On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    mmmmmmmmmmmmimm^ Nov. 2, 1885 The Publis...

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Ruskin Versus Robinson. — The Case Arisi...

    allowed owner of to the be copyri soldan ght d if he spurious was not copies were d to prepare

    of say the that conduct Mr . Ruskin of , his could solicitors not have if comp they lained had

    i given ord notice er . It and had did been not at determined once proceed b to other get ! authorities an than his that in cases of this y kind

    notice is not necessary , and that the party in the wrong must pay the coststhoug — — h he may #

    ¦ hav ^ A * ^^ e had ™ — t _ M no bad intention «/ — — — and , may ^^ have " — acted —^ _ in ¦ ignorance . When the injunction was served

    ^ ™ —^ p mj it was the duty of the defendants to offer to make all amends and to pay the costs of the

    proceedings up to that time . His Lordship ^ referred ^— to the jud 4 / gment t .. , J of the late Master of

    the Rolls in a copyright case of Cooper v . Whittingham ( L . R . 15 , Ch . D . 501 ) , where Sir ; George Jessel said that the rule was , where a

    ¦ ! there plain nlaintiff tin has comes comes been no to to misconduct enforce eniorce a a legal leeral on his rignt rierht part . , and ana no omission or neglect , which would induce , the

    Court to deprive him of his costs , the Court had no discretion , and could not take away the laintiff ' s right to costs . He did nothis

    Lordp ship said , find anything to take the case , out of that rule , and gave the plaintiff his costs .

    Copyright of University "Lectures . —Mr . William S . Sime , bookseller , Glasgow , recently

    appealed to the Second Division of the Court of Session against a decision given in the Sheriff ' s Court of Lanarkshire , granting an

    interdict at the instance of Professor Edward Caird against the publication of certain works entitled 'An Aid to the Study of Moral

    Philosophy . Mr . Sime ' s appeal was successful . The Lord Justice-Clerk ( Moncrieff ) said the result

    were of the in op favour inions of of the the defender consulted and jud five ges were was t in hat favour four of the pursuerund of those of their Lordships in thia

    Divisionthat , two were in favour of the defender and on © in , favour of the pursuer . He gave his voice in favour of the defender , ofl the ground that he

    proposition thought the in pursuer point of had law failed on which to establish his demand the for interdict restedthat he had a ripjht of property

    in his delivered lectures , . On this question ho those agreed of -with the the consulti opinion ng jud of ges the who Xord- had President expressed and

    You and their ng in con . all currence He particulars had with been him with unabl , and the e he to op agreed appreciate inion of entirel Lord the y

    t view here was on no which distinction the pursuer between had the insisted case of a that - fessor — - ^ ** m in jm ^ m ^ m a ^^^ public m— 1 ^* ¦ ^*^ ** ^ ^"" university ^¦^ ' ii »«^ ^ w ^ " ^ ^ a > ¦ . «» ^^ » ¦ and ^ ¦»» ' ^^ that ^^ ^* p * ^ - ^ — of — - a — — pri »— — - ^ vate pro - ¦ - — —

    the t lecturer he present case , and of case Ab that . ernet He the hy was judgment was so equall far from of Lord a being pplicable Eldon of that to in view that ^^^^ r ^ m Vi ^ hv ^^ ^ he B ^ b ^ br thoug ^ r lw ^ B ^^ ¦¦ v ^ s p ^ ht ^ ^ r the ^ r ^ v *^ r distinction ^ ip ^ ^ mm ^ m ™ ~ ^ ^^ ^ v ^ - ^ v - * -- " — between * - ^ ^^ ^ v — - ^ — ^^ w a —

    private vital on lecturer the very and princi a public ple official on which was the marked caso and of the Aberneth footing y was of decided an imp . lied That cont case ract proceeded between the on

    | mitted voluntary to lecturer be present and . the The students lecturer whom was free ho per to - jecture lecture or or not not as as he he liked likedand and to to attach attach any anv con

    con-ditions he pleased to the , , advantage he bestowed upon public his obligation audience to ; but lecture when in the considerat lecturer ion was of under ¦¦¦¦¦ the

    position and emoluments of a professorship in a of public which university he was , before the time the , learning uncontrolled , and master ability ' Were devoted to the duties of his chairand ho 1 ~ i ' . i I . . ! , ,

    Mfcv A-. . :. ' / . ' ' , ¦¦ , ' .....

    -- . those was no b longer y which free his to impose office condi was tions regulated other . than He I I

    by no means said that this general proposition I was cated conclusive that to confound of the present the public dispute professor , but 1 with it indi the - I I

    portant private ~ ' ~^ — lecturer element "" " ^ ^ " " ^ - ^^ - ^^ ~^ ^^ m in was ~^ m ^^ ^ the ^ ^ - ^ to ~^^ m con ^ v ^ lose « v ~^^ troversy « w " ^ si F ^^ ^ ght v ^ ^^ . ^^ o ^»^ f After ^^ one ^^^ " ^^ ^^ ^ m most alluding W W ^* ^^ ^ " ^ W im ^^ ^»^» ^ - I - to the statute of William IV ., which he thought was

