considered in some of its relations to ethics and political economy." In this he suggested simultaneous registration in both countries, republication within six months, and

restriction of copyright protection here for the first ten years of the term to books printed and bound in the United States and published by an American citizen.

An interesting series of replies from American authors, publishers, etc., as to methods for international copyright, to queries from the PUBLISHERS' WEEKLY will be found in v. 15, commencing with No. 7, Feb. 15, 1879.

The " Harper draft" was submitted in September, 1880, by Mr. Lowell to Earl Granville, who replied, March, 1881, that the British Government favored such a treaty, but considered an extension of the republication term to six months essential, and to twelve months much more equitable. In the same month the International Literary Association adopted a report favoring an agreement, but protesting against the manufacturing clause and time limit. This posi

tion was also taken at several meetings of London publishers, and Mr. F. R. Daldy was sent to America to further the English view. Sir Edward Thornton, British Minister at Washington, was instructed to proceed to the consideration of the treaty, provided the term for reprint could be extended, and both President Garfield and Secretary Blaine were understood to favor the completion of a treaty. With the death of Garfield the matter ended for the time.

It was revived once more in 1884. A new copyright association, the American Copyright League, had been organized in 1883, chiefly through the efforts of George P. Lathrop, Edward Eggleston, and R. W. Gilder, and there was a general revival of interest in the question. On January 9, 1884, Mr. Dorsheimer, of New York, introduced into the House his bill for international copyright, which provided for the extension of copyright to citizens of countries granting reciprocal privileges, so soon as the President should issue his proclamation accepting such reciprocity, for the life of the author, or for twenty-five years, providing he should live longer than that time. This bill

was the occasion of a general discussion. The Copyright League addressed a letter to Mr. Dorsheimer urging the modification of the above limitations, and it was particularly pointed out that the confining of copyright to an author's life-time would render literary property most insecure. The League also addressed a letter to the Secretary of State, urging the completion of a treaty with Great Britain, to which Mr. Frelinghuysen replied, January 25, 1884, that while

the negotiation as to the Harper draft had not been interrupted, he thought the object might be attained by a simple amendment to our present copyright law, based on reciprocity, after which a simple convention would suffice to put the amendment in force. Mr. Dorsheimer's bill was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, and reported favorably, with amendments extending the copyright term to twentyeight years, without regard to the decease of the author, with renewal for fourteen years. The amended bill also provided that such copyright should cease in case reciprocity was withdrawn by another country; that there should be no copyright in works already published, and that the provisions of the domestic copyright law should as far as applicable extend also to foreign copyrights. On the 19th of February Mr. Dorsheimer moved to make his bill the special order for February 27, but his motion failed of the necessary two-thirds vote, 155 voting aye, 98 nay and 55 not voting. There was considerable opposition on the part of those who insisted upon the re-manufacture of foreign books in this country, and Mr. Dorsheimer privately expressed himself as willing to accept, although not willing to favor, amendments in that direction if they were necessary to insure the passage of the bill. A circular letter of inquiry sent out by the PUBLISHERS' WEEKLY in March, 1884, showed a general desire on the part of American publishers in favor of international copyright. Of fiftyfive leading publishers who answered, fifty-two favored and only three opposed international copyright. Out of these, twenty-eight advocated International Copyright pure and simple; fourteen favored a “manufacturing clause;" the others did not reply on this point. Congress adjourned, however, without taking definite action.

President Arthur, in his message of December, 1884, put himself on record as favoring copyright on the basis of reciprocity. The Dorsheimer

bill was re-introduced by Mr. English, January 5, 1885, and on January 6 Senator Hawley introduced "the Hawley bill" into the Senate. This latter, which covered all copyright articles, while Mr. Dorsheimer's had been confined to books, was understood to be favored by the Copyright League; it extended copyright to citizens of foreign States, on a basis of reciprocity, for books or other works published after the passage of the bill, by repealing those parts of the Revised Statutes confining copyright to "citizens of the United States or resident therein." No action was taken, however, on either the Dorsheimer or the Hawley bill. A bill brought forward in the PUBLISHERS' WEEKLY of December 6, 1884, was intended, by a form admitting of easy amendment, to facilitate the passage of some kind of bill extending the principle of copyright to citizens of foreign countries under limitations set forth in subsequent sections of the bill.

In his first annual message, 1885, President Cleveland referred favorably to the negotiations at Berne, and with the opening of the Forty-ninth Congress two bills were introduced into the Senate, that of Senator Hawley (December 7, 1885), being essentially his bill of the previous year, and that of Senator Chace (January 21, 1886), a new bill, based on a plan put forward some years previously by Mr. Henry C. Lea and now supported by the Typographical Union and other labor organizations. The Hawley bill is on a simple basis of reciprocity; the Chace bill requires registry within fifteen days and deposit of the best American edition within six months from publication abroad, at a fee of $1, to be used in printing a list of copyright books for customs use; the prohibition of importations ; and the voiding of copyright when the American manufacturer abandons publication. They are both before the Senate Committee on Patents, which has given several hearings to those interested in the subject.

