Commons Sitting of 8 April 1818

PETITION OF MESSRS. CADELL AND DAVIES RESPECTING THE COPYRIGHT BILL.
A Petition from Messrs. Cadell and Davies, booksellers and publishers, was presented; setting forth,
"That the Petitioners having observed that a bill has been brought into the House to modify the burthen of delivering eleven copies of books to certain libraries, as directed by a preceding statute, and that several petitions have been presented on the subject, are desirous to state how heavily they are affected by the said delivery; the petitioners at an expense of much greater magnitude than usually attends the publication of books have published a work, intituled, "Murphy's Arabian antiquities of Spain," consisting principally of 100 plates, with some descriptive letter press of the most interesting and important remains of Moorish architecture in Spain; from the cost of the said work, it was necessarily published at the price of 40 guineas, and as it consisted wholly of plates, with no other letter press than a few lines to each describing its contents, the petitioners hoped that they would not be subjected to the grievance of delivering the said 11 copies, which, at the publishing price, would have amounted to 440 guineas; but they are informed that the addition of the letter-press description makes them liable to such delivery, and 8 copies

1213
thereof have been already demanded; that on eight other works, that is to say, the Gallery of portraits, Lysons's Cornwall, Cumberland, Derby and the Britannia Depicta, Dr. Clarke's Travels, Farrington's Lakes, and Drake's Shakspeare, the delivery of the said 11 copies have amounted to the sum of 338 l. 12 s. at the lowest wholesale price; the petitioners have also found that the burthen of the delivery on all the other books which they have published has been a yearly grievance of very considerable amount, while all the expenses of their trade, and of publishing in general, continue unabated, and, as far as the petitioners can ascertain, no advantage of any sort has accrued to them as booksellers from the said delivery, nor do they believe that it increases the circulation of books; on the contrary, it appears to them that many persons read the works in these libraries who would otherwise have been purchasers, and they are satisfied that it is daily operating to discourage authors and artists from undertaking several works, which, but for the delivery, they would have risked: the petitioners, therefore, respectfully beg the indulgence of the House to permit them thus to represent the grievance of the delivery of these 11 copies, both to themselves and to others, and to hope that the House will remove the same, or at least materially diminish it, by enacting that some portion of the published price of each book should be paid by the library demanding the same, or that the House would grant such other relief as in its wisdom shall seem most expedient."

PETITIONS FROM CERTAIN AUTHORS AND COMPOSERS OF BOOKS RESPECTING THE COPYRIGHT BILL.
Lord Althorp presented a Petition from certain persons, the Authors and Composers of Books; setting forth,
"That the Petitioners, observing that notice has been given in the House, and their leave obtained, to bring in a bill to amend the statute passed in the 54th of his majesty, which enacted the delivery of 11 copies of all books printed and published after the passing of that act to the eleven libraries or public bodies therein mentioned, request the permission of' the House to state their view of the grievances which this compulsory delivery has produced, and to solicit such relief as to their wisdom shall seem most expedient;
1214
the petitioners humbly submit, that by the common law of this country, and by the decision of its highest court of judicature, as well as by the principles of natural equity, and by the analogy of every other species of property, they would have had, if no statute had passed on the subject, an exclusive right to the copyright of their several works, and to all the benefit and produce arising from their sale, as every other subject of this kingdom enjoys as to all his effects and possessions; but the legislature of this kingdom having formerly thought it right to limit the enjoyment of this species of property, has now extended that limitation to the term of 28 years, or of the author's life if he should survive that time; the petitioners are grateful to the equity of parliament for this extension, and only regret that it was accompanied by the enactment that eleven copies of all publications should be delivered on demand for the eleven libraries mentioned in the said act; the petitioners submit that the equitable right of the said libraries to these copies is quite distinct from the right of authors as to their copyright, the delivery of these copies rests merely on the enactment of the statutes on that subject, and is founded upon no previous right, for, as to the ancient contract alluded to between sir Thomas Boclley and the Stationers Company in 1609, it was an engagement between those two contracting parties for reciprocal objects then in view, which do not now subsist, and binding only themselves, and confined to only one of the said libraries; but can by no construction of law, or rule of equity, be justly extended to the petitioners, and the authors in modern times, who have no connexion either with the Bodleian library or the Stationers Company; the petitioners therefore submit, that this compulsory delivery is unjust in its principle, as it invades the great rules of law and policy which assure to every one the unmolested enjoyment of the produce of his labour and acquired property; and that it has this additional objection, that although every publication is not under the same circumstances of expense, circulation, or importance, yet the compulsory delivery is imposed without discrimination on all; the petitioners believe that it operates materially to the injury of authors, and to the discouragement of future publications; the petitioners cannot change the established

