publication of the lectures himself. He accordingly applied to the Court of Chancery to stop the publication by summary injunction; but it was then found that, as the identity of the lectures could not be proved by any copy or manuscript from whence they were delivered, no evidence of property could be shewn, which would be satisfactory to a court of law; and that which cannot be demonstrated to be property in a court of law, cannot be recognized as such in a court of equity, so far as to authorize it to proceed in the summary way of issuing an injunction to protect it as property. Mr. Abernethy was then advised to make a fresh application to Chancery, on the grounds that a tacit and implied contract existed between himself and those to whom the lectures were delivered; and that, consequently, a trust became vested in the hearers, which, by the fact of publication, was violated. The arguments urged on behalf of Mr. A. (who did not abandon his former ground) tended to show that, if the doctrine was maintainable, compositions of any kind, which had not been, at the period of delivery, reduced to writing, could be published by any person without the sanction of the author; then professors, clergymen, orators, and, in short, every class of learned men who possessed the faculty, or preferred the mode, of expressing themselves without the aid of writing, would be entirely at the mercy of literary pirates. On the contrary side it was alleged, that a property in literary compositions was recognized by the statute of Queen Anne; and that all decisions of chancellors and judges, as well as common sense, denoted that the compositions thus constituted property must be in writing; otherwise it would be impossible to tell how far the monopoly would extend, or where the line of distinction was to be drawn. If what was divulged by one man to another, without any express prohibition of publication, could be protected by an injunction from Chancery, a door would be opened to innumerable suits and endless litigation. A weighty consideration was added, namely, that the policy of the law must be understood, in the absence of express authority to the contrary, to promote the diffusion of knowledge, and especially to encourage the public criticism of oral discourses, which are most likely to convey injurious mistakes. The Chancellor has issued his injunction to restrain the publication; thereby establishing the rule that individuals who attend a lecturer to whom they pay a fee, have no right thereby to publish what they hear. It is to be regretted that the grounds of this decision are not fully and distinctly stated. The injury sustained by Mr. Abernethy, is apparent; but when the interests of the great body of society are, in however small a degree, concerned, they should outweigh private interests, especially when, as in this case, it is in the power of parties to protect themselves, by incurring the slight trouble of writing their compositions. The doctrine of tacit contract and implied trust, by virtue of which the Court has interfered, and which has of late so much enlarged its jurisdiction, cannot always be understood by men of plain understandings. It may happen, hereafter, that a person expert at writing short-hand, and who copies upon paper a speech which he is admitted to hear, may, by transferring the copy to another, who publishes it, find that he has violated a trust raised in him by virtue of a tacit contract between the orator and himself, of the existence of which he had not the smallest intimation until he discovers himself liable to the costs of a bill in Chancery. The interest which the public have in this decision, with respect to its tendency to bring the press more within the scope of courts possessed of large and summary jurisdiction, is obvious; but this subject is of a political complexion, and therefore not strictly within the limits of our discussion. MADE UP TO 1ST MAY 1825, AND AMOUNT OF PROCEEDS OF SALE OF GOODS, AND OTHER POLITICAL AND RECEIPTS. BILLS on Account of Supplies, and Bills drawn on India Net Produce of Remittance of Bullion from India COMMERCIAL .£5,609,709 12 10 COMPANY'S Goods Charges on Private-Trade, warehoused and sold by Company Freight on Private Goods imported and exported.......................... .... Owners of Ships, for Advances and Supplies Abroad, and Goods short delivered in India and China of outward Consignments Private-Trade Goods sold Fee-Funds for House and Warehouses ...... Widows' Funds for Officers of House and Warehouses, &c. Charges on Spices sold for Government.... ............. Almshouses at Poplar, and Seamen's Wages unclaimed Dividends on Stock standing in Company's name ... 13,717 0 0 3,075,755 1 8 87,310 13 6 14,709 2 1 2,579 0 0 21,412 4 8 56,519 9 8 Balance in favour 1st May 1824 (exclusive of Duty on Tea) PRINTED BY ORDER OF PARLIAMENT. RECEIPTS, CHARges, and Payments, In Great BRITAIN. Effects of deceased Officers, &c. Freight of Stores, &c. chargeable to Government Carnatic Debts; Interest on Claims adjudicated 338,941 8 8 291,754 1 2 63,382 18 11 169,415 1 4 Salaries of the Commissioners, and Current Charges Charges on account of St. Helena ........................................... Ditto Bencoolen Prince of Wales Island.......... Political Charges, General .......... Payments on account of Retiring Pay, &c. of King's Troops in India 83,365 15 4 4,582 13 8 91,334 3 3 1,650 17 4 835 14 10 423,235 19 2 60,000 0 0 347,886 13 11 1,191 5 0 Goods for Sale and Use, exported and to be exported ......... Fee-Funds for House and Warehouses Widows' Funds for Officers of House and Warehouses, &c. ......... £1,500,000 in 1823-4 Interest on that Loan Sums received in deposit on account of Hong Merchants in China, repaid Territorial Payments .................................€2,807,624 7 11 -9,766,179 10 5 Balance in favour 1st May 1825 (exclusive of Duty on Tea)... 1,594,644 9 8 £11,360,824 01 151,899 BILLS of Exchange for Supplies to His Majesty's Government.... Remittances from Canada, on account of Proceeds of Tea, to be sold there by the Company's Agent 20,000 £6,389,453 BALANCE in favour on 1st May 1825 (exclusive of Duty on Tea)............ 1,594,644 Memorandum.A Remittance of Bullion from India was ordered by the Court of amount of Bills drawn in liquidation of Indian Debt, and although the operations of expectation may still be entertained, that a consignment will be made, so as to become Carnatic Debts, Interests and Charges payable from the Carnatic Fund... 93,800 Payments on account Retiring Pay, &c. of King's Troops in India 60,000 44,200 £4,212,333 Proprietors of Private-Trade, for Goods sold before 1st May 1825...... 672,895 823,005 Directors in June 1823, to be shipped for England in the Year 1825, to meet the large the War have suspended the shipment, yet from the tenor of the last advices, an applicable to the demands of the current Year. |