Aug. 9, 1900]
The Nation.
103
tunate if the fear of showing favoritism should confuse the whole fssue, and leave us by default the old agreement.
Justice Davy of the New York Su- Preme Court has rendered a decision to the effect that an action for damages will le when the “right of privacy” is violated. In this case a young woman’s Portrait was used as an advertisement without her consent, and a demurrer to her complaint has been overruled. The Court says that the plaintiff was not “within the category of what might be denominated public character,” and that there is no intrinsic improbability in the claim that she suffered mental distress because she was forced into this category. To desire a life of privacy, the Court continues, is entirely legiti- mate, and to print and post in public Places as an advertisement the likeness of @ person who wishes to avold noto- riety, may unquestionably injure the rep- utation as well as the feelings. Further- more, if a lithographic likeness, owing to its beauty, is of great value as a trademark or an advertising medium, this value belongs to the person whose features are represented, and not to any Person who chooses to make use of the Ukeness.
Some of the reasoning by which Jus- tice Davy supports his decision is not altogether satisfactory. Privacy, he says, Is regarded as a product of clvil- ization, and was unknown and unsought among the barbarous tribes. The pri- vacy of the home in every civilized coun- try 1s regarded as sacred, and any in- vasion of it tends to destroy domestic and individual happiness, But many ber- Darous tribes are extremely particular on this point, and the customs of the Mohammedans are too well known to be referred to. On the other hand, it is only necessary to take up a copy of one of our sensational journals in order to 00 how far we regard the privacy of the home as sacred. It might more proper- ly be sald that civilisation consists in giving the protection of the law to those customs and those feelings concerning privacy which the maintenance of the in- stitution of the family in its perfection requires. Some years ago the Court of Appeals took the unfortunate position that a surviving relative could not suf- fer, in the eye of the law, because of the exhibition of a memorial of a deceased Person which that person might have ob- fected to if living. In that case all the surviving relatives of a woman of high Position protested against the erection of a statue of ber by an “art associa tion” of dubious character; but the ma- Jority of the Court of Appeals held that the feelings of these relatives were in- Sured only in their fancy. The Judges of the lower courts, men not regarded in the profession as inferior in their abili- ties to those who reviewed their decision,
gave substantial reasons for thinking Such injuries not fanciful. But even the Court of Appeals admitted that living eople had rights of privacy, and it ts Probable that Justice Davy's declelon will be sustained,
The House of Lords has finally deter- mined an interesting question under the law of copyright. During the year 1896 Lord Rosebery made a number of public speeches at meetings which reporters were invited to attend. The Timea sent its representatives, who prepared re- ports of the speeches, which were then Published. Other reporters were present, ‘and also reported the speeches for publi- cation, In 1899 a publisher, Lane, issued & book entitled “Appreciations and Ad- Greases by Lord Rosebery,’ which was made up of verbatim coptes of the Times's reports, the copying being without its consent. Lord Rosebery made no claim to copyright in his speeches. The Times then brought its action against Lane, al- loging that he had infringed its copy- right, it having duly registered its re- ports according to therequirements of the Copyright Law. There was no dispute concerning the facts, the sole issue being whether reporters of the public speeches of other people were authors or not, with- in the meaning of the statute. It was al- 80 admitted that the reports were prac- tleally exact reproductions of Lord Rose- bery’s words. They left out nothing. they added nothing, and there was no Paraphrasing or epitomizing or compos- ing. The speeches might, in fact, have been reproduced by a phonograph, so far as any personal contribution by the re- porters was concerned. An injunction ‘was granted in the Chancery Diviston, but the decision was reversed in the Court of Appeal. Now the House of Lords, four judges against one, has de- finitively established the reporters’ right, or that of their employers, Lord Rose- bery, It was contended by counsel, was the author of his speech; but the re- porter was the author of the report of his speech. One of the most effective arguments employed for the Times was that if @ man had a perfect memory, and wrote out by heart with complete accu- racy @ speech which he had heard, he would have no protection, whereas, if he only gave the substance of It fn his own words, he would be entitled to copyright. The case was extremely well argued, Mr. Augustine Birrell doing ‘is best for the publisher, Lane; and the full report of the decision will be await- ed with Interest.
‘The exodus of the Jews from Rumania 1s explained by @ correspondent of the London Times in a letter which reflects severely on the Government of that country, The Independence of Rumania ‘was established In 1878 by. the treaty of Berlin, Article 44 of that treaty declares
that “In Rumania the difference of re- Ugious creeds and confessions shall not be alleged against any pereon as a ground for exclusion or incapacity in matters relating to the enjoyment of civil and Political rights, admission to public em- Dloyments, functions, and honors, or the exercise of the various professions and Industries in any locality whatsoever.” In spite of this explicit provision and of tno Temonstrances of England, France, and Germany, the Rumanian Government has practically denied citizenship to the Jowas In 1879 about 800 Jewish soldiers were naturalized, but during the last twenty years less than 100 Rumanian Jews, members of a few wealthy fami- Mes, have been enfranchised. Of the 260,000 Jews in the kingdom, most of them descended from those who have been settled there for generations, only 900 are now citizens, Even in their case the right 1s purely personal, and does not descend to thelr children. The Jews, being thus aliens in the eye of the law, are denied free education. There are 30,000 children of their race who are en- titled to it, but only by paying foes are 3,000 of them able to obtain educational ‘advantages which are free to Rumantans, The higher schools are closed to them, and they are hampered in establishing schools of thelr own. No Jow ts permit ted to hold a Government office, or a position in a hospital or on a railway. No Jew may be an architect, a veteri- nary surgeon, a dispensing chemist, or a lawyer. No Jew can be employed in the National Bank, or serve in the Chamber of Commerce, or hold a commission in the army. A Jew cannot sell tobacco or salt, and by a special act against peddlers 20,000 of these have been brought to the verge of starvation. They have been ex- pelled from the country, and every ob- stacle has been placed in the way of thetr obtaining a living in the towns,
‘The Jews have until recently endured thelr persecutions with patience, and, while not enjoying the rights of cltizen- ship, they have discharged its duties. They have performed military service, and fought in the campatgn of Plevna. But the recent harvest failures have made their condition intolerable, and they are now trying to escape to the United States, to Canada, to Cyprus, even to Turkey, knowing that they can be no worse off, wherever they may go. This shocking spectacle has disgusted Burope and alarmed the Rumanian Gov- ernment, which is trying to cover up its cruelties. It is sald that the Rothschilds have let {t be understood that that Gov- ernment will find it hard to borrow mon- ey hereafter—a report which we hope 1s true, If the Jewish bankers will teach Christian rulers a few lessons in ele- mentary humanity by cutting off thelr financial supplies, {t will be an applica~ tfon of the “money power” which even the Bryanites might condone, �
