Such is his preposterous a.s.sertion, the absurdity of which will make an Englishman laugh; but the corollaries drawn from it are serious, as they are intended to feed the hostile feeling still existing against this country; for he attempts to prove that from the time the Independence was ratified by George the Third, that we have ever been trying to reduce America again to our sway; and that all the hostile attempts of the various Indian tribes, all the murders of women and children, and scalping, since that date, were wholly to be ascribed to the agency and bribes of England, who hoped by such means to drive the Americans back to the sea coast, where they could be a.s.sailed by her navy.
A little reflection might satisfy any reasonable American, that when they wrestled by main force, and without regard to justice, those lands from the Indians which they had hunted over for so many generations, and which were their own property, it was very natural that the Indians should not surrender them without a struggle. But the wish of Judge Hall was to satisfy his countrymen that their exterminating wars against the Indians have been those of _self defence_, and not of _unpardonable aggression_. At that period there were many white men who had either joined, or, having been captured, had been adopted into, the Indian tribes. All these Judge Hall would make out to be English emissaries, especially one whom he very correctly designates as the "infamous Girty." Unfortunately for Judge Hall the infamous Girty was an American, and born in Philadelphia, as is proved by American authority.
This obligation to write for their own countrymen, and for them alone, has very much injured the sale of American works in England, for publishers having read them find so many offensive and untrue remarks upon this country, that they will not print them. But it does more harm, as it cramps genius, harrows their ideas, and instead of leading in the advance, and the people looking up to them, they follow in the rear, and look up to the people, whom they flatter to obtain popularity; and thus the pen in America, as a moral weapon, is at present "_niddering_."
The remarks of Miss Martineau on American literature are, as all her other remarks, to be received with great caution. Where she obtained her information I know very well, and certain it is that she has been most egregiously deceived. An American critic observes very truly:--
"It is the misfortune of professed book writers, when they arrive in the United States, to fall into the hands of certain cliques in our princ.i.p.al cities and town, who make themselves the medium of interpretation--their own modes of life, the representation of those of the _elite_ of the country; their own opinions, the infallible criterion by which all others must be estimated. They surround the traveller with an atmosphere of their own, and hope to shine through it on the future pages of the grateful guest.
"This accounts satisfactorily for many things which are to be found in Miss Martineau"s work, for her numerous misapprehensions as to the character, taste, and occupations of the American women.
"She evidently mistakes the character of our merchants, and does our literature but meagre justice. To hold up some obscure publications from the pens of mere literary adventurers as the best works she has seen, and at the same time p.r.o.nounce Mr Cooper"s much regretted failure, is a stretch of boldness, quite unwarranted by anything Miss Martineau has yet achieved in the republic of letters."
Such was really the case; Miss Martineau fell into what was termed the Stockbridge clique, and pinned her faith upon the oracles which they poured into her ears. She says that in America, Hannah More is best known; on the contrary, Hannah More is hardly known in the United States.
She says that Wordsworth is much read. Mr Wordsworth has never even in this country been appreciated as he ought to be. In America it may almost be said that he has not been read; and she adds to this, that Byron is _little known_; this is really too bold an a.s.sertion. Miss Martineau was everywhere in the best society in America; and I believe that in nine drawing-rooms out of ten, she must have seen a copy of Byron lying on the table.
She says Mr Cooper is a failure. With the exception of Washington Irving, there never was an American writer so justly popular in America as Cooper. It is true that latterly he has displeased the majority, by pointing out to them their faults, and that he is not _always_ in a good humour when he writes about England. But to state the author of such works as "_The Pilot_", "_The Last of the Mohicans_", and "_The Prairie_", a failure, is really too absurd. The cause of this remark is said to be that Mr Cooper had a quarrel with Miss Martineau"s particular friend Mr S---. There is only one remark in the whole of her observations which is in itself true. She says Bulwer is much read.
Here she is correct: but the cause which she gives for his being so much read, is not the real one. She a.s.serts it is on account of his liberal opinions; it is not on that account, it is from the interest of his stories, and the beauty of his writing.
But the a.s.sertion that seemed to me the most strange in Miss Martineau"s work, was, that Mr Carlisle, the author of "_Sartor Resartus_", was the most read of any English author. Without intending to depreciate the works of Mr Carlisle, I felt convinced from my own knowledge, that this could not be a fact, for Mr Carlisle"s works are not suited to the Americans. I, therefore, determined to ascertain how far it was correct. I went to the publishers, and inquired how many of Mr Carlisle"s works had been printed. They replied that they had printed one edition of six hundred copies, which they had nearly sold; and were considering whether it would be worth their while to print a second; and in consequence of Miss Martineau"s a.s.sertion, that Byron was little known, I applied to the largest publishers in New York and Philadelphia, to ascertain, if I could, how many copies of Byron had been published.
