iStbatti min Procceningi in landintnent. COPYRIGHT.

Mr. Sergeant TAIFOURD, on Thursday, moved the House of Com- mons for kayo to bring in II bill "to consolidate and amend the laws relating to property in books, musical compositions, acted dramas, pic- tures, and engnivings, to provide remedies for the violation thereof, and to extend the term of its duration."

The churns of men of letters to some share in the consideration of the Legislature would not be tiligt■ " I ion aware," said Mr. Talfon hat they appeal to feelings far different from those which are usually excited by the political conflicts ot this place that the interest of their case is not of that stirring kind which belongs to the present, but that it reflects buck on the past the passions which are now sileut, and stretches forward into the visionary future ; and that the circumstances which impede their efforts are hut appreciated in the calmness of thought to which those efforts are akin. I shall, therefore, intrude as briefly as I can on the patience of the House while I trace the history of the evils ot which they complain, suggests the principles on which I think them entitled to redress, and state the outline of the remedies which may in some degree ameliorate their condition."

It was indeed time that literature should experience some of the blessings of legislation; for, except the splendid boon to the acted drama of Mr. 13ttlwer's bill, it hail received from it scarcely any thing but evil. Simply to repeal all the statutes passed "for the encourage- ment of learning" would be a great relief. By the common law, an author had the sole right of multiplying copies of his work, and his remedy by action against any who should infringe it. The Star Chamber, while it restrained the liberty of the press, preserved copy- right from violation. In 1769, in the case of Miller versus Taylor, it was found as a fact in a special verdict, "that before the reign of Queen Anne, it was usual to purchase from authors the perpetual copy- right of their works, and to assign the same from band to hand, for valuable considerations, and to make them the subject of family settle- ments." But in 1709, the act 8th Ann, chapter 19, was passed ; in which mischief lurked unsuspected, till, many years after, it was called into action to limit the right it professed to secure- " By that act, the sole right of printing and reprinting their works was re- cognized in authors for the term of fourteen years, and, if living at the close of that period, for another period of the same duration ; piracy was made !punish- able during these times, by the forfeiture of the books .illegally published, and of a penny for every sheet in the offender's custody—one half to the use of the Queen's Majesty—the other halfpenny, not to the poor author, whose poverty the sum might 'mem to befit, but to the informer ; and the condition of these remedies was the entering of the work at Stationers' Hall. This act for the encouragement of learning' also confers a power on the Archbishop of Canter- bury and other great functionaries, to regulate the rims of books, which was rejected by the Lords, restored on conference with the Commons, and repealed in the following reign ; and also confers on learning the benefit of a forced contribution of nine copies of every work on the best paper for the use of cer- tain libraries. Except in the last particular, the act seems to have remained a dead letter down to the year 1760; no one, so far as lean trace, having thought It worth while to sue for the halfpenny, and no one having suggested that its effect had been to restrict the common-law right of authors to the term during which its remedies were to operate. So far was thie construction from being suspected, that in the interval the Court of Chancery repeatedly inter- fered by injunction to restrain the piracy of books in which the stututable copyright had long expired."

Protection was extended, in 1735, to the Whole Duty of Man, the assignment of which had been made seventy-eight years before ; after- wards to different works of Pope, Swift, and Milton.

