Yale Digital Edition of the Works of Samuel Johnson

Back to Search

Works of Samuel Johnson

Back to Search

Table of Contents

< Previous document Next document >

Considerations on the case of Dr T.—s Sermons abridg’d by Mr Cave

- Export Citation
- Export Annotation

By Johnson, Samuel

Samuel Johnson: Johnson on Demand

Image view

Print
Save
Share
Cite

Translation

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE CASE OF DR. T—S SERMONS ABRIDGED BY MR. CAVE (1739)

Joseph Trapp (1