The reply was, that it was impossible to say exactly, as there had been so many editions issued, by so many different publishers, but that they considered that from one hundred and fifty to two hundred thousand copies, must have been sold! so much for the accuracy of Miss Martineau.
[See Note 1.]
I am afraid, that notwithstanding the eloquent and energetic exertions of the author of "_Ion_," we shall never be able to make the public believe that the creations of a man"s brain are his own property, or effect any arrangement with foreign countries, so as to secure a copyright to the English author. As on my arrival in America it was reported in the newspapers that I had come out to ascertain what could be done in that respect, and to follow up the pet.i.tion of the English authors. The subject was, therefore, constantly introduced and canva.s.sed; and I naturally took an interest in it. Every one almost was for granting it; but, at the same time, every one told me that we should not obtain it.
The pet.i.tion of the English authors to Congress was warmly espoused by Mr Clay, who invariably leads the van in everything which is liberal and gentlemanlike. A select committee, of which Mr Clay was chairman, was formed to consider upon it, and the following was the result of their inquiry, and a bill was brought in, upon the report of the committee:--
"_In Senate of the United States, Feb_. 16, 1837.
"Mr Clay made the following report:--
"The select committee to whom was referred the address of certain British and the pet.i.tion of certain American authors, have, according to order, had the same under consideration, and beg leave now to report:--
"That, by the act of Congress of 1831, being the law now in force regulating copyrights, the benefits of the act are restricted to citizens or residents of the United States; so that no foreigner, residing abroad, can secure a copyright in the United States for any work of which he is the author, however important or valuable it may be.
The object of the address and pet.i.tion, therefore, is to remove this restriction as to British authors, and to allow them to enjoy the benefits of our law.
"That authors and inventors have, according to the practice among civilised nations, a property in the respective productions of their genius is incontestible; and that this property should be protected as effectually as any other property is, by law, follows as a legitimate consequence. Authors and inventors are among the greatest benefactors of mankind. They are often dependent, exclusively, upon their own mental labours for the means of subsistence; and are frequently, from the nature of their pursuits, or the const.i.tutions of their minds, incapable of applying that provident care to worldly affairs which other cla.s.ses of society are in the habit of bestowing. These considerations give additional strength to their just t.i.tle to the protection of the law.
"It being established that literary property is ent.i.tled to legal protection, it results that this protection ought to be afforded wherever the property is situated. A British merchant brings or transmits to the United States a bale of merchandise, and the moment it comes within the jurisdiction of our laws they throw around it effectual security. But if the work of a British author is brought to the United States, it may be appropriated by any resident here, and republished, without any compensation whatever being made to the author. We should be all shocked if the law tolerated the least invasion of the rights of property, in the case of the merchandise, whilst those which justly belong to the works of authors are exposed to daily violation, without the possibility of their invoking the aid of the laws.
"The committee think that this distinction in the condition of the two descriptions of property is not just; and that it ought to be remedied by some safe and cautious amendment of the law. Already the principle has been adopted in the patent laws, of extending their benefits to foreign inventions and improvements. It is but carrying out the same principle to extend the benefit of our copyright laws to foreign authors. In relation to the subject of Great Britain and France, it will be but a measure of reciprocal justice; for, in both of those countries, our authors may enjoy that protection of their laws for literary property which is denied to their subjects here.
"Entertaining these views, the committee have been anxious to devise some measure which, without too great a disturbance of interests or affecting too seriously arrangements which have grown out of the present state of things, may, without hazard, be subjected to the test of practical experience. Of the works which have heretofore issued from the foreign press, many have already been republished in the United States; others are in a progress of republication, and some probably have been stereotyped. A copyright law which should embrace any of these works, might injuriously affect American publishers, and lead to collision and litigation between them and foreign authors.