1215
custom of the printing profession of charging for printing any number less than 250 the price of printing 250; and therefore, to print eleven copies beyond any regular number incurs the charge of printing 250, and to deliver eleven copies out of the regular number printed of any work is a subtraction from the petitioners and their assigns of the whole trade sale price of those eleven copies when the impression sells, and if the impression should not sell, yet the petitioners are aggrieved by the loss of the amount of the paper, and printing of so many copies; and they submit, that if this amount be in some cases not large, yet it is considerable in the aggregate of the whole quantity demanded, and no law of any country has made the amount of any property the measure or the standard of right and justice respecting it, the smallest quantity of value is protected to every one as much as the greatest, the legal right is the same whatever be the pecuniary amount, and all penal codes for the preservation of property, are founded on this natural principle, so essential to the general welfare of society; as far as the petitioners can judge, the delivery of these copies also operates to injure the sale of many books; it not only takes away the eleven libraries as purchasers of those which they demand, but, by the books being deposited in so many public libraries in the three great metropolitan cities, and the principal universities and libraries of of these kingdoms, it enables a great many individuals to gratify their curiosity without purchasing the publication, and such members are satisfied with a temporary perusal of works daily issuing from the press; and the petitioners believe that the sale of several useful publications has been thereby greatly lessened; the petitioners are also satisfied that it makes the booksellers more averse to undertake the publication of expensive and of many important works; the price of the eleven copies taken away now becomes a material object of their calculation, and some have, on that account, declined the risk of publishing; the delivery also leads the booksellers to diminish the compensation to authors for their copyright in works where popularity is not certain, which is the case with most, and especially books of labour and expense, and as far as it operates to increase the price, it tends thereby to injure the sale; it prevents authors from receiving from their booksellers
1216
so many copies as they wish to give to their friends, and therefore it-is a deduction of so much from the general produce and benefit of literature, which are already sufficiently uncertain, and in the great majority of instances exceedingly scanty; the petitioners are therefore decidedly of opinion, that the continuation of the demand and delivery of these copies without some modification, will discourage the future composition and publication of works; many valuable works are every year composed of great importance to science and learning, which from their expensive nature cannot be published unless booksellers can be found who will undertake the risk of the publication; but the petitioners are informed that the necessity of delivering these copies has occasioned some booksellers to decline the publication of some useful works whose sale was precarious; many authors are now projecting expensive works which the burthen of the delivery prevents them from undertaking, and the petitioners are satisfied that it will operate hereafter to prevent such works from being undertaken at all; the petitioners humbly submit, that in this great commercial and wealthy country, reputation alone cannot be a sufficient stimulus to authors to compose or publish valuable works, and more especially those which involve much expense; the affluence of the country operates not only to make the annual expenditure for subsistence considerable, but also to enhance the charges of every publication; the same prosperity, of the country leading to costly habits of living, prevents men of literary reputation from holding the same rank in this country that it obtains in some others; justice also to the family who have to derive their nurture and respectability from the paternal labours, compels the parent to devote some portion of his attention to pecuniary considerations; hence an author can rarely write for fame alone; and every subtraction from his profit, and every measure that will diminish his ardour to prepare, and the readiness of booksellers to publish his work, especially as so many require such large sums to be expended and risked upon them, is an injury not only to authors, but to literature itself; the petitioners submit, that there never was a period in the history of the world, in Which the people of every country have been more strongly emulous of each other, in scientific and literary attainments,

