act upon the presumed validity or invalidity of the patent, without the right having been ascertained by a previous trial; but will send the patentee to law, and oblige him to establish the validity of his patent in a court of law, before it will give him the benefit of an injunction.' (20) Whenever a case shall arise, depending on the doubtful tendency of a work, after a long exclusive enjoyment of the copyright by the author, the Court will be called on to consider whether the exception, in the case of patents, to the usual rule, extends also to literary productions. In the meantime, it is obvious that it could not in any way be applied to the recent cases on copyright, in which the pirate has followed the publisher so closely, that the exclusive possession has scarcely existed at all. In the last instance of the kind (Don Juan, Cantos 6, 7, and 8), so rapid was the printing, that the appearance of the original and spurious editions was almost contemporaneous, and the injunction was applied for within a very few days after the first publication. A rule, founded on long possession, has but little connection with such cases. What resemblance do they bear to the case of Bolton and Watt's patent, exclusively enjoyed for twenty-three years, and sanctioned by an act of parliament extending the term ?” The Edinburgh Reviewer could not but be struck with the similarity of procedure in regard to new books and recent patents: but he endeavoured to meet the difficulty by telling us, that 6 "In a case of a new patent, where an injunction was refused, Lord Eldon in the interim, held the defendant to an account of every shilling which he had drawn from the alleged violation of that which eventually proved to be no right at all; and a little further, he adds,' We have no hint, therefore, in this analogous case, of leaving property to the jeopardy of a doubt.' Now, certainly, if this holding to account were, as from the language employed the reader might suppose, some process by which the defendant was to render an account of his profits, pay them over, or deposit them in court, it might justify the reviewer in attaching importance to it. But when it is known that it is only an order to the defendant to do that, which of course he does without being ordered, to keep an account of his dealings in his own books, without giving any one even a right to inspect them,-it becomes ludicrous to hear it spoken of, as if it gave some substantial security against the jeopardy of doubts, and as if it bore any comparison, in point of efficacy, to an injunction. It leaves it open to the other party to persist in the invasion of the supposed right, and gives no security for ultimate reimbursement. The defendant, in the event of the plaintiff's succeeding, would always be compelled to exhibit his accounts, for the purpose of estimating the profits which he has made; and the only possible utility of this order is, that it prevents him in that case from setting up the absurd pretence of his having kept no accounts. It is in fact the mere shadow of a remedy; and if a plaintiff, failing in an application for an injunction, thinks it worth while to ask for such a direction to the defendant, it is only because it indicates that the Court does not wholly renounce jurisdiction in the case, and thinks it possible that he may succeed. In the last of the cases now under discussion, a direction for the defendant to keep an account formed part of the Vice-Chancellor's order dissolving the injunction. If desired by the plaintiff, it would of course be always granted, unless the opinion of the Court was very strongly and decidedly against him." It is painful to omit the elaborate argument, by which all that the Reviewer had done in anything like the shape of quoting positive authorities in his own favour, is for ever demolished, (vide p. 19-29 inclus.) But we must, as much as possible, confine ourselves to what unprofessional readers will understand, and so come we at once to the case of theatrical injunctions. "Nor are the cases upon the question, whether theatrical representation be an infringement of copyright, at all more favourable to the reviewer. When the point was looked upon as clear, injunctions were granted: when it was found to be doubtful, they ceased. It appeared so reasonable that the author alone should enjoy this mode of deriving profit from his work, that no doubt appears to have suggested itself at first, as to the legality of the prevailing usage and understanding the injunctions were accordingly granted. But when in the case of Murray v. Elliston, the point was raised and argued by the defendant's counsel, and it was made apparent that the right was far from clear, the result was, that the Lord Chan : (20) 3 Mcr. 624. cellor referred it to a court of law: in the meantime he dissolved the injunction; and Marino Faliero continued on the stage, and terminated its theatrical career before the decision of the Court of King's Bench (21) had pronounced its representation to be lawful. The history of this question is another illustration of the rule, that a doubtful right will not support an injunction." The arguments which this writer uses, in regard to the alledged actual protection of libellous and immoral writers in former times, have been almost all anticipated by Mr T.'s letter in our August Number. We must, however, make room for these few excellent sentences. "It has never been intimated, that if the general design and tendency of a book be harmless, it is to be deprived of the rights of property by a few slight trespasses on decorum, by an occasional levity or coarseness of expression, or by trifling sallies of ill humour. (22) The