Act of 1894.

statutory enfranchisement of copyhold, first established by the Copyhold Act, 1841, has been consolidated by the Copyhold Act, 1894. Owing to the incidents attaching to land "holden by copy of court roll according to the. custom of the manor "in the shape of fines and heriots, the inability to grant a lease for a term exceeding a year, and to the peculiar rules as to descent, waste, dower, curtesy, alienation, and other matters, varying often. from manor to manor and widely differing from the uniform law applicable to land in general, enfranchisement, or the conversion of land held by copyhold tenure into freehold, is often desired. This could and may still be effected at common law, but only by agreement on the part of both the lord and the tenant. Moreover, it was subject to other disadvantages. The cost fell on the tenant, and the land when enfranchised was subject to the encumbrances attaching to the manor, and so an investigation into the lord's title was necessary. In 1841 an Act was passed to provide a statutory method of enfranchisement, removing some of the barriers existing at common law; but the machinery created was only available where both lord and tenant were in agreement. The Copyhold Act, 1852, went further, and for the first time introduced the principle of compulsory enfranchisement on the part of either party. By the Copyhold Act, 1894, which now governs statutory enfranchisement, the former Copyhold Acts, 1841-87, were repealed, and the law was consolidated and improved. Enfranchisement is now effected under this Act, though in certain cases it is also to be obtained under special Acts, such as the Land Clauses Consolidation Act, 1848; and the old common-law method with all its disadvantages is still open. The Copyhold Act, 1894, deals both with compulsory and with voluntary enfranchisement. In either case the sanction of the Board of Agriculture must be obtained; and powers are bestowed on it to decide questions arising on enfranchisement, with an appeal to the High Court. The actual enfranchisement, where it is compelled by one of the parties, is effected by an award made by the board; in the case of a voluntary enfranchisement it is completed by deed. Under the Act it is open to both lord and tenant to compel enfranchisement, though the expenses are to be borne by the party requiring it. The compensation to the lord, in the absence of an agreement, is ascertained under the direction of the board on a valuation made by a valuer or valuers appointed by the lord and tenant; and may be paid either in a gross sum or by way of an annual rent charge issuing out of the land enfranchised, and equivalent to interest at the rate of 4 per cent. on the amount fixed upon as compensation. This rent charge is redeemable on six months' notice at twenty-five times its annual amount. The tenant, even if he is the compelling party, may elect either method; but the lord has not the same option, and where the enfranchisement is at his instance, unless there is either an agreement to the contrary or a notice on the part of the tenant to exercise his option, the compensation

18 a rent charge. Power is conferred on the lord to purchase the tenant's interest where a change in the condition of the land by enfranchisement would prejudice his mansion house, park, or gardens; while on the other hand, in the interest of the public or the other tenants, the board is authorized to continue conditions of user for their benefit.

So far the provisions relating to compulsory enfranchisement have been dealt with; but even in the case of a voluntary agreement the lord and tenant are only entitled to accept enfranchisement with the consent of the Board of Agriculture. The consideration in addition to a gross sum or a rent charge may consist of a conveyance of land, or of a right to mines or minerals, or of a right to waste in lands belonging to the manor, or partly in one way and partly in another. The effect of enfranchisement, whether it be voluntary or compulsory, is that the land becomes of freehold tenure subject to the same laws relating to descent, dower, and curtesy as are applicable to freeholds, and so freed from Borough English, Gavelkind (save in Kent), and other customary modes of descent, and from any custom relating to dower, or free-bench, or tenancy by curtesy. Nevertheless, the lord is entitled to escheat in the event of failure of heirs, just as if the land had not been enfranchised. The land is held under the same title as that under which it was held at the date at which the enfranchisement takes effect; but it is not subject to any estate right, charge, or interest affecting the manor. Every mortgage of the copyhold estate in the land enfranchised becomes a mortgage of the freehold, subject though to the priority of the rent charge paid in compensation under the Act. All rights and interests of any person in the land and all leases remain binding in the same manner. On the other hand the tenant's rights of common still continue attached to the freehold; and, without express consent in writing of the lord or tenant respectively, the right of either in mines or minerals shall not be affected by the change. Some other changes are also made by the Act. No creation of new copyholds by granting land out of the waste is permissible, save with the consent of the Board of Agriculture; and it would seem as if the Act had rendered the customary court a very shadowy institution by enacting that a valid admittance of a new copyholder may be made without holding

a court.