1217
than they are at this moment; and not only great national celebrity arises from superior excellence in works of art and literature, but it may be considered to be equally true, that whatever discourages or obstructs the progress of literature, in any country, will produce in time a national inferiority, and those political effects will be severely felt, when they will be with much difficulty remedied; the petitioners have been surprised to find, by the return of the list of publications entered at Stationers-hall, which has been laid on the table of the House, that copies of all that have been entered have been indiscriminately demanded by the said eleven libraries, with the single exception that two of them, and two of them only, namely, the Advocates Library and Trinity College, Dublin, have not demanded music: and novels; the petitioners have remarked this fact with astonishment and regret; that all the promiscuous medley of modern publications should be incorporated with the important works that were formerly deposited in these libraries, and should there be open to the perusal of the most distinguished and most lively youthful minds of this empire, whose judgments have to be correctly formed, and should be there transmitted with all their sanction to posterity, seems to the petitioners to be incompatible with the objects and policy of those venerable institutions: if they be demanded and not deposited, then authors and publishers are burthened unnecessarily; and if all be deposited and read, the petitioners think, that if it be recollected how many multifarious theories; speculations, discussions, and doubts, are daily arising in society, and daily investigated in public by the press, an indiscriminate demand and compulsory delivery of every publication, must tend to lead the impressible minds of the educating youth (who cannot have yet attained that solid judgment which time alone can create), to imbibe and nourish whatever spirit of change, desire of novelty, or projects of innovation, the conversations and incidents of the day may excite; without this delivery, no publication is purchased till it is wanted, and the expense of the purchase diminishes curiosity; but the delivery brings before the eyes of the educating youth of this country, and their instructors, books that they would not else have noticed, and perhaps not have heard of, books often highly useful and important in themselves, but not advan-
1218
tageous to the young and inexperienced mind; the petitioners respectfully submit, that it is of the highest importance to the interests of our venerable universities, and the other valuable seats of knowledge and learning, that the utmost harmony of feeling should be established and perpetuated between these respected institutions and the intelligent minds that now abound and are increasing in the British community; but the petitioners feel that this promiscuous demand and delivery tends to diminish this desirable harmony, because it creates a sense of grievance on the one side, unmitigated by any perception of a public good resulting from its continuance: and the petitioners are informed, that in no country of Europe, nor in America, are so many copies taken from authors and publishers as by the enactment above mentioned, although in those countries much larger editions are printed and sold than can be disposed of in this kingdom; books are also printed abroad at so much less expense than in Great Britain, that the petitioners are apprehensive many works will be lost to this nation by being printed and circulated exclusively elsewhere; the petitioners therefore most humbly pray, that by the bill now before the House on this subject, such relief as to their wisdom shall seem most expedient may be granted to the petitioners, cither by lessening the number of copies to be delivered, or by some regulation that will make it expedient for the libraries not to demand, indiscriminately, all publications, and therefore to contribute some such portion of the price of the books they may demand, as to the House shall seem equitable, or that the House will be pleased to grant the petitioners such further or other relief on the subject, as to them shall be deemed most fitting."
Mr. J. H. Smithsaid, that strong prejudices prevailed upon the subject, some of which he believed to be unfounded. The signatures of many respectable men now appeared to petitions, though the same persons were totally silent upon the subject in 1814, when it obtained a very full discussion. The bill passed at that time conferred many important privileges upon publishers and authors which it was expected would indemnify them for the loss they considered themselves liable to by the copies which were required to be delivered to the universities. He hoped the bill now before the House upon the

1219
subject of copyright would not be pressed forward too hastily, but that the subject would meet with the attention which its importance merited.
Mr. Gurneysaid, that in many cases the inconvenience to authors and publishers was very great, in consequence of the number of copies with which they were bound to furnish the universities. This in-convenience was particularly felt when the work was expensive. Mr. Lysons was then publishing a work the price of which would be 60 guineas, so that before he could derive the least profit from the sale of it it would be incumbent on him to send copies to the universities amounting to 660 guineas.
The petitions were ordered to lie on the table, and to be printed; as were also petitions on the same subject from Mr. Cooke, and Mr. Daniell, engravers, and from the rev. Rogers Ruding, author of Annals of the coinage of Great Britain and its dependencies."

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.
Lord Archibald Hamiltonsaid, that he wished to call the attention of the House to a subject of great importance, affecting the privileges of the Commons House of Parliament. He would not at present enter into any details on the subject; he wished merely to state, that it related to a contest now going on in a county for the election of a member to serve in that House, in which contest a noble lord, a member of the other House of parliament, had thought proper to interfere. He intended to submit this matter to their consideration on Friday next; and he now desired merely to know whether, as this motion related to a breach of their privileges, it would not be entitled to precedency over other business. He should abstain from mentioning the names of the parties, or any of the particulars, unless the chair, or any honourable member, thought that he ought to be more explicit on the subject. If no farther expiation were required, he should now merely add, that he would bring forward this matter on Friday next.
Lord Castlercaghobserved, that several matters stood on the orders for Friday, but he apprehended that, if the noble lord wished to make his motion on that day, it would, as a matter of privilege, be entitled to precedency.