writings of Pope, Swift, and Gay, which are mentioned, are certainly liable to such charges; but they could not be accused of making it their peculiar object to propagate irreligion, to teach men to dispute the goodness of their Creator, or to undermine morality by destroying the expectations of a state of retribution; nor could it be said that they were written in a tone of determined profligacy, studiously inculcating licentiousness, and laughing away every virtuous and honourable sentiment. It is besides to be considered, that the temper and taste of the age of Pope and Swift differed widely on these points from that which now prevails. The reviewer has well observed, that some of their works are such as no person with the least pretension to character would at present avow; and the remark might be extended to many others of the most admired writings of the former part of the last century. The editors of Pope have been greatly censured in the present age, for admitting some of these pieces to a place in their collections. Much that was then reckoned the mere playfulness of an elegant wit, would now be denounced as offensive to decen cy; and, in the same way, what was then the common style of controversy and of satire, would now be justly condemned as gross scurrility. It must be admitted and lamented, that indecency and personal abuse are not extinct amongst our writers; but such publications are now differently received; though read, they are universally reprobated; they never appear as the productions of any respectable author; and even the publisher has been known to decline placing his name in the titlepage. Yet, formerly, men of talent and reputation did not blush to avow such works, and apparently without any diminution of their estimation in society. This altered state of feeling carries with it a variation in the practical effect of the law of libel. The question of what is so far prejudicial to public morals or private character, as to deserve punishment, being one not capable of a determination by technical rules, and being therefore left in general to the discretion of a jury, the decision of it must be mainly influenced by the habits and sentiments of the age. If, therefore, it were true, that any of the works referred to, as having received protection, could now be justly deemed obnoxious to the law, it would still be quite natural that a different view should formerly have been taken of them." clusion which Mr T.'s sagacity leapt This brings us directly to the conto. It is not the Chancellor's fault, if publishers, by craving injunctions to protect their books, instead of instituting prosecutions in the law courts, voluntarily make him their jury: and he, acting at their prayer as their jury, must act like a jury; that is, somewhat under the influence of the feelings of the age to which he belongs ;-he must embody in his particular decision the general decisions of living intellectthat intellect of which, in the present instance, he himself happens to be one of the most distinguished ornaments. It is probable, that the author of this very valuable tract may think we have made rather too free with his pages. To say truth, could we have been permitted personal access to him, (21) 5 Barn. & Ald. 657. (22) Thus, in one case, (Hime v. Dale, 2 Campb. 27. n.) an objection was raised to the tendency of a humorous song, containing these lines: Though Justice, 'tis known, Can see through a mill-stone, She can't see through Abraham Newland.' This was said to be a reflection on the administration of justice, but the argument did not prevail. The Court did not think of applying the law of libel to a mere harmless jest. It was compared to the Beggar's Opera, one of the works alluded to above. we should have asked his leave to reprint the whole of them without mutilation or comment,-and as it is, he must just be contented with this apology; that we were anxious to place what he has done under the eyes of many who could have no chance of seeing the pamphlet itself. We feel in the lofty character, and universal estimation, of the present Chancellor, all the interest which reverence can inspire: and-seeing him thoroughly, and effectually, and unanswerably, vindicated from a long sequence of elaborate calumnies, the object of which was to attack not merely the judge and the minister, but the honest man and the enlightened gentleman-we thought it our duty to enable all our readers, and more especially those who reside at a great distance from the only mart of pamphlets, to partake our gratification and our triumph. For the rest, we should hope that the present publication may be received as a salutary warning by Mr Brougham himself, and by certain minor spirits, who, without anything of Mr Brougham's talents, are so fond of aping Mr Brougham's insolence. As for the editor of the Edinburgh Review, the next time he admits an attack, openly stigmatizing the Conduct, and casting out suspicious hints, (to say the least of it,) as to the MOTIVES of the Chancellor, he ought to remember, that he subjects his London publisher to the risk of a punishment very different from that of a refused injunction. And the sovereign scorn or indifference with which the Chancellor has refrained, on all similar occasions, from exercising the severe power, both coercive and punitory, which the law really has placed in his hands, for the enforcement of the respect due to that high tribunal, ought certainly to make all those blush who have insinuated against him, like this rash, and ignorant, and malevolent reviewer, the charges, most alien to his nature, of political vindictiveness and judicial intolerance. Weshall conclude