OUR CONTINENTAL CORRESPONDENCE.
PARIS, December 31, 1867.

AN American or an English author justly looks with surprise upon the extent to which literary copartnership is carried in France, for it is fatal to genius and to power. Some sort of literary copartnership is indispensable to authors. When Shakspeare and Walter Scott drew from the old chroniclers the rough foundation-stones on which they were to rear their stately fabric, the chroniclers were their literary copartners. When critics point out mistakes in the construction or conduct of works, and the author profits by their judgment, the critics are his literary copartners. These assistances are favorable to art and to artists. They not only do not militate against originality, they actually furnish it with occasions to produce itself. They act on the author's mind as the falling apple suggested inquiries which led to the discovery of the law of gravitation.

There is an abyss between this assistance and the French literary co-labor which I find so clearly exhibited in an article I read the other day in one of our newspapers, I must beg permission to translate and place it here:

"So long as authors wrote only for honor-so long as trade occupied merely a secondary rank in art, the co-laborer did not care to join his name with the principal author's. What use was there to do so? Reputation is a thing which, by nature, cannot be divided; it goes entirely to him who merits it. But when other ideas came into vogue; when authors considered in a work in the first place the profit they could lawfully draw from it; and when reputation came to be valued as a means of making money, it became proper that all those who had taken part in the common work should associate their names with it; for the noise made by this name was a sort of capital which would one day yield interest. This, and none other, is the reason the publication of literary copartnership has at present become more frequent than formerly. As in the theatres the profits have become largest, and the organization of receipts is most thorough, it is in the theatres we see the habit of literary copartnership most widely spread. Literary copartnip does not deserve all the reprobation poured on it. It is but a confession, justly due the greater part of the time, of that which an author owes to the friends who often have given him the leading idea of the piece, or who have aided him with their advice. MM. Emile Augier and Paul Foussier are intimate friends. They pass their evenings together talking about a subject before their minds, and Les Lionnes Pauvres' is the fruit of these incessant conversations. To which one of them is the best part of the work due? M. Foussier says it is due to M. Emile Augier; but the latter declares it belongs, of right, to his friend. Now, how shall the question be solved? In justice both names should be united, as both talents were. What can be more proper than this copartnership, and what more decorous than this confession to the public? It is true you can never root out of the public mind the idea that one of the co-laborers did more than the other, and the public naturally designates the author of most reputation as this one. 'Les Lionnes Pauvres' is attributed to M. Emile Augier by an irresistible movement of public opinion. Nevertheless, M. Paul Foussier is not despoiled of the share of honor which belongs to him, and if he goes to another theatre with a piece written entirely by himself, the recollection of this co-labor will recommend him to the manager and to the public. M. Scribe, who thoroughly understood commercial accounts,

was always honesty itself in his relations with his co-laborers. The honor of the vaudevilles played was altogether his, for the public attributed them to him alone; but he always acknowledged his obligations on the playbills, and never failed to share copyright with his co-laborers. An obscure young man one day came up from Lyons (where he had brought out a vaudeville) with a letter of introduction to Scribe. He was cordially received, and left with Scribe the manuscript of a terrible melodrama. Soon afterwards he made M. Anicet Bourgeois's acquaintance, worked with him and then with Merville, brought out piece after piece, and forgot his visit to Scribe. Three years afterwards he was asked to write a drama. This reminded him of the play he had left with Scribe. He went to see him. Scribe did not recognize him, but when he mentioned the title of the piece, Scribe looked in one of his boxes (for everything was in order in his study), drew forth a manuscript, and said to him, 'Have you time to spare?' 'Yes.' 'Very well, then; I shall read you a piece.' Scribe immediately began to read the charming vaudeville entitled 'La Chanoinesse.' At its conclusion he asked the visitor his opinion. The latter declared the play charming, and made sure it would be very successful; then, reverting to the subject of his visit, spoke of his drama. 'Why, you have just heard it,' replied Scribe; and as the visitor expressed his astonishment, Scribe added: 'My dear sir, I found an idea in your drama, and used it; and as I consider an idea everything in a piece, the play is our joint production.' Incidents of this nature are common in Scribe's history. One day Mazères happened to be on a visit to him, and by chance related the anecdote of Turenne captured by a gang of counterfeiters, and liberated on his parole-adding, as he ended the story, 'Something might be made of that.' Scribe replied: 'I have long been familiar with that anecdote, but I have never thought of turning it to account; but I shall think over it.' There the matter ended for the time. Scribe long afterwards made use of the anecdote to write his opera 'Le Serment.' M. Mazères returned to Paris after a long absence, heard the piece was in rehearsal, went to see it, and the next day wrote to Scribe: 'I demand my share as a co-laborer in the opera you are now rehearsing; but I do not ask to be named. It is true I have not written a line in it; but I might have done so, for it was I who told you the anecdote which forms the foundation of your opera.' Scribe admitted the claim. He gave Mazères his share of the copyright. In these limits literary copartnership does not merit the anathemas heaped on it. As soon as it is admitted every work of art is in one respect a work of trade, we must deduce the conclusion that all those who have contributed to make it what it is have also a right to a fair share of the profits immediately accruing in money or in reputation, which may become a source of new profits. It does deserve blame when it gives rise to those dirty intrigues which we too often witness. A young author carries his play to a manager; the latter requires him to take as his copartner the playwright-in-ordinary to his theatre, with whom he, the manager, secretly shares the profits. When you see three names on a playbill for one vaudeville, you may almost be sure that the third person did not write one word of the play. He is a mere business man, a go-between, who undertakes the fatiguing duty of seeing all the people who must be visited and talked to-managers, actors, and actresses the authors wish to play in the piece. Sometimes he is a third party who has been able to bring together two writers who were unse

