§ Mr. Edward Lytton Bulwer,in moving for leave to bring in a Bill for the better protection of Dramatic Authors, said, that he did not feel it necessary to occupy the time of the House with many observations, as he was sure, that the necessity of some legislative measure on the subject was universally admitted. At this moment dramatic authors possessed no control over the use of their property, such as was very properly given to other labourers in the field of literature by the laws of copyright. A play, when published, might be acted upon any stage without the consent of the author, and without his deriving a single shilling from the profits of the performance. It might not only be acted at one theatre, but at 100 theatres, and though, perhaps, it filled the pockets of the managers, not a single penny might accrue from its performance, however successful, or however repeated, to the unfortunate author. It was to remedy such a state of things that he proposed to bring in the present Bill, and he begged to observe, that in the Committee which sat upon this subject last Session, there was not a single dissentient voice as to the injustice of the present system, and as to the advantages which literature would derive from a change in it such as that which he was now about to propose. By the Bill which he was going to bring in, it was proposed to allow to dramatic authors the same copyright that was, by the existing law, given to all other authors—namely, for twenty-eight years, or for the life of the author. It also enacted, that no play should be performed at any theatre without the author's consent, and that if played without his consent he should have the right of applying to a court of law for damages against the proprietor of the theatre where it was so played; the maximum of the damages to be given to him to be 50l., and the minimum 10l., for every night the said play was so performed. The evil of the existing system was pretty abundantly evinced by the striking decline of the modern drama, and he was quite sure that the 561 result of the proposed change in that system would be, that greater talents and a higher order of genius would be enlisted in the service of the stage, and that the dramatic literature of the country would once more regain that exalted position from which it had been degraded by the want of the necessary encouragement and protection. It was but justice to his hon. friend opposite (the member for Dungarvon) to say, that he had been foremost in his efforts to procure such protection for dramatic authors. In a late Session, his hon. friend was the first to propose a measure similar to the present, and he was therefore sure that as his right hon. friend had been the earliest and ablest advocate of the interests of dramatic authors, he might count upon his supporting the present Bill. The hon. Member concluded by moving for leave to bring in the Bill.
§ Mr. Lambsaid, that as far as he was acquainted with the provisions of the Bill of his hon. friend, they had his approval, and he did hope, that the consequence of passing such a measure would be to elevate dramatic literature from that depressed state in which, he was sorry to say, it, as well as all other interests connected with the drama, had been for many years. It struck him that 10l. would be too large a minimum of damages to be given in some cases. It would be too large, for instance, in the case of a manager of a company of strolling players, but, at the same time, it would be scarcely worth an author's while to proceed against a man of straw, such as a manager of strolling players usually was. He trusted there would be no difficulty in passing such a measure as this through Parliament.
§ Leave given.