Under the earlier Acts, machinery to free the land from the burden of the old rents, fines, and heriots was set up, commuting them into a rent charge or a fine. Commutation, however, is never compulsory, and differs from enfranchisement in that, whereas by enfranchisement the land in question is converted into freehold, by commutation it still continued parcel of the manor, though subject to a rent charge or a fine, as might have been agreed. The ordinary laws of descent, dower, and curtesy were, however, substituted for the customs in relation to these matters incidental to the land in question before commutation, and the timber became the tenant's. (JNO. S.)

So far as the English law of copyright in books is concerned the chief developments have been by decisions of the Courts explaining the exact limits to which protection extends.

work, as laid down by Lord Mansfield, no doubt has been abandoned. But the Copyright Act, 1842, has been liberally construed as to what is a literary work and what is original matter. It is now settled law that a newspaper is a book within the meaning of the Act, and can claim all rights that a book has under the Copyright Act. Thus, at the present time, leading articles, special articles, and even news items are protected. Current prices of stocks and shares, translations, the compilation of a directory, summaries of legal proceedings, and other similar literary work, so far as the literary form, the labour, and money are concerned, are equally protected. In short, the test may now be broadly stated to be, whether labour of the brain and expenditure of money have been given for the production; whilst the old requirement of original matter is not strictly maintained, or, at any rate, is broadly interpreted. Thus, the St James's Gazette was restrained from making extracts from a descriptive article by Rudyard Kipling in the Times, and the Pall Mall Gazette protected its cable reports of Australian cricket-matches. The latest leading case, however, on the subject is Walter v. Lane (decided in the House of Lords, 6th August 1900). The question raised was, whether or not copyright applied under the Act of 1842 in respect of verbatim reports of speeches. Four of the law lords, viz., the Lord Chancellor, Lord Davey, Lord James of Hereford, and Lord Brampton, upheld the claim to copyright in such cases, whilst Lord Robertson was the sole dissentient. The point of law was examined by each judge with great care; but the gist of their decision is to be found in the opening sentences of the judgment of the Lord Chancellor (Lord Halsbury), who said:"My lords, I should very much regret if I were compelled to come to the conclusion that the state of the law permitted one man to make profit out of and to appropriate to himself the labour, skill, and capital of another. And it is not denied that in this case the defendant seeks to appropriate to himself the labour, skill, and capital of another. In the view I take of this case, I think the law is strong enough to restrain what to my mind would be a grievous injustice."

Apart from newspapers, protection has been extended to publications having no literary character; Messrs Maple's furniture catalogue, and the Stock Exchange prices on the "tape" have been awarded the same protection as directories. On the other hand, it has been decided that there is no copyright in a title, though if a new title is so like one with an established reputation that it will mislead the public, it may be restrained, not on grounds of copyright, but as a use of a title akin to common-law fraud. The Sphere and Spear, titles of misleading similarity, assumed by two weekly periodicals that appeared almost simultaneously in London in 1900-the latter, however, being but short-lived-could not successfully attack each other, because neither had an established reputation when the title of the other was first adopted. The Courts have declined to protect works which are mere copies of railway time-tables, or the "tips" of a sporting prophet, or mechanical devices with no independent literary matter, such as patterns for cutting

ladies' sleeves.