"In 1766, an action was brought, Miller versus Taylor, for pirating Thom- son'. Seasons, in the Court of King's Bench, before whom it was elaborately argued, and who, in 1769, gave judgment in favour of the subsisting Copyright. Lord Mansfield, Mr. Justioe Wiles, and Mr. Justice Aston holding that c-ply" right was perpetual by the °meson law, and not limited by the statute, exoce-p. as to penalties, and Mr. Justice Yates differiog from them. In 1774, the ques.'t tion was brought before the House of Lord., when eleven judges delirered their opinion upon it—six of whom thought the copyright limited, while fin held It perpetual ; and Lord Mansfield, who would have made the aurae; equal, retaining his opinion, but expressing none. By this bare majority, ageieit the strong opinion of the Chief Justice of England, was it decided that the statute of Ann has substituted a short time in copyright for an estate in fee; and the rights of authors were delivered up to the mercy of succeeding Podia. meats. Until this decision, copyright vested in the Universities had wr shared the protection which it was supposed had existed for all; and, in fees. their copyright was gene! But they immediately resorted to the Legielature, and obtained an act, 15th George 111. c. 63, 'for enabling the two Universities in England, the four Universities of Scotland, and the several Colleges of Eton, Westminster, and Winchester, to hold in perpetuity the copyright in books given or bequeathed to them for the advancement of learning and the pu of education • ' and the like privilege was by 41st George III. C. 107, extended to Trinity allege, Dublin. With the immunities this cohferred on the Uois versities—or rather with exemption from the wrong incidentally inflicted oa individuals—I have no intention to interfere. Neither do I seek to relieve lit.. rature from the obligation, recently lightened by the just consideration of nient, of supplying the principal Universities with copies of all works at thetas thor's charge. I only seek to apply the terms of the statute, which recites that ths purposes of those who bequeath copyright to the Universities for the advance_ meat of learning will be frustrated unless the sole printing and reprintiog of such works be secured in perpetuity, to the claim of individuals to some els tended interest in their own. I only ask that some share of the benefits enjoyed by the venerable nurseries of learning and of genius should attend the works of those whose youth they have inspired and fostered, and of those to whom fortune has denied that inestimable blessing, but who look with reverence upon them, and feel themselves in that reverence not wholly strangers to the great body of associations they preserve."

The next Copyright Act, the 41st George III. C. 107, did little more than include Ireland in the general law ; but in 1814 was passed the subsisting Copyright Act, which enlarges the duration of copyright to twenty.eight years, and, if the author should survive that period, for the remainder of his life. Since then, the protection of copyright bad been extended to acted Animas and lectures ; and, instead of nine, five copies of their works are firm given to learned bodies. But the exten- sion from fourteen to twenty-eight years is all that authors have obtained in the place of that inheritance of which the statute of Ann deprived them. No compensation has been made to them by efficacious means of preventing piracy, or by simplicity in the means of proving their right, or cheapness of remedy for its violation.

'‘ The penal clauses have proved wholly worthless. Engravings, etchings, maps, and chaits—which are regulated by other statutes—are secured to the authors for twenty-eight years, but not, like books, for term of life. Instead of the registration at Stationers' Hall—which has been holden not necessary for the right of action—the work must bear the date and the name of the propiie- tor ; but no provision is made in either case for cheap transfer. Now, Sir, I propose to render the law of copyright uniform as to all books and works of art, to secure to the proprietor the same time in each, to give one plan of registra- tion and one mode of transfer. The Stationers' Company having enjoyed the control over the registration of books, I do not propose to take it from them, if they are willing to continue it with the increased trouble, compensated by the increased fees which their officer will be entitled to receive. I propose that, before any proceeding can be adopted for the violation or copyright, the author or his assignees shall deposit a copy of the work, whether book or engraving with the officer of the company, and cause an entry to be made in a form to le given in the act, of the proprietorship of the work—whether al:solute or limited —and that a copy of much entry, signed by the officer, shall be admitted in any court as prima fade evidence of the property. 1 propose that any trot* should be registered in like manner, in a form to be given by the act, and that such transfer shall be evidenced by a similar copy."

At present there was great uncertainty as to the property in perio- dical works, and works written at the instance of a bookseller, and the right to an engraving from ant original picture-

" However desirable it may be that these questions could be settled, it is impossible to interfere with the existing regulations of the booksellers and au- thors, or of the patrons of art and artists. Neither, for the future, do I propose to lay down any rule as to the rights which shall originally be implied between the parties themselves; but that the right of copy shall be registered as to book, picture, or engraving, only with the consent of both exhibited in writing; and when once so registered, shall be absolute in the party registered as owner. At present an engraver who has given a large sum for permission to engraves picture, and expended his money and labour on the plate, may be met by un- expected competition, for which he has no remedy. By making the registra- tion not the condition of the right itself, but of the remedy by action or other- wise, the independence of the contracting parties will be preserved, and this evil avoided for the future."