"Acting, then, on the principles of prudence and caution, by which the committee have thought it best to be governed, the bill which the committee intend proposing provides that the protection which it secures shall extend to those works only which shall be published after its pa.s.sage. It is also limited to the subjects of Great Britain and France; among other reasons, because the committee have information that, by their laws, American authors can obtain there protection for their productions; but they have no information that such is the case in any other foreign country. But, in principle, the committee perceive no objection to considering the republic of letters as one great community, and adopting a system of protection for literary property which should be common to all parts of it. The bill also provides that an American edition of the foreign work for which an American copyright has been obtained, shall be published within reasonable time.
"If the bill should pa.s.s, its operation in this country would be to leave the public, without any charge for copyright, in the undisturbed possession of all scientific and literary works published prior to its pa.s.sage--in other words, the great ma.s.s of the science and literature of the world; and to ent.i.tle the British or French author only to the benefit of every copyright in respect to works which may be published subsequent to the pa.s.sage of the law.
"The committee cannot antic.i.p.ate any reasonable or just objection to a measure thus guarded and restricted. It may, indeed, be contended, and it is possible that a new work, when charged with the expense incident to the copyright, may come into the hands of the purchaser at a small advance beyond what would be its price, if there were no such charge; but this is by no means certain. It is, on the contrary, highly probable that, when the American publisher has adequate time to issue carefully an edition of the foreign work, without incurring the extraordinary expense which he now has to sustain to make a hurried publication of it, and to guard himself against dangerous compet.i.tion, he will be able to bring it into the market as cheaply as if the bill were not to pa.s.s. But, if that should not prove to be the case, and if the American reader should have to pay a few cents to compensate the author for composing a work which he is instructed and profited, would it not be just in itself? Has any reader a right to the use, without remuneration, of intellectual productions which have not yet been brought into existence, but lie buried in the mind of genius? The committee think not; and they believe that no American citizen would not feel it quite as unjust, in reference to future publications, to appropriate to himself their use, without any consideration being paid to their foreign proprietors, as he would to take the bale of merchandise, in the case stated, without paying for it; and he would the more readily make this trifling contribution, when it secured to him, instead of the imperfect and slovenly book now often issued, a neat and valuable work, worthy of preservation.
"With respect to the const.i.tutional power to pa.s.s the proposed bill, the committee entertain no doubt, and Congress, as before stated, has acted on it. The const.i.tution authorises Congress to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing, for limited times, to authors and inventors, the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. There is no limitation of the power to natives or residents of this country. Such a limitation would have been hostile to the object of the power granted. That object was to _promote_ the progress of science and useful arts. They belong to no particular country, but to mankind generally. And it cannot be doubted that the stimulus which it was intended to give to mind and genius, in other words, the promotion of the progress of science and the arts, will be increased by the motives which the bill offers to the inhabitants of Great Britain and France.
"The committee conclude by asking leave to introduce the bill which accompanies this report."
Let it not, however, be supposed that Mr Clay was unreported by the American press; on the contrary, a large portion of it espoused the cause of the English author in the most liberal manner, indeed the boon itself, if granted, would in reality be of more advantage to America than to us; as many of them argued. The New York Daily Express observes, "But another great evil resulting from the present law is, that most of the writers of our own country are utterly precluded from advancing our native literature, since they can derive no emolument or compensation for their labours; and it is idle to urge that the devotees of literature, any more than the ingenious artisan or mechanic, can be indifferent to the ultimate advantages which should result alike to both from the diligent use and studious application of their mental energies.
We patronise and read the works of foreign writers, but it is at the expense of our own, the books of the English author being procured free of all cost, supersede those which would otherwise be produced by our own countrymen,--thus the foreigner is wronged, while the same wrong acts again as a tariff upon our American author and all this manifest injury is perpetuated without its being qualified by the most remote advantage to any of the parties concerned."
The Boston Atlas responded to this observation in almost the same language.
"This systematic, legalised depredation on English authors, is perfectly ruinous to all native literature. What writer can devote himself to a literary work, which he must offer on its completion, in compet.i.tion with a work of the same description, perhaps, furnishing _printed copy_ to the compositors, and to be had for the expense of a single London copy. What publisher would give its worth for a novel, in ma.n.u.script, supposing it to be equal to Bulwer"s best, when he would get a novel of Bulwer himself, for a few shillings--with an English reputation at the back of it? This is the great reason that we have so few works ill.u.s.trative of our own history--whether of fact or fiction. Our booksellers are supplied for nothing."
I extract the following from a very excellent article on the subject, in the North American Review.