A committee of the House of Lords has considered proposals and heard evidence concerning various Bills for the amendment of the law of copyright, both literary and artistic. The general tendency of all the proposals is to increase the protection given to authors and artists, by lengthening the term of protection to thirty years after the death of the author, by increasing the amount of protection given (as by forbidding abridgments, dramatization of novels, and translations), and by increasing the efficacy of the remedies for infringement. Many difficult

questions, however, remain for consideration, especially in artistic copyright.

Plays and Music. The only decision of importance affecting the drama has been the "Little Lord Fauntleroy" case, in which the person who dramatized the novel of another without his consent, an operation up to that time believed to be unassailable in law, was attacked successfully, by preventing him from using printed or written copies of the play, either to deposit with the Lord Chamberlain or as prompt-books. In every case where much of the original dialogue of the novel is taken, this stops the production of the dramatization. In music, statutes of 1882 and 1888 have prevented the use of the provisions inflicting penalties for the performance of copyright songs for purposes of extortion, by allowing the Court to inflict a penalty of one farthing and make the plaintiff pay the costs, if justice requires it. Authors reserving the right of public performance are required to print a notice to that effect on all copies of the music. An important decision on musical copyright is the recent case in which it has been held that the reproduction of copyright tunes on perforated slips for an Æolian mechanical organ is not an infringement of the copyright in the tune.

Artistic Copyright.-The most striking decisions have been those in the "Living Picture cases (in which it was decided that tableaux vivants are not infringements of the copyright of the pictures from which they are taken), and a series of cases relating to photographs, which were not much in the contemplation of the framers of the Artistic Copyright Act of 1862. It has been decided that the "author" of a photograph is the person who groups and effectively superintends the picture, and not his employer, nor the sun, which has some claims to the title. The private sitter has restrained the photographer from exhibiting or selling the photographs for which he has been paid, but in several cases the celebrity who has sat to a photographer at his request and without payment, has not been allowed to distribute his photograph to newspapers for reproduction without the consent of the photographer. (See ARTISTIC COPYRIGHT below.)

Colonial Copyright.-The International Copyright Act, 1886, contains provisions designed to extend the benefit of the British Copyright Acts to works first produced in the colonies, while allowing each colony to legislate separately for works first produced within its own limit. The latter permission has been adopted by several of the colonies. The desire of Canadian printers to allow or require copyright works to be reprinted or printed in Canada has given rise to a very difficult controversy. The colonies at present are all included in the system of international copyright established by the Bern Convention hereafter explained. International Copyright.—Until 1886 international copyright in Great Britain rested on a series of Orders in Council, made under the authority of the International Copyright Act, 1844, conferring on the authors of a particular foreign country the same rights in Great Britain as British authors, on condition of their registering their work in Great Britain within a year of first publication abroad. A condition of the granting of each order was that the Sovereign should be satisfied that reciprocal protection was given in the country in question to British authors.

The Bern Convention.-As the result of conferences at

Bern in 1885 and 1887, this system was simplified and made more general by the treaty known as "The Bern Convention," signed at Bern on 5th September 1887. The contracting parties were the British Empire, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Tunis, and Hayti. Luxemburg, Monaco, Norway, and Japan have since joined. Austria and Hungary have a separate con

vention with Great Britain, concluded on 24th April 1893. The notable absentees among European powers are Holland and Russia. The basis of the Bern Convention was that authors of any of the countries of the Union, or the publishers of works first published in one of them, should enjoy in each of the other countries of the Union the same rights as the law of that country granted to native authors. The only conditions were that the work should comply with the necessary formalities, such as registration, in the country where it was first published, in which case it was exempt from all such formalities elsewhere; and that the protection required from any country should not exceed that given in the country of origin. The rights conferred included the sole right of making a translation of the work for ten years from its first publication. The Convention was retrospective; that is to say, it applied to copyright works published before its coming into existence, each country being allowed to protect vested interests, or copies already made by others, as it should think best.