REFORM OF PARLIAMENT—PETITION FROM ROYTOX.
Lord Stanleywished to
1220
call the attention of the House to a petition which he held in his hands. The House must be aware that in his situation of representative for the county of Lancaster, a number of petitions were frequently put into his hands, of which he could not approve either the matter or the manner. The petition which he now held in his hands, was signed in behalf of a meeting held at Roy ton, by George Taylor the chairman of that meeting. He was aware that the House did not recognize any petition so signed, as the petition of those from whom it purported to come, and that it could only be received as the petition of the individual who was the chairman of the meeting. But this was not the point to which he was most anxious to draw their attention. Among the petitions put into the hands of members some came so near the line of right and propriety, that it became a matter of doubt whether they ought to be presented. With respect to this petition, he owned that he had his doubts—it certainly came very near the line of propriety—but as he always wished to leave the right of petitioning as unfettered as possible, he should be sorry to do any thing to prevent the voice of individuals from being heard. There was hardly any thing in the prayer of the petition which was improper. Whether in the body of the petition some expressions might not be considered as improper, he should leave for the House to consider when they heard it read.
The Petition was brought up and read. It purported to be the petition of several thousands of people assembled at Royton, in Lancashire, on the 23d of March 1818. It commenced by stating, that self-preservation was the first law of nature. It went on to state, that many of the petitioners Were weavers, whose wages did not exceed seven shillings a week, a sum altogether inadequate to the support of themselves and families, and the payment of house rent and taxes—that in this situation they were bringing children into the world whom they could never support—that God never made men to labour and to starve—that the business of quarter sessions formerly used to last only about two days—but that the quarter sessions now usually lasted twelve or fourteen days—that this moral deterioration was the consequence of the unexampled misery and privation in the lower classes—that general misery was productive of ignorance and slavery—that a state of things

1221
like this could not be conducive to our prosperity either at home or abroad—that the property of a country consisted in the produce of its land and labour—that if too much of this produce went to rent and taxes, the consequence was a proportionate privation and suffering of those by whose labour that produce was realized—that the avarice and cunning of some individuals had succeeded in appropriating to themselves, and those who were instrumental to their views, so much, that nothing was left to others—that it was the duty of wise statesmen to check this evil, and to oppose instead of supporting expensive wars, the undertaking of which could neither be productive of good, nor prevent evil—that the weight of the burdens of these wars fell on the poor with double force—that from the attention which they had given to the proceedings of the House on the subject of the poor laws, they could see no disposition on the part of the House to diminish the evils of pauperism—that as wages increased, pauperism decreased—that his majesty's ministers had imprisoned many of the best men in the country, on the pretence of treason, while no treason had been committed—that as well might men have been committed for murder, while no murder had taken place—that any disorders which look place were solely attributable to spies and incendiaries employed by the government—and that they attributed their misery to the selfish principles which had influenced the honourable house for a long time. The petition prayed the House to repeal the corn bill, that rents might fall —to retrench all useles and improper expenditure, that the burden of the taxes might be diminished—and to reform the Commons House, and to admit the people to the exercise of their just rights. On the motion, that the petition do lie on the table,
Mr. Bankeswas of opinion, that as this petition professed to come from a public meeting, and was only signed by one individual, it ought not to be received. He was aware, that the House sometimes extended their indulgence so far as to consider a petition of a public meeting the petition of the individual who signed it; but as this petition alleged only general opinions, he thought it would be inconvenient for the House to extend their indulgence to it. He wished, therefore, to refer to the standing order of the the House which forbid the receiving such petitions.
Mr. Wynncontended, that there was a great difference between a petition like this, and one signed by a sheriff in the name of a county meeting. This alone was a ground for refusing to receive it; but when he looked at the manner in which it was worded, and the outrage offered to the House, by attributing selfish principles to them, he could come to no other conclusion, than that the petition was presented for the purpose of insulting the House, and therefore ought to be rejected.
Mr. Lambtonwould not enter into the question of informality; but he had attended to the wording of the petition, and he certainly could see nothing in it insulting or derogatory to the House. If the hon. member meant to propose that the petition should be rejected on the ground of improper language, he should feel it his duty to divide the House on that point.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwas surprised to hear it said that such a petition ought to lie on the table. The words "selfish principles," contained in the petition were such as one member could not, without great irregularity, use to another, at least if he was to hear any member use such language in that House, he would certainly call him to order.
Mr. Tierneysaid, it appeared to him that the petitioners had used the word selfish as intending to convey that the House had entered into a narrow view of the subject, and had not proceeded on general grounds. If the House were to reject such petitions as this, they might as well say at once, that the people should never petition for parliamentary reform. Feeling as anxious as any man that the doors of the House should be open to petitions, he must declare his opinion, that there was nothing derogatory to their dignity in the language of this petition. The word "selfish" was the only unhappy word on which the chancellor of the exchequer had been able to place his hand. The right hon. gentleman had said, that any member who should use that word, in debate, would be called to order. Now he would use that word on the very first opportunity, and he was sure the right hon. gentleman would not call him to order [Hear, hear!] If there was any thing really offensive to the House contained in the petition, he would not support it. But if people who had no land saw those who had a good deal passing a