Another bad consequence of the existing state of things is, that the choice of books, which shall be offered us, is in the wrong hands. Our publishers have, to no small extent, the direction of our reading, inasmuch as they make the selection of books for reprinting. They, of course, will choose those works which will command the readiest and most extensive sale; but it must be remembered, that in so doing, while they answer the demand of the most numerous cla.s.s of readers, they neglect the wants of the more cultivated and intelligent cla.s.s. Besides his, there are many admirable works, which might come into general use if they were presented to our reading public, but which are left unnoticed by the publishers, because their success is doubtful. Supposing Abbott"s "Young Christian," for instance, a book which has had a more extensive circulation than any work of the present times, had been first published in England at the same moment that a good novel appeared, the American publishers would have given us immediately a horrid reprint of the novel; but we should have heard nothing of Abbott"s book, till its success had been abundantly tried abroad; nor even then, if some ephemeral novel had started up which promised to sell better.
"Nor is it certain that the price of books would be seriously augmented by the pa.s.sage of the copyright law. It must be remembered, that a great number of writers would thus be called into the field at once, English as well as American writers; for, if English authors could enjoy this benefit, they would soon begin to write expressly for America; and the compet.i.tion would become so great, as to regulate the prices of books to a proper standard. But, even supposing the price to be considerably raised, it would certainly be better to pay two dollars for a handsome volume, which is worth keeping, and worth reading again, than to pay only one dollar for a book, which in five years will be worth no more than the same amount of brown paper. And, finally, there is the consideration of a native literature, which will, we presume, be placed by all reasonable and intelligent persons above that of cheap books."
Nevertheless, a large portion of the press took up the other side of the question, as may be inferred from a reply which I have inserted in the note beneath. [See note 2.]
The bill brought in was lost. Strange to say, the Southerner voted against, on the grounds that they would not give a copyright to Miss Martineau, to propagate her abolition doctrines in that country-- forgetting, that as a copyright would increase the price of a work, it would be the means of checking its circulation, rather than of extending it.
When I arrived at Washington, I thought it would be worth while to ascertain the opinion of any of the members of Congress I might meet; and one fine morning, I put the question to one of the Loco foco delegates; when the following conversation took place:--
"Why, Captain, there is much to be said on this subject. Your authors have pet.i.tioned our Congress, I perceive. The pet.i.tion was read last session."
(Many of the Americans appeared to be highly gratified at the idea of an English pet.i.tion having been sent to Congress.)
"I believe it was."
"Well, now, you see, Captain--you will ask us to let you have your copyright in this country, as you allow our authors their copyright in yours; and I suppose you mean to say that if we do not, that our authors shall have no copyright in your country. We"ll allow that, but still I consider you ask too much, as the balance is on our side most considerably. Your authors are very numerous--ours are not. It is very true, that you can steal our copyrights, as well as we can yours. But if you steal ten, we steal a hundred. Don"t you perceive that you ask us to give up the advantage?"
"Oh, certainly," replied I, "I have nothing more to say on the subject.
I"m only glad of one thing."
"And what may that be, Captain?"
"That I did not sign the pet.i.tion."
"No, we observed that your name was not down, which rather surprised us."
To this cogent argument of the honourable member, I had no reply; and this was the first and last time that I broached the subject when at Washington; but after many conversations with American gentleman on the subject, and examination into the real merits of the case, came to the conclusion, that the English authors never would obtain a copyright in the United States, and as long as the present party are in power.
Their princ.i.p.al argument raised against the copyright, is as follows:--
"It is only by the enlightening and education of the people, that we can expect our inst.i.tutions to hold together. You ask us to tax ourselves, to check the circulation of cheap literature, so essential to our welfare for the benefit of a few English authors? Are the interests of thirteen millions of people to be sacrificed? the foundation of our government and inst.i.tutions to be shaken for such trivial advantages as would be derived by a few foreign authors. Your claim has the show of justice we admit, but when the sacrifice to justice must be attended with such serious consequences, must we not adhere to expediency?"
Now, it so happens that the very reverse of this argument has always proved to be the case from the denial of copyright. The enlightening of a people can only be produced by their hearing the truth, which they cannot, and do not, under existing regulations, receive from their own authors, as I have already pointed out; and the effects of their refusal of the copyright to English authors, is, that the American publishers will only send forth such works as are likely to have an immediate sale, such as the novels of the day, which may be said at present to comprise nearly the whole of American rending. Such works as might enlighten the Americans are not so rapidly saleable as to induce an American publisher to risk publishing when there is such compet.i.tion. What is the consequence that the Americans are amused, but not instructed or enlightened?