The rights of foreign authors in Great Britain rest on legislation giving effect to the Bern Convention, namely, the International Copyright Act of 1886 (49 and 50 Vict. c. 33), and an Order in Council made under that Act, dated 28th November 1887. These confer on the author or

publisher of a work of literature or art first published in one of the countries which are parties to the Convention, after compliance with the formalities necessary there, the same rights as if the work had been first published in the United Kingdom, provided that those rights are not greater than those enjoyed in the foreign country.

The rights of British authors in foreign countries rest in each country on the domestic legislation by which the particular country has given effect to its promise contained in the Bern Convention, and are enforced by the courts of that country. The Bern Convention was revised in minor details not affecting its broad principles by a conference meeting in Paris, and Great Britain adopted the results of their labours by an Order in Council dated 7th March 1898.

AUTHORITIES.-BIRRELL, A. Copyright in Books. London, 1899. -COHEN, B. A. Law of Copyright. London, 1896.-EDMUNDS, L. Copyright in Designs. London, 1895.-KNOX and HIND. Copyright in Designs. London, 1899.-SCRUTTON, T. E. Law of Copyright, third edition. London, 1896. (T. E. S.)

AMERICAN COPYRIGHT.

An Act of the United States, known as the Act of March 1891, which replaced the Act of July 1870, and which is still in force, constituted the most important modification in copyright law since the original Act of 1790. Under all Acts preceding it, copyright had been granted to "citizens or residents of the United States," the term "resident" having been, in decisions prior to 1891, construed to mean a person domiciled in the United States with the intention of making there his permanent abode. The works of foreigners could thus be reproduced without authorization, and they were so reproduced in so far as there was prospect of financial gain. The leading publishers, however, had from the earliest times made terms with British authors, or with their representatives, the British publishers, for producing authorized American editions. But at most they were only able to secure by this means an advantage of a few weeks' priority over the unauthorized editions, and the good-will of the conscientious buyer; so that if they paid the author any considerable sum, the price of the authorized editions had to be made so high that it was not easy to secure a remunerative sale. The unauthorized editions had the further advantage in competition, that for the purpose of being manufactured more

promptly and more economically, they could be and often were issued in an abbreviated and garbled form, an injury which to not a few writers seemed more grievous than the lack of pecuniary profit. In Great Britain, during the first half of the 19th century the copyright law had been so interpreted as to secure recognition of the rights of American authors for such works as were produced there not later than in any other country, so that authors like Washington Irving and Fenimore Cooper secured for a time satisfactory returns; but after 1850 the conditions became the same as in the United States. Unauthorized editions were published, and were often incomplete and garbled.

As from decade to decade the books produced on either side of the Atlantic, which possessed interest for readers of the other side, increased in quantity and in importance, the evil of these unrestricted piracies increased. The injury to British authors was greater only in proportion as the English books were more numerous. The pressure from Great Britain during the last half of the 19th century for international copyright was continuous; and in America it was recognized by authors, by representative publishers, and by the more intelligent people everywhere, that the existing conditions were of material disadvantage. The loss to American authors was direct; and the loss to legitimate American publishers was also clear, in that better returns could be secured by adequate payments for rights that could be protected by law than by "courtesy payments for authorizations that carried no legal rights. An injury was being done to American literature; for, when authorized editions of American works had to compete against unauthorized and more cheaply produced editions of English works, the business incentive for literary production was seriously lessened. In fiction particularly, authors had to contend against a flood of cheaply produced editions of "appropriated" English books. Equally to be condemned were the ethics of a relation under which one class of property could be appropriated while other classes secured legal protection. On these several grounds efforts had long been made to secure international copyright. Between 1843 and 1886 no less than eleven international copyright Bills were drafted, for the most part at the instance of the copyright associations or copyright leagues. They were one after the other killed in committee. In 1886 the twelfth international copyright Bill was brought before the Senate by Senator Jonathan Chace of Rhode Island, and was referred to the Committee on Patents. In 1887 the American Publishers' Copyright League (succeeding the earlier American Publishers' Associations) was organized, with William H. Appleton as president, and G. H. Putnam as secretary. The Executive Committee of this league formed, with a similar committee of the Authors' Copyright League, a Conference Committee, under the direction of which the campaign for copyright was continued until the passage of the Act of March 1891. Of the Authors' Copyright League James Russell Lowell was the first president, being succeeded by Edmund Clarence Stedman. The secretary during the active work of the League was Mr Robert Ü. Johnson. Under the initiative of the Conference Committee copyright leagues were organized in Boston, Chicago, St Louis, Cincinnati, Minneapolis, Denver, Colorado City, and other places. The Chace Bill was introduced in the House in March 1888. In May 1890 this Bill, with certain modifications, came before the House, and was there defeated. In March 1891 the same measure, with certain further modifications, secured a favourable vote in the House during the last hour of the last day of the session, was passed by the Senate, and was promptly signed by President Harrison. Thus, after a struggle extending over fifty-three years, the United States accepted the principle of international copyright. S. III.