    not against without Pitman importance , in which , and Mr . to Justice the case Kay of simp Nicol ly I applied Lord Eldon ' s judgment in the Abernetby

    case agreed , his with Lordshi the views p said expressed that for the by the rest Lord he enti -Presi rel - y dent . He thought that ¦ ¦ these lectures were published r

    by the — mere — — — delivery ^^ V . ^ B ^^ ^ v ^ r w to ^^ ^ r an ^ V ^ B ^^ ^ . ^ audience ^^ ^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^ r ^ . ^ Vi ^ v ^ VF . ^^ of v ^ v ^ ^ the ^*^ - ^^ ^^ " ^ ^ h public ^^ f ^^ ^^ v ^^ ^ ^ m ^ ^ m ^^ ^ as ^ ^^^^ demical part — -- of — — — — the obli — — profe - gation wm — — — s so ^^— ^ s ^ r . w ' s duty On ^^ ^ k ^ in the ^ r »* ^ discharge ^ whole ww m m ^^ ^ ^^ m » of w ^^ atter ^ r ^^ his « r ^ i * ^» , « aca ^ his b ^ b ^ - ^^

    opinion was in favour of the , defender , and the result t of here that were was six that in of favour the of jud the ges in the and whole for Court

    sustaining — — — — - - — the —^ jud — — gment ' — ^^ ™ » " ^» - ^» an w ^^ ^ d continuing ^ v ^ h ^>^ pursuer ^^^ ^ p ^ t ^ b ^^^ ^ v ^ ^^ ^* m the ^*^ ^ h ^ v ^ interdict *^» ^^ ^^ i *^ . *^ ^ p » »*^ , favour and there of the were defender seven . against Therefore r ¦ the he pursuer proposed and that in

    ~ "" ' ^— —¦— ~™~ —™ ~™~ ^»^» ^ W ^^ r —^ ^ P M <^^ H ^"^^ ^^ " ' ^ p ^ ^^ ^^ i ^^ ^^» ^^ fr ^ V ^ . ^ HIK ^^ ^ t ^ M ^ ^ k ^* ^^ ^ . ^ ^ " ^^ ^^ ^^»^^ ^ fc ^^ ^^» they should pronounce the following interlocutor : — vers * Find ity that of Glasgow the pursuer and that is the professor lectures in refe the rred Uni to

    in the record were , delivered by him to his students who as part is a of bookseller his ordinary in course Glasgow ; find published that the defender the work ,

    , now complained of : find that this work was comp and iled who by a had student taken wh notes o had in attended shorthand the classes of the ,

    op professor inion , of ' s the lectures majori : find ty , of in the conformity "whole Court with , th the at such publication did not constitute an infringement

    of any legal right of property belonging to or vested in the pursuer : therefore sustain the appeal , recall the judgment appealed against , and dismiss the

    action , with expenses . ' Shakspearean Book » sellers . —It is just

    three hundred years ago since young William Shakspeare left Stratford-upon-Avon and came to London with the proverbial penny

    - ^^ ^ h ^^ V ^™ ^^ ^^ ^^^ ^™ ^^ ^^^ " ^^^ ^^ . * . ^^ ^^^ " ^*^ ^^ ^^ ^ ^^^ ^^^ ^ ^^ ^ " ^^ ^^ ^^¦ ^ > jr ^^ T — ¦ " ^^ ^^» " " ^ ^^ — " ¦ " r ¦—^ — ¦—»~ r m in his pocket . ' Eight years afterwards he attained literary celebrity by the publication of

    his first poem , Venus and Adonis , which was published by Richard Field . This was quickly followed by his historical plays , and then by

    his comedies . It may interest our readers to learn the names and the j > laces of business of the manbooksellers whoit is saidderived

    y , , large profits from the publication of the pla } r s of Shakspeare JL . during his life-time . There

    were : Richard Fieldat the sicrne of tho Whit © , •*—

    -Thomas Greyhound Millington , in Paules , at his Church shoppe -yard under . St . Peter ' s Church in Com-wal .

    Andrew yardat Wise the , at signe his of shop the in Angell Paules .

    Church-William yard vnrH , at n . t Leak the th « e signe sicrnft , dwelling of of the the in Ureyhoiui Grevhound Paules Church cl ..

    -Cuthbert Burby , at his shop neare tho Exchange .

    John Busby , at hia house in Carter Lane , Thomas next w % the Fisher ¦ Powle vr ¦ :- at Head his sh ( oppe PauVs ) . the signe

    ^ p ^^ v of ^^ . W the ^ ^^ ^^^ " ^^^^ White ^^ ^ ^ « ^^ ¦¦ , "v ^~ Hart " in Fleete ^ B , -Streete . ^^^^ p Edward White , at the , little North dore of

    Thomas Paules Heyes , at the in signe Paul of es the Church Gun . -yardat

    , , the signe of the Greene Dragon . „ n

    Mmmmmmmmmmmmimm^ Nov. 2, 1885 The Publis...

    mmmmmmmmmmmmimm ^ Nov . 2 , 1885 The Publishers' Circular 1 II 9 [ —

• Citation
  • Publishers’ Circular (1880-1890), Nov. 2, 1885, page 1119, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/pc/issues/tec_02111885/page/3/