THE unsettled and confused state of copyright law, as shown in the previous chapters, makes desirable a thorough revision of our domestic copyright code, and the pending organization of an International Copyright Union, similar to the existing International Postal Union, with the proposed revision and assimilation to a general system of the domestic law of England and other countries, makes the time opportune.

The copyright term adopted by Germany, of the author's life and thirty years thereafter, promises to become the standard statutory term, giving the control and returns of all his works directly to the author and his heirs or assigns into the period of a third generation and avoiding all questions as to the date of commencement of copyright or the lapse at different times of copyright on different works. With an adequate terin, extending the benefit of an author's works into the days of his children and grandchildren, the question of perpetuity of copyright, except as an acknowledgment of an author's inherent right in his own product, is comparatively unimportant. There are, indeed, two considerations which go far to reconcile the upholders of authors' rights to a statutory term, waiving rights at common law. An indeterminate copyright would bring, if sold by the author, little if any more "outright" price than one for the term designated; and if the author retains copyright for his own proper heirs, his duties to his own posterity are fairly limited (as in the precedent of the law of entail) to his grandchildren. Beyond the term designated, the publisher or other beneficiary holding the exclusive right would have little natural relation to the original producer, and the reversion may very

fairly be to the public. Moreover, in the case of material property, where a material exists, it is difficult enough to keep a title clear from generation to generation; it might be still more difficult in the case of immaterial property.

The adoption of an adequate term, the freeing of the copyright system from mere technicalities which tend to forfeit rights for inadequate reasons, the recognition in the law itself of the present status of copyright as determined by judicial interpretations, the adoption into our law of useful features found in the copyright systems of other countries, are all desiderata for our domestic code, and the appointment by Congress of a Commission of experts to report a revised and comprehensive system, at an ensuing session or to a later Congress, would be most desirable.

The relations between authors and publishers is not properly within the scope of such a codea fact overlooked by the advocates of what is called the royalty system." The law, whether as to copyright or other matters, should afford a basis of certainty for business, but it cannot wisely interfere with freedom of contract between the parties to a business transaction. "The royalty plan," whether for domestic or international copyright, proposes that the law shall permit any person to publish the work of any author, on payment to him of a specified royalty, say of ten or five per cent, or a fixed sum per copy, on each copy sold. In reply to the criticism that the author would thus be put at the mercy of irresponsible persons, unless the Government undertook an elaborate system of accounting and guarantee to the author as its ward, the suggestion has been made that the royalty

should be paid by means of stamps affixed to each copy published, sold by the aut. or to the publisher-a system actually in practice in the shoe business, under the royalty scheme of the McKay Sewing-Machine Company. The answer to both is that the author is now at liberty to make such arrangements, by contract with one publisher or with many, and that a law to compel him to adopt any one plan of marketing his wares would interfere with his freedom of choice and his natural return. The reason that an author chooses one publisher instead of many is the simple one that the original cost of making and advertising a book is, in this way, reduced to one outlay instead of multiplied in many, and that this cost is minimized by being distributed over the largest possible edition. It is the practice of any successful publisher to plan for such an edition as will command the widest sale, and so distribute the original cost over as many copies as possible, and when a copyright book proves to be of such general demand that different styles of editions can be sold, such editions are in fact made by the same publisher.

64

The royalty plan" would only protect the public against the unwisdom of publishers whose mistakes are presently corrected by business failure or by the transfer of his books by the author to more enterprising houses.

The relations between author and publisher are simply those between principal and agent, or, where an author sells "outright," between buyer and seller. The "outright" price of a book is purely a matter of bargain, and no general rule applies. The author may reserve the "renewal" for his own benefit, or contract to renew as part of the original bargain. In the case where the publisher acts as agent for the author, the arrangement may be one of several different kinds. Either the author or the publisher may bargain to defray the cost of setting the type or making "plates," in which last case the plates usually remain the property of the party paying for them. An allowance of about ten per cent on the actual manufacturing cost of plates is a fair charge of the publisher for his oversight of them. Either the author or the publisher may bargain to defray the cost of making the edition (paper, press-work, and binding), and of the advertising, usually a large item, and like expenses. The remaining profits may be equally divided, which is the "half profits" system used in England. Or a definite percentage, usually calculated on the retail price (excluding

the price of fancy bindings), may be paid the author-usually in America fifteen or twenty per cent when the author pays for the book and takes the risk; ten per cent on general, and five per cent on school and subscription books when the publisher does these. Or the author may arrange to pay the publisher a definite commission of ten or twenty per cent, as selling agent, and take all risk. An author's copyright is reckoned almost invariably not on copies printed, but on copies sold, and accounted for yearly or halfyearly. The “half-profits" system is apt to lead to much misunderstanding as to the actual expenses (e.g., general office expenses of a publisher,) to be deducted before profits are reckoned, and the American ten per cent system is, on the whole, most satisfactory. The publisher does not, as is sometimes naïvely assumed, get the other ninety per cent as profit; he gets the difference between the returns from the trade or public on copies actually sold-averaging perhaps two thirds of the "retail price," on which the author's ten per cent (really thus fifteen per cent) is reckoned--and the cost of making the entire edition and of advertising and marketing the book. The author, in any event, gets a return proportioned to the success of his book. If its sales are small, the publisher makes a loss if large, the publisher makes a profit increasing proportionately with each extra thousand sold.