31

The Act of 1891.-The provisions of the copyright law, as amended by the Act of 1891, may be briefly summarized as follows:

A. Works of Literature.—1. Copyright is granted to authors, whether resident or non-resident, for a term of twenty-eight years. A further term of fourteen years is granted to the author if at the expiration of the first term he be still living, or to his widow or children if he be dead. Unless the author survives the first term, or leaves widow or children, the copyright is limited to twenty-eight years. The essential change indicated in this section of the law is the extension of copyright privileges to nonresident producers. 2. In order to secure copyright, all editions of the works of all authors, resident or non-resident, must be entirely manufactured within the United States, the term "manufactured" including the setting of type as well as printing and binding. Prior to 1891 the works of American authors could be put into print on either side of the Atlantic. This manufacturing condition was insisted on by the typographical unions. 3. The country of which a non-resident author is citizen must concede to American authors copyright privileges equivalent to those which it concedes to its own authors. 4. As under the British Act, the works of resident as well as of non-resident authors must be published in the home country not later than in any other country. 5. The regulations previously in force for making the entries of copyright are continued. 6. While the importation of editions of the books so copyrighted is prohibited, whether the authors of the same be American or foreign, invoices may be imported of not more than two copies each, said copies being certified to be "for use and not for sale." 7. Foreign periodicals, of which there are no editions printed from type set in the United States, cannot secure an American copyright. The importation of such periodicals is unrestricted except for such numbers as contain reprints of material that has already in some other form secured an American copyright. An English author who copyrights and publishes a volume in the United States, some chapters of which have previously been printed in an English magazine, is not able to prevent the reprinting in the United States of an unauthorized issue of those chapters. In case all the chapters have been printed in a foreign periodical before the publication of the American edition, its American copyright has probably been forfeited. 8. The foreign author has the same control as the native author over translations of such of his books as have been copyrighted in the United States. There is, however, no prohibition of the importation of an edition of a work printed in a language other than that in which it has secured its copyright. 9. Authors or their assigns have the exclusive right to dramatize and to translate any of their works for which copyright has been obtained under the laws of the United States.

B. Works of Art.-Foreign artists and designers are accorded the term or terms accorded to foreign authors and to domestic artists. To reproductions in the form of chromos, lithographs, or photographs the condition of American manufacture is attached, but not to the more artistic forms of reproduction, so that foreign authors can control engravings or photogravures of their designs, whether these are manufactured in Europe or in the United States. This provision is held by artists and art publishers of the Continent, who had in past years suffered severely from American appropriations of their productions, to be of special importance. In the case of a painting, drawing, statue, statuary, or a model or design for a work of the Fine Arts, in addition to the title, if there be one, a description and a photograph must be

sent.

C. Music. Foreign composers are given the same terms that are accorded to Americans. American manufacture is not necessary, but the condition of reciprocity is the same as in the case of books.