A competent tribunal would still be wanting. Its establishment, however, would be beyond the scope of his intention and his power; but he felt that complete justice would not be done to literature and art until a mode should be devised for a cheap and summary vindication of their injuries, before parties better qualified to decide upon them than our judges and juries. The main object of his bill, however, was the further extension of the time during which authors should receive direct pecuniary benefit from the sale of their works- " Although I see no reason why authors should not be restored to that Wm-, ritance which, under the name of protection and encouragement, has been taken from them, I feel that the subject has NO long been treated as matter of compro- mise between those who deny that the creations of the inventive faculty, Of the achievements of the reason, are the subject of property at all, and those who think the property shonlil last as long as the works which contain them live., that I propose still to treat it on the principle of compromise, and to rest sa- tisfied with a fairer adjustment of the difference than the last act of Parli e ment affords. I shall propose, subject to modification when the details of th. measure shall be discussed, that the term of property in all such worksroraot learning, genius, and art, shall be extended to sixty years, to be computed t the death of the author • which will, at least, enable him, while providing fo.or the instruction and delight of diatant ages, to contemplate that he shall leaive. ler his works themselves some legacy to those for whom a nearer if noltea h_gb duty requires him to provide, and which may make 'death less terrible.' When the opponents of literary property, in the language of Mr. Justice Yaters,espea_ of glory as the reward of genius, they make an ungenerous use elf) the nobleness of its impulses, and show bow little they have profited by its example. When Milton, in poverty and in blindness, fed the flame of II. ne .1. el; enthusiasm by the assurance of a duration coeval with his language, I with Lord Camden, that no thought crossed him of the wealth %eh:eh might be awaned by the sale of his poem ; but surely some shadow would have been thrown on the clear dream and solemn vision of his future glories, bad he fore II that, while booksellers would strive to rival each other in the magnificence 7their editions, or their adaptation to the convenience of various lasses of ad. milers and their own, his only surviving descendant—a woman—al ould be re- lieved from abject want only be the charity of Garrick ,who, at the solicitation of Dr. Johnson, gave her a benefit at the theatre which had appropriated to itself all that could be represented of Comm. The liberality of genius is surely ill- urged as a rervion for our ungrateful denial of its rights. The late Mr. Cole- ridge gave an example, not of its liberality, but of its profeseress, while he ',night not even to appropriate to himself the fame of the vast intellectual treasure which he had derived from boundless remarch and tinted by a glorious anagination—while he ecattered abroad the seeds of beauty and of wisdom, to talls root in congenial minds, and was content to witness their fruits in the productions of those who received them. But ought we, therefore, the less to 'deplore, now when the living music of his divine philosophy is for ever hushed, that the earlier portion of these works, on which he stamped his own impress--all which he desired of the world, that they should be lecognized as his—are published for the gain of others then his children, that his death is illestrated by the forfeiture of their birthright? What justice is there in this ? Do we reward our heroes PO ? Do we tell them that glory was their reward— that they fought for posterity ? and that posterity would pay them ? We leave them to 110 such cold and uncertain requital. We do not merely leave them to eajoy the spoils of their victories—we concentrate a nation's honest feeling of gratitude and pride into the form of an endowment, and teach other ages what we thought,sand what they ought to think, of their deeds, by the substantial memorials of our praise. Were Shakspeare and Milton less the ornaments of their country, less the benefactors of mankind ? Would the example be less inspiring if we permitted them to enjoy the spoils of their victories—if we allovred to their descendants, not the tax assessed by present gratitude and charged on the future, but the mere amount which the future might be de- lighted to pay, and in which payment the reward must be commensurate, not onle to the immediate good, but to the permanent blessing—extending as the circle of their glory expands, and rendered by those who reap the benefit and are content at once to enjoy and to reward its author ? But I do not press those considerations to the full extent—the past is beyond our power, and I only ask for the present a brief reversion in the future. Riches fineless are already outs. It is in truth the greatness of the blessings which the world inherits from genius that dazzles the mind on this question—and the habit of repaying its legacy by words that confuses ue, and indisposes us to justice. It is because the spoils of time are ours—because the forms of classic beauty wear for us the bloom of an imperishable youth—because the elder literature of our own coun- try is a free iniue of wealth for booksellers, and of delight to ourselves, that we are unable to understand the claim of our contemporaries to a beneficial inte- rest in their works. Because genius of necessity communicates so much, we cannot conceive it as retaining any thing fir its possessor."