with one more quotation. The same things have in effect been said before often enough; but they are things that cannot be said too often, nor considered too seriously and they never will be said better than by our author. "In an artificial state of society, a large demand for vicious excitement will always exist, and there will always be found persons willing, for an adequate remuneration, to employ themselves in supplying, exciting, and propagating, this depraved appetite. By taking away the prospect of gain, they are diverted to some more honourable course. It is impossible to say to what extent this may already have operated. It is often seen, that the appearance of an highly successful work, by stimulating crowds of imitators, gives a new direction to the literature of the day. If such had been the consequence of some of the publications, to which the principle in question has lately been applied, it is certain that public morals and taste would have experienced a serious shock. We see the application of the law to those individual aspirants after the rewards and distincworks, but we cannot know how many not deterred them, have adopted the same tions of literature, would, if the law had varying only the style and form, so as to tone, and echoed the same sentiments, adapt their writings to the tastes and capacities of every class. The more adventurous would probably have struck out some new, and yet unknown line of licentious composition; they, in their turn, would have had their followers and imitators, and no one can say how far the extension of profligacy might have attested the success of their labours. "The loss which may possibly be suffered by the author of a work, not of a criminal nature, is another popular ground of objection to the law on this subject. If it be meant by those who adopt it, that this law may be erroneously applied to productions which are clearly harmless, it can only be said that such objections apply equally to all human laws, for they are all open to maladministration. When such instances occur, the judge, and not the law, is in fault. But if it be said, that when a work, really within the rule,which are by no means clear, may evena work, the propriety and innocence of tually be found capable of supporting an action, and that the author may then have been injured by the denial of an injunetion in the meantime, the answer is, that while his case was uncertain, he had no fering is, that he must have recourse to an acright to such relief. The extent of his suftion, the only remedy which the law gives for the generality of wrongs. His success in that proceeding will of course be followed by ample damages, measured, not merely by the loss he has suffered, but by the indignation naturally excited by the defendant's conduct. It is true, that the latter may, perhaps, be unable to pay; and this is the only contin gency by which, in such cases, the author can ultimately be a loser. It is, however, a misfortune not peculiar to his case. Every one is liable to be injured by persons incapable of making compensation. Poverty and insolvency are evils which it is not in the power of the law to cure. "It is satisfactory that there is no reason for supposing any loss of this kind to have been sustained in the cases which have hitherto occurred. In the two first of them, the plaintiffs have themselves acquiesced in the decision. They have not thought fit to have recourse to actions, either with a view to damages, to secure the future sale, or to relieve their feelings from the wounds which the doubts of the Lord Chancellor are said to inflict in cases of this sort: No appeal has been made from his judgments to a jury. The third case has only lately occurred, and, as some further proceedings may perhaps be taken, we shall suppress the reflections it suggests. In the instances in which the piracy has been quietly submitted to, the parties who have not thought their cases fit to be laid before a Chancellor or a jury, can scarcely complain of the law having been improperly applied against them. "But, granting that some loss should occasionally be thus incurred, it is one, the danger of which has been voluntarily encountered, and which will seldom fall on persons peculiarly deserving of sympathy. When Wilkes was asked by a foreigner, how far the law of England would permit libel and sedition to be carried, he is said to have replied that he did not yet know, but that he was trying to ascertain it experimentally. The same spirit still actuates some; they make it their business to achieve all the mischiefs of which the press can be made the instrument, while studying to evade the punishment due to their intentions. Such persons may now and then experience from this rule a short interruption of their profits, but it can scarcely be thought desirable that OUR LAWS should be altered to suit THEIR VIEWS, and to give increased encouragement to THEIR PURSUITS." We have no notion who the author of this admirable tract is; but we can scarcely suppose that the talents he has displayed, leave a wide field for speculation as to this, among the professional circles of London. PANACEAS FOR POVERTY. SHAKESPEARE. necessity of your resolving immediately upon "something;" and forthwith declare in favour of that particular measure, which, of all the pis allers of your estate, is the most perfectly detestable. FROM the days of Job, downwards, COMFORTERS (to me) have always seemed the most impertinent set of people upon earth. For you may see, nine times in ten, that they actually gratify themselves in what they call consoling" their neighbours; and go Thirdly come the "whoreson caaway in an improved satisfaction