Mr. Egbert Hazard desired, before the organization of the meeting, to state briefly the motives that had induced him to call it. He had travelled through the different countries of Europe during the last three or four years, and had encountered many authors, publishers, and even readers of books, who expressed a desire that some understanding between the different literary nations of the earth should be arrived at by means of which recompense might be yielded to authors for their labors in countries other than their own; and further, that on the part of readers some means be adopted by which, without studying so many languages, they would be enabled to extend their knowledge of the literature of other countries. The northern nations of Europe had been more earnest in their expressions. The literary men of Sweden and Norway were the first to appeal strongly to him upon the subject. He (Mr. Hazard) felt that they should be accorded the free privilege of translations. In conversing with publishers and authors in England the desire was universal, and they were willing to carry it out if assisted by their professional brethren on this side of the Atlantic. For the purpose of ascertaining the opinion of American publishers and authors this meeting had been called, and any measures that might be adopted here would secure the hearty co-operation of England and France.

It was moved, seconded, and carried unanimously that Mr. Putnam be appointed President of the meeting.

The chairman remarked that he did not come prepared to take any active part in the matter, as he had not made it a subject of study, but was willing to act in any capacity that might be useful. Mr. M. N. Hurd was appointed Secretary. The chairman further observed that one of the last official acts of Mr. Everett when Secretary of State was an effort to effect a treaty for international copyright. Such treaty was prepared in expectation that it would be ratified by this Senate, but for some reason or other it fell through. The fact that the number of American books printed in England had largely increased was perhaps sufficient evidence that sooner or later it might be quite as much a selfish interest for American authors to have a copyright in England as it was for English authors to have a copyright here.

Mr. Ivison supposed that the real question was to do justice to the great reading public, and at the same time to the authors. His firm paid on an average about $50,000 a year for the books published by them. If a plan would be devised by

which the people could have cheap books, and at the same time foreign authors have justice done them, it could undoubtedly be carried out. It seemed to him that the best mode would be to have a law passed by Congress and the British Parliament making it obligatory on the publisher to pay five per cent. upon the wholesale price of the book belonging to a foreign author. Were such a law adopted, there would be no opportunity for monopoly.

Mr. Miller could not agree with the last speaker. He believed that authors were sufficiently remunerated abroad, and they ought to be satisfied with it. A great cry was raised about " poor authors," but he (Mr. Miller) never saw one yet. He was willing to pay authors as liberally as any one, but objected to the plan proposed.

Mr. Tompkins, of England, said that the copyright in England was in a very unsatisfactory state, and it was absolutely necessary that some measures should be promptly taken for the benefit alike of publishers, authors, and the reading public.

Mr. Ivison desired to correct a misapprehension which Mr. Miller appeared to entertain. His (the speaker's) object was that there should be no restriction on publishers, but those who did publish should secure to authors this five per cent.

Mr. Prime contended that if he wrote a book he had both a moral and a legal right to it the world over as well as to any other part of the property he possessed. Many of his works had been printed, and in one instance where upwards of one hundred thousand copies had been sold, on application to the English publisher he was forwarded the muuificent sum of $100.

Mr. Hazard earnestly wished that this meeting would take some forward steps in the formation of the society; for, fortified with our expression on this side of the water, there would then be plain sailing on the other. The publishers, authors, and translators of Europe were willing to meet their American brethren on any just terms that they were disposed to present to them.

Dr. Prime offered the following resolutions, which were adopted :

Resolved, That this meeting is of opinion that measures should be adopted with a view to the establishment of international copyright between the United States and Great Britain and the nations of Continental Europe.

Resolved, further, That a committee of five be appointed to digest a system of regulation which may serve as a basis for an international copyright law, and to report at a future meeting, and that the chairman of this meeting be the chairman of the committee.

Dr. Shepherd proposed the following resolution, which was also adopted :

Resolved, That it is expedient to make an appeal to the natural sense of justice and equity of the people of the United States on international copyright questions.

The following committee was then appointed:Mr. Putnam, Rev. Dr. Prime, and Messrs. James Parton, Egbert Hazard, and Henry Ivison. The meeting then adjourned, subject to the call of the committee.

[From the "PRINTERS' CIRCULAR" of March.] MR. BALDWIN'S INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT ACT.We elsewhere discuss the question of copyright in general and the principles which underlie the rela tions between authors and the public. The matter, just now, happens to be one of not merely specula tive interest to our readers, in view of the bill to create an International Copyright, which was re