s
distinction between native and foreign authors. The copyright was
granted "to authors," without any restriction as to nationality. It
has been contended, therefore, by jurists on the one hand that the
privilege must be presumed to have been intended for British subjects
exclusively, and on the other that it of necessity belonged to all
authors, whether native or foreign.

There were, previous to 1854, several conflicting decisions of the
courts on this question. In that year the House of Lords decided, in
the case of Jeffreys _v._ Boosey, that a foreign author, resident
abroad, was not entitled to English copyright.

In 1868 the House of Lords, in the case of Routledge _v._ Low, with
reference to the rights of an American author who was residing in
Canada at the time of the publication of his book in London, declared
that an alien became entitled to English copyright by first publishing
in the United Kingdom, provided he were, at the time of publication,
anywhere within the British dominions. Drone says that "this judgment
has continued to represent the law."

It is certainly the case that for a few years after 1868, as a
consequence of this decision, several American authors whose books
were being published in London, took up a temporary residence in
Canada, which enabled their London publishers to enter the books for
copyright, and to pay the authors an honorarium.

I am not able to quote any decisions that have set aside or modified
the above, but I have been advised by leading London publishers that
the effect of this judgment has in some way been nullified, and that
"Canada copyrights" can no longer be depended upon for protecting
American authors in England.

In the United States copyright can at present be secured only by a
citizen or permanent resident, and there is no regulation to prevent
the use, without remuneration, of the literary property of foreign
authors. The United States is therefore at present the only country
itself possessing a literature of importance, and making a large use
of the literature of the world, which has done nothing to recognize
and protect by law the rights of foreign authors of whose property it
is enjoying the benefit, or to obtain a similar recognition and
protection for its own authors abroad.

It has looked after the rights of the makers of its sewing-machines,
its telephones, and its mouse-traps, but it appears to have entirely
forgotten the makers of its literature.