The moment when the name of a gifted author is invested with the solemn interest of the grave, and his works assume their place among the classics of the country, the law says they become public property, and requites him by sehing on the patrimony of his children-

" We blame the errors mul excesses of genius; and we leave them, justly leave them, for the most part, to the consequences of their mingled nature: but if genius, in assertion of its diviner alliances, produce larger returns when the course of it$ frail possessor is spent, why is the public to insult his descendants with their alma awl their pity ? What right have we to moralize over the ex- cesses of a Burns, and insult his memory by charitable honours, while we are taking the benefit of his premature death, in the expiration of his copyright, and the consequent deduction of some paltry suns from the price of his works? Or, to advert to a case in which the highest intellectual powers were associated with the noblest moral excellence, what right have we take credit to ourselves for a poor and ineffectual subscription to rescue Abbotsfard for the family of its great author, while we insist on appropriating even now the profits of his earlier poems to ourselves, and anticipate the time when, in a few years, his novels will be ours without rent-charge to enjoy, and every one's to copy, to emasculate, and to garble? This is the case of one whom kings and people delighted to honour ; but look on another picture—that of a man of genius and integrity, who had received all the insults and injuries from his contemporaries, and ob- tains nothing from posterity but a name: look at Daniel De Foe! recollect him pilloried, bankrupt, wearing away his life to pay his creditors in full, and dying in the struggle—and his works live, imitated, corrupted, yet casting off tin stains, not by protection of law, but by their own pure essence. Had every schoolboy, whose young imagination has been prompted by his great work, and whose heart has learned to beat in the strange yet familiar solitude he created, given the halfpenny to the statute of Ann there would have been no need of a provision for his children, no need of a subscription for a statue to his memory."

Mr. Talfourd also enforced the expediency and justice of ac- knowledging the rights of foreigners to copyright in this country, and of claiming it for Englishmen in return. It would seem, from a late decision on the subject of musical copyright, that the principle of international copyright is already acknowledged here— !t has been decided by a judge conversant with the business and the ele. gancies of life to a degree unusual with an eminent lawyer—by one who was the most successful advocate of his time, yet who was not more remarkable for his skill in dealing. with facts than for the grace with which he embellished them—by Lord Alonger—that the assignee of foreign copyright, deriving title from the author abroad to publish in this country, and creating that right within a reasonable time, may claim the protection of our courts against any infringement of his copy. If this is law, and I believe and trust it is, we shall make no sacrifice in so declaring, and in setting an example which France, Prussia, America, and Germany, are prepared to follow. Let us do justice to our law and to ourselves. At present, not only is the literary intercourse of countries who should form one great family degraded into a low series of piracies ; not only are industry and genius deprived of their just reward ; but our literature is debased in the eyes of the world by the wretched medium through which they behold it. Pilfered, and disfigured in the pilfering, the noblest images are broken; wit falls pointless, and verse is only felt in fragments of broken music—sad fate for an irritable race ! The great minds of our times have now an audience to impress far vaster than it entered into the minds of their predecessors to hope for—an audience in.

creasing as popul ition thickens in the cities of America, and spreads itself out through its long-untrodden wilds—who speak our language, and who look at our old poets as their own immortal ancestry. And if thus our literature shall

be theirs—if its diffusion shall foliose. the efforts of the stout heart and steady arm in their triumph over the obstacles of nature—if the deeper woods which

shall still encircle the still-extending states of civilization shall be haunted with visions of beauty which our poets have created—let those who thus are softening the ruggedness of young society have some personal interest

about which affection may gather; and at least let them be protected from those who would exhibitIthem mangled or corrupted to the new world U f their admiring disciples. I do not, in truth, ask for literature favour—I do not ask for it charity—I do not even appeal to gratitude in its behalf; but I ask for it a portion, and but a portion, of that common justice which the coarsest industry obtains for its natural reward, and which nothing but the very extent of its claims, and the nobleness of the associations to Which they art akin, have prevented it from our laws." (Much cheering throughout.) Mr. SPRING RICE begged to be allowed to second the motion. Be had never enjoyed a more unmixed feeling of gratification than from Mr. Talfourd's speech. The motion was not unappropriately mole by one to whom the country was under obligations of a literary charades which would be long remembered. Judging from the manner in which the motion had been received, he should think that the House now ready to participate in all the hopes for the future in which Mr. Tel- fourd indulged. To the question of international law, the " other brother of the English family" had already given attention— He believed it had been brought under the conaideration of the American Congress, by a report drawn up by one of its most eminent statesmen, M. Clay. The illustrations alone of his honourable and learned friend were suffi- cient, in his opinion, to niake out his cue; but, taken in connexion with the arguments which he hail urged, they were beyond doubt irresistible.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS had intended to bring this subject before Par- liament himself, but he rejoiced that he had not done so, as it was now in the hands of one who was in all respects so highly qualified to do it justice. Leave was given to bring in the bill.

CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS.

On the motion of Mr. Citanns Stmts.'', the House, on Wednesday, went into Committee on the bill to establish an improved tribunal fee the decision of disputed elections. In the Committee, Mr. Strum explained the measure— It was admitted, lie believed, by gentlemen of both sides, that the Election Committees were governed more by party feeling than by a consideration of the merits of the Case. Surely such a state of things ought, if possible, to be pia an end to; and it was with that object that he had introduced the present mea- sure. The cause of the partisanship Was, he believed, not that the Membees were so prone to party feeling that they could not be trusted to deliver a jest decision, but that the law seas so uncertain in election matters that it was al- most impossible to say what was the law and what was not. Now, he proposed that there should be one member of the Committee who did understand the law. It would be desirable that every gentleman should understand it, bet that was impracticable. It hail been suggested that controverted elections should be referred to a legal tribunal : he, however, thought that there were very serioas objections to allowing the power of judging of such elections tit pass out of the hands of Parliament ; in his opinion it would not be for the safety of Parliament that it should give up that privilege. The first alteration proposed by the bill was, that there should be an aases-or who should preside over the Committee as chairman, and somewhat in the capacity of a judge. He would not be a Member of the House, and he would not have the power to vote; but he would be informed as to the law, and would guide the Committee is its deliberations. The responsibility of the nomination of the assessor it was pre- posed should rest with the Speaker, the House having the power of exercieing a veto on that nominat. . With rosiwet to the number of the Committee, excepting the chairman, it was proposed that they should be reduced from eleven to five. The present Tam of striking the Committee was abolished ; and ia place of it the proposition was, that, as in the case of juries, the parties should each have the power of a peremptory challenge—every name that was not clads leuged was to be allowed to remain on the list.

He concluded by moving that the first clause should be postponed. Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET said, that the bill would not remedy the evils which everybody allowed to exist— The assessors would be overworked in the opening semi= of a new Parlia- ment, and would have nothing, or next to nothing, to do, in the sre.sious which followed it. Ile also objected to the system of terwhing Members of that House to look up to individuals not belonging to it as the parties on whose deci- sion was to depend whether they should exercise the highest privilege of British Commoners or not, lie did not think that the present mode of striking Elec- tion Committees wag free from objection, but the question for him to decide was, whether that mode was not better than that proposed. lie was of opinion that party-spirit was more likely to prevail in a Committee of five than in a Com- mittee of eleven, lie doubted whether they could improve the law for deciding upon disputed election returns by departing (ions the principles on which that law was founded.

Mr. PouLTER doubted the efficacy of Mr. Bailer's measure.

Sir Jot's: CAmenELL said, the House ought to retain this jurisdiction entirely, or part with it entirely— He suggested to the House the propriety of considering whether it could not obtain a tribunal for decision of questions of this sort entirely unconnected with party and with Parliament. If such a tribunal could be obtained, questions ed this sort would be decided not only with greater rapidity, but with greater eco- nomy to all the parties interested in them. He thought, however, that the best course which the Committee could adopt, woe to be contented with the agi- tation which the subject Isid already undergone ; and lie should therefore con- clude by moving that the chairman do now report progress, and ask leave to sit again. Mr. WYNN recommended that a declaratory act should be passed to settle as many disputed points as possible.

The Committee was about to divide on Sir John Campbell's motion, when "notice was taken" that only 36 Members were present, and an adjournment took place.

STATE. OF PUBLIC BUSINESS.