1223
bill to serve themselves at their expense, it was natural that they should express themselves as they felt.
The question being put, "That the said Petition do lie upon the table," the House divided: Ayes, 14; Noes, 43.

FORGERY OF BANK OF ENGLAND NOTES.
General Thorntonrose, pursuant to the notice he had given, to move for an account of the nominal value of notes presented at the Bank of England and refused payment, in consequence of being forgeries. It was, he observed, a matter of melancholy consideration, to observe how rapidly the crime of forgery had increased within a few years. Indeed, so great had been the sacrifice of human life in consequence of convictions for forgeries of late, that several persons against whom there was sufficient evidence to convict capitally, had been suffered to escape with impunity. Compromises were frequently entered into with the accused parties, and the capital charge withdrawn in consequence of their consenting to plead guilty to the charge of uttering forged notes. He was well convinced, that if the directors of the Bank gave the proper encouragement to able artists, means might be devised of rendering forgery, if not impossible, at least extremely difficult. He was sorry that the plan proposed to the Bank about twenty years ago by Mr. Tilloch, had not been adopted. That gentleman had invented a particular kind of plate, which in the opinion of Mr. Bartolozzi, and all the eminent artists of that day, was considered as inimitable. They had declared it was impossible to imitate it with any chance of success. At that time, however, the Bank consulted Mr. Terry their engraver, and he produced what was called an imitation of it, but his imitation was declared by many celebrated artists to be so bad, that no person could be deceived by it. Since, then, the Bank had altogether neglected the plan, though its completion was still within their power. He trusted, however, that they would now, from motives of humanity, see the necessity of devising some method of preventing a crime which had risen to such a height. If the Bank directors should not come forward with a motion for a committee on the subject, he trusted the chancellor of the exchequer would. Indeed, he felt much more interested in this subject at present than before, in consequence of the motion of
1224
which the right hon. gentleman had given notice for a renewal of the Bank Restriction act. That circumstance imperatively called for some such measure as that to which he had alluded. He had heard, that the Bank had refrained from adopting the plan of Mr. Tilloch, in consequence of the expense attending it. He was not aware how great that expense was likely to be, but he was certain, that if the expense of the prosecutions for forgery incurred by the Bank was known, as he trusted it would, by the result of the motion on the subject which stood for Tuesday, they would be found not inferior to that which the Bank wished to avoid in refusing to adopt the plan of Mr. Tilloch. With the view of assisting in the object of bringing the matter more fully before the House, he should move, "That there be laid before this House an account of the total nominal value of Bank of England Notes presented at the Bank of England and refused payment on account of their being forged, for the last six years, to the latest period to which the same can be made up: specifying the total nominal value so presented and refused payment in each year respectively."
Mr. Grenfelldid not mean to oppose the motion, but he suggested to the hon. general whether it would not be better to withdraw it for the present, in consequence of a motion of an hon. and learned friend of his (sir J. Mackintosh) which stood for Tuesday, and which embraced the same object along with some others.
General Thorntonwas not aware that the motion for Tuesday embraced the object which he had then in view; but as he now understood that that object would be included in the intended motion, he would, with the leave of the House, withdraw his.
The motion was accordingly withdrawn.