The Act came into effect 1st July 1891. The provisions having to do with international copyright become operative in the case of a foreign state only when the President proclaims that the state has fulfilled the condition of reciprocity. The Act has been put into force with foreign states as follows:-1st July 1891, Great Britain, Belgium, France, Switzerland; 8th March 1892, Germany (by separate treaty); 31st October 1892, Italy; 8th May 1893, Denmark; 15th July 1895, Spain; 20th July 1895, Portugal; 27th February 1896, Mexico; 13th April 1896, Sweden and Norway; 25th May 1896, Chile; 19th October 1899, Costa Rica; 20th November 1899, the kingdom of the Netherlands. In the case of each state the territory covered by the provisions of the law includes the possessions, dependencies, &c. The copyright agreement with Great Britain, therefore, covers the Crown colonies of the empire, such as India, and the independent dominions and states, such as Canada,

Australia, &c. An American work which has been duly entered for copyright in Great Britain secures, as a British publication secures, the protection of copyright under the provisions of the Bern convention throughout the territory of the several states that are parties to that convention. Amendments to the copyright law have been made as follows:- -3rd March 1893-Producers of article entitled to copyright who had heretofore failed to make delivery, according to the regulation in force, of two copies of the article to be copyrighted, but who had complied with all the other provisions of the Act, and who shall before 1st March 1893 make such delivery, shall be entitled to complete the entry of copyright accordingly. 2nd March 1895-The penalty to be paid in case of the infringement of the copyright of a photograph made from any object not a work of the Fine Arts shall be limited to a maximum of $5000; and in case of the infringement of a work of the Fine Arts, or of a photograph of the same, to a maximum of $10,000, one-half of said penalties to be paid to the proprietors of the copyright, and the other half to the Treasury of the United States. 1st January 1897 The performance of dramatic and musical compositions without the consent of the authors involves a liability for damages of not less than $100 for the first performance, and $50 for every subsequent performance as to the Court shall appear just. If the unlawful performance be wilful and for profit, the party responsible shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and upon conviction shall be imprisoned for a period not exceeding one year. 19th February 1897A Bill establishing as the Copyright Department of the Library of Congress a Bureau of Copyrights, the head of which bears the title Register of Copyrights. 3rd March 1897-Through a modification of section 4963, the responsibility for enjoining the publication or the selling of any article made or imported in violation of the United States copyright laws is placed upon the Circuit Court of the United States in the city of the person complaining of violation.

The salaries of the staff of the Bureau of Copyrights, as established in 1897, amounted to $36,440. The Appropriation Bill passed by Congress in March 1900, increasing the appropriation for the library as a whole, gave the staff of the Copyright Bureau an additional allowance, making the total $51,080. According to the annual statement of the Register of Copyrights of 30th December 1899, the fees received during the twelve preceding months for copyright entries and for the recording of assignments aggregated $60,803.50. The copyright entries comprised 78,370 titles of United States productions, and 8122 titles of foreign productions. These figures include works of art and musical compositions. During the years immediately preceding 1900 the producers of copyright property paid into the United States Treasury from $15,000 to $20,000 annually in excess of the cost of carrying on the Copyright Bureau, and with the increased expenditure for the maintenance of the bureau there will still apparently be a surplus of fees amounting to $10,000. In addition to this, the producers of copyrighted books deliver to the library of Congress a copy required as a voucher for the copyright entry and a further copy for the use of the nation. The books so delivered aggregate from 6100 to 6500 works each year.

The existing American copyright law is defective in several respects, and the following considerations are submitted with a view to its amendment :

1. The condition that books or works of art must be ". manufactured" in America in order to secure American copyright should be eliminated. In case it may not prove practicable to secure the tainly to be given promptly to the just claims of authors whose abolition of the manufacturing condition, consideration ought cerbooks are originally produced in some language other than English. There is no logical connexion between the right of an