It is by means of this profit on successful books that the publisher is able to take risks with new books and new authors. It has been said that of five books, three fail, one covers its cost, the fifth must pay a profit to cover the rest. The element of risk in the book business is, in fact, very large; if the author complains that his successful book ought not to pay for others' unsuccessful books, he can get over the difficulty by taking the risk himself, and making corresponding terms with a publisher. On a dollar clothbound book, it may usually be roughly estimated that the cost is 30 cents, the trade discount 30 cents (covering the bookseller's expenses, risk, and profit), the author's royalty 10 cents; out of the remaining 30 cents the publisher covers expenses, risk, and profit. On the average, he nets probably less than the 10 cents of the author, and the system is essentially on an equitable basis. The publisher's larger returns come from the fact that he handles more books than any one author writes. The publisher has usually in bargaining with the author the advantage of larger experience and superior business abil

ity, and of the fact that the author seeks him rather than he the author; but no law can better the author in these respects. As a matter of practice, the better publishing houses treat with new authors on the same terms as with old, and have a form of contract on which transactions are based. It is usually understood in these contracts that a book remains with the publisher so long as he keeps it in the market; if an author wishes to retain control of his book, that should be specified. The true secret, in fact, of satisfactory relations between author and publisher lies in a full understanding of the conditions of the arrangement in settling the terms of a contract, and these details of customary arrangements have here been given to correct the common confusion between copyright law and a business relation, which rests solely upon the common law of contracts.

In regard to international copyright, this country has yet to put itself on a par with other civilized nations, and blot out what has become a national disgrace. There are two great reasons for international copyright-the general principle of justice inciting us to pay foreign authors for the service they do us, and the unwisdom of discouraging home literature by subjecting home authors and home books to competition with absolutely unpaid labor. The plea against the first, that a nation legislates chiefly for its own citizens, is met by the second, as well as by the increasing disposition of civilized nations mutually to recognize and protect property of all kinds and of any owner. The reasons commonly advanced against international copyright are (1) that we have got on well without it, and may best leave things as they are, instead of "forcing the people to pay for what they can now have free;" (2) that it would make books dearer, whereas American civilization depends on cheap education, which in turn depends on cheap books; (3) that the benefit would be, not to the foreign author, but to the foreign publisher, who would foist on us English editions and take work from our mechanics; (4) that the best foreign authors stimulate our own to greater efforts, so that they can supply the American market and drive out poor foreign books; (5) that copyright gives a monopoly to a few authors against the interest of the many readers, and is kindred to patents, depriving new-comers of the benefit of what they might have invented for themselves.

The answers to these objections may be briefly

outlined as follows: (1) “Things as they are" are against the present standard of international honesty, and against the interest of American authors. Moreover, people would not be "forced to pay for what they now have free," for international copyright would not be retroactive, and the cheap reprints from Shakespeare to Tennyson could still be had. (2) It would make the new books of foreign authors dearer, but by affording opportunity for wider sale of American books, it would tend to make them cheaper, distributing the original cost among larger editions. The novel-devourer, buying

64

the last new novel," now takes an English reprint at 10 or 20 cents instead of an American work at 50 cents or $1. Moreover, even in England, while three-volume novels, etc., are higher priced than here, the many lines of popular new books are often cheaper than here (e. g., two shillings sixpence to our seventy-five cents), so that the question of relative prices has not the bearing alleged by the opponents of international copyright. The French copyright literature, with full copyright, is the cheapest in the world. American cheap education has come from cheap school-books, which are American and are already copyright. Further, "there is one thing better than a cheap book," as Mr. Lowell says, and that is a book honestly come by ;" and, above all, American civilization depends on the honesty and justice of the people. (3) The foreign author would soon learn to bargain for his American market, and American editions would best meet American wants. The increased demand for American books would also operate to give our mechanics more to do. At worst, this objection would be met by the proposed manufacturing clause (which logically, however, has no more to do than the tariff with copyright), confining copyright to books printed here. Such a clause should not, however, prohibit the use of imported stereotype plates and electros of illustrations, since otherwise we should have to pay twice for doing work that can be done once for both countries, and should cut ourselves off from printing many illustrated books. The amount of type-setting involved is exaggerated-it is probably less than that of two or three of our daily papers together, and is largely the cheap work of women or machines. The manufacturing clause is advocated by some publishers for a term of years only, until foreign authors get into the habit of dealing for the American market separately. (4) American au