In the House of Lords, on Thursday, Lord BROUGHAM gave notice, that at an early day he would call the attention of their Lordships to the state of public business. It would be difficult to say what the House had done since the commencement of the session, except what svsts mischief instead of good—he meant the passing of the Canada Coer- cive Resolutions. Many measures had been introduced into the other House of Parliament, which might as well have originated with the Lords, and by this time have been passed. It was a most serious in- convenience to have so much business postponed till the very end of the session.

In the House of Commons, on the same evening, Mr. ROEBUC& made a similar complaint. It was said that the Radicals delayed the progress of business by their motions : he denied the charge ; and if Lord John Russell would undertake to proceed de die in diem with the Government bills, he for one would promise not to make a single mo- tion till they were all through the House.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL disclaimed any intention of imputing blame to the Radical Members especially. With respect to Mr. Roebuck's offer, be must observe, that that gentleman could only speak for-him. self: other Members might press their motions. He complained of she conduct of the Opposition Members, who put great difficulties in the way of Government business—

He had taken very great pains last week to proceed with the Irish Poor-law

11, but had found great difficulty in doing so. About a week ago, be proposed to take the Criminal-law Bill on Friday the 19th instant, being anxious the House should have a distinct day fixed for them to consider a bill of so great importance; but be found among the notices for to-morrow, one which had been given by an honourable Member opposite (Colonel Sibthorpe) relative to the duty on fire-insurances, and to take precedence of the Orders of the Day. He did hope that the course which hall hitherto been insisted on would be die- coantenaneed, and that for the future bills regularly before the House would be allavied to be proceeded with.

Mr. AGLIONBY suggested, that a Committee should be appointed to celisider a rearrangement of the whole course of the business of the House.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL would readily consider any feasible plan. The conversation dropped: nothing was done.

MISCELLANEOUS.

Suicortv TRAVELLING. On Wednesday, the order of the day for ,ermsidering the report of the Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Greenock Railway having been read, Dr. BOWRING moved to expunge the clause which prohibited travelling by the railway on a Sunday. Mr. DUNLOP opposed this motion ; the regulation being, be said, in accordance with the universal feeling of the people of Scotland. Mr. ROEBUCK said it was a matter of pounds, shillings, and pence : the "anal proprietors supported the clause ; religious feeling had nothing to do with the question— He wished to leave the observance of Sunday to the feeling of the people. 'The strict observance of that day was, in his opinion, contrary to the Christian religion—it was nothing more than an ascetic and Jewish usage, having no rotation to the morals of the people; it was mere matter of hypocrisy in souse peoyle, and of ignorance in others.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL, Mr. JERVIS, and Mr. CHARLES BULLER spoke against, and Sir ROBERT INGLIS and Sir GEORGE CLERK in favour of the clause ; which was retained in the bill, by a majority of 51 to 47.

CoraetON or CANADA. On Thursday, a conference on behalf of the two Houses was held ; when the Lords' agreement to the Canada Resolutions was signified. Subsequently, in the Commons, Lord Jo IAN RUSSELL had leave to introduce a bill founded on the Resolutions.

REGISTRY OF ELECTORS. Mr. HOWARD ELPHINSTONE, OD Thurs- day, moved for leave to bring in a bill to give the right of voting to every registered elector for the current year, notwithstanding any loss of qualification that might have arisen in the interval between the re- gistration and the time of voting; also to prevent Election Committees from opening the register and questioning the validity of votes received without objection by the Revising Barrister, Mr. WASON asked, why no progress had been made with the Regis- tration of Voters Bill ?

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL said, that the state of public business ren- dered it impossible to proceed with that as well as other bills. He yet hoped that the Imprisonment for Debt Bill and 'other Government measures would follow each other in rapid succession, and be sent tri- nmpbantly up to the House of Lords. He had consulted with Lord -Tan Russell, and they had agreed not to oppose Mr. Elphinstone's lotion.—Leave given.

TAXES ON INTERNAL COMMUNICAT/ON. Mr. GILLON moved for a Select Committee to consider the unequal rates of taxation on different modes of travelling. He laid pal denier stress on the heavy duties imposed on road carriages as compared with those on railway carriages. Mr. SPRING RICE assented to the motion, but wished to guard against the idea that it was intended to cheek any mode of investing capital.— Committee appointed.

A Nrw WRIT was ordered on Wednesday, for Glasgow; Mr. Os- vald having accepted the Chiltern Hundreds.