with terpillars," who are what people call their own condition, after philoso-"well to do" in the world; and espephizing for an hour and a half upon the disadvantages of yours. There are several different families of these benevolent characters abroad; and each set rubs sore places in a manner peculiar to itself. First and foremost, there are those who go, in detail, through the history of your calamity, shewing (as the case may be) either how completely you have been outwitted, or how exceedingly ill or absurdly you have conducted yourself and so leave you -with "their good wishes," and an invitation to come and dine, when your troubles are over." Next, there are those, a set, I think, still more intolerable, who press the VOL. XIV. cially those who have become so (as they believe) by their own good conduct. These are very particularly vile dogs indeed! I recollect one such(he was an opulent cheese-monger,) who had been porter in the same shop which he afterwards kept, and had come to town, as he used to boast, without cash enough to buy a night's lodging on his arrival. This man had neither love nor pity for any human being. He met every complaint of distress with a history of his own fortunes. No living creature, as he took it, could reasonably be poor, so long as there were birch brooms or watering-pots in the world. He would tell those who asked for 4 L work, that" idleness was the root of all evil;" prove to people "that a penny was the seed of a guinea," who were without a farthing in the world; and argue all day, with a man who had nothing, to shew that "out of a little, a little might be put by." Fourthly, and in the rear, march those most provoking ruffians of all, who uphold the prudence of always "putting the best face" (as they term it) upon an affair. And these will cure your broken leg by setting it off against somebody else's hump back, and so soundly demonstrate that you have nothing to complain of; or admit, perhaps, (for the sake of variety) the fact that you are naked; and proceed to devise stratagems how you shall be contented to remain so. And it is amazing what a number of (mad upon that particular point,) but otherwise reasonable and respectable persons, have amused themselves by proving, that The Poor have an enviable condition. The poor "Poor!" They seem really to have been set up as a sort of target for ingenuity to try its hand upon; and, from Papin, the Bone Digester, down to Cobbett, the Bone Grubber, from Wesley, who made cheap physic, and added to every prescription" a quart of cold water,' to Hunt who sells roasted wheat (vice coffee) five hundred per cent above its cost-an absolute army of projectors and old women has, from time to time, been popping at them. High among these philosophers, indeed I might almost say at the head of them, stands the author of a tract called, "A Way to save Wealth;" which was published (I think) about the year 1640, to shew how a man might thrive upon an allowance of TwoPENCE per day. The observations prefatory to the promulgation of this inestimable secret, are worthy of everybody's-that is every poor body's attention. First, the writer touches, generally, upon the advantage of "thin, spare diet;"-exposing how all beyond is mere pitiable luxury ;"-enumerating the diseases consequent upon high living; and pointing out the criminal acts and passions to which it leads ;— evidently demonstrating, indeed, to the meanest capacity, that no man can possibly eat goose, and go to Heaven. Shortly after, he takes the question up upon a broader ground; and examines it as one of mere worldly policy, and of mere convenience." The man who eats flesh, has need of other things (vegetables) to eat with it; but that necessity is not felt by him who eats vegetables only."-If Leadenhall market could stand against that, I am mistaken. The recipes for cheap dishes will no doubt (when known,) come into general practice; so they shall be given in the Saver of Wealth's own words.Here is one (probably) for a Christmas dinner. "Take two spoonfuls of oatmeal; put it into two quarts of cold water, then stir it over the fire until it boils, and put in a little salt and an onion. And this," continues our Economist, "this does not cost above a farthing; and is a noble, exhilarating meal!”For drink, he afterwards recommends the same dish, (unboiled ;)—and no form of regimen, it must be admitted, can be more simple, or conveni ent. Now this man was, certainly, (as the phrase is,) "something like" a projector in his way. And it seems probable that he met with encouragement; for, passing the necessities, he goes on to treat upon the elegancies of life. Take his recipe for instance, next,— "For dressing (cleaning) a hat." "Smear a little soap on the places of your hat which are felthy, and rub it with some hot water and a hard brush. Then scrape it with the back of a knife, what felth sticks; and it will bring both grease and soap out.”—The book of this author is scarce ;-I suspect the hatters bought it up to prevent this secret from being known. Only one more recipe and really it is one worthy to be written in letters of gold;-worthy to stand beside that never-to-be-forgotten suggestion of Mrs Rundell's-(she who now in the kitchen of the gods roasts!—that roasts," in a proper sense, not is roasted,)-her immortal direction to prevent the creaking of a door,-" Rub a bit of soap on the hinges !"-This it is. "To make your teeth white." "Take a little brick dust on a towel, and rub them."-The mechanical action, (the reader sees) not the chemical; but potent notwithstanding. But Mrs Rundell deserves better than to be quoted, in aid, on an occasion like this; nay, merits herself to |