made capable of distinct enjoyment, defined by positive rules, or defended by the general principles of justice. The right to pass over the soil, or to gather a definite portion of the fruit that grows upon it, may be severed from the ownership of the soil itself; and the grant of these subordinate rights does not necessarily suppose a grant of the proprietorship of the soil, or of any other of the rights of the original proprietor. The use of an animal, for a fixed period or in a certain manner, may be separated from the ownership of the animal, and a contract for the one does not imply a contract for the other.

We are to inquire, then, whether the claim of authors to the exclusive multiplication and sale of copies of their own literary productions can be brought within the fair scope of these principles. In determining this question, it is obviously necessary to define the right claimed, and to ascertain its essential character.

The right claimed by an author, after publication, is not to the exclusive possession or appropriation, intellectually, of the ideas and sentiments which he originates and puts upon paper. In the first place, such an appropriation becomes impossible, as soon as he imparts to others the means of an intellectual perception of his ideas; and in the next place, it is inconsistent with the very objects for which he publishes to others the conceptions of his own mind. Such an appropriation is impossible, because if I am permitted to read the ideas and sentiments which

another has written, they become part of my intellectual possessions, as far as I can retain them in my memory, and no rule can be established which would deprive me of the opportunity to use them for my own enjoyment, or to impart a knowledge of them by speech to others. Such an appropriation by the author is also inconsistent with one of his objects in publishing his thoughts; which is to impart his own thoughts to others, to induce others to make them part of their intellectual possessions, and thus to influence, refine, or instruct his fellow-men, to gain their admiration, excite their pity, or influence their conduct. The painter, who spreads upon canvass the immortal conceptions of genius, does not ordinarily intend to be the sole beholder of the images which he thus creates. The grandeur and loveliness, to which he has given outward form, he places before the eyes of others, in order, expressly, that they may fully appropriate into their own intellectual perceptions the ideas which he has embodied. In like manner, the author who writes and publishes, writes and publishes that he may be read that other men may absorb into their own intellectual natures the thoughts which have had their birth in his reason or imagination, making them part and parcel of their own minds.

But it does not follow, because this is one of the objects of the painter or the author, in the exercise of their respective arts, that there may not be another purpose collateral to this, and in all respects

consistent with it. It may be the purpose of both the painter and the poet, while they delight or instruct mankind, to receive a direct compensation for the pleasure or instruction which they impart; and the question is, whether there is any right, by the exercise of which they can make this purpose effectual; or, in other terms, whether there is anything to which the compensation can be made to attach.

The right to multiply copies of what is written or printed, and to take therefor whatever other possession mankind are willing to give in exchange, constitutes the whole claim of literary property. This claim leaves wholly undisturbed the opportunity of every reader to make an intellectual appropriation of the ideas suggested to him by the characters which he purchases; it goes no farther than to assert an exclusive right to the profits which may be derived from the production of successive copies of the characters which, in a particular combination, represent a set of intellectual ideas. This right is to be derived, if at all, from the original, exclusive invention and possession by the author of the ideas themselves, and of the combination of characters which exhibits those ideas. If this right can be distinctly traced to original possession and invention, and if the exercise of the right involves the general attributes which belong to property, there is no reason why it should not be placed among the rights of property.

The author of every original literary composition

creates both the ideas and the particular combination of characters which represents those ideas upon paper. He is therefore an inventor, in two senses; and he has the exclusive possession, before publication, of his invention. Every one may use the elemental characters of which the original author makes use, in other combinations, but if any one uses them in the same precise combination, he exhibits necessarily the ideas of the original author. The two subjects of the invention are therefore inseparably interwoven, and when we contemplate them in their blended condition upon the written or printed page, they present to the mind the idea of one creation or invention only. Considered, however, with reference to its component parts, this invention consists of distinct creations, the ideas themselves and the combination of characters which exhibits those ideas to the eye. Both are new, both have never existed before, and both are capable of being retained in the exclusive possession of the original inventor.

The author, then, has in his possession a valuable invention, which he may withhold or impart to others at his pleasure. His dominion over his written composition is perfect, since it is founded both in oceupancy or possession, and in invention or creation. No title can be more complete than this.

From this full and complete title flows the right to annex conditions to the transfer of such a written composition, when the author chooses to impart the possession of it to others. It cannot be doubted that

this right is inherent in every possession vested in an individual by the rules of natural or positive law. It enables the owner of a literary composition to declare the purposes for which he grants it to others, in the same manner as it enables the owner of a piece of merchandise to declare that he grants the full property, or only a qualified use thereof, when he gives the possession of it to another. In both cases, the principles of justice require that this right of the original owner should be respected in the same manner as his original possession; for if it would be a violation of justice to deprive him of all his rights, when he has reserved them all, it is equally so to deprive him of a part of them, which he reserved, when he granted another part.

The right of literary property commences, therefore, from a full and exclusive intellectual possession of his ideas, by the author, coupled with the physical possession of the combination of characters representing those ideas, which he has traced upon paper or other material. As soon as publication takes place, it is no longer his object or intention to retain to himself the intellectual appropriation and enjoyment of the ideas themselves. What he does seek to reserve is, the exclusive multiplication of copies of that particular combination of characters, which exhibits to the eye of another the ideas that he intends shall be received. His power to do this depends upon his exclusive title to his invention, and upon the fact that each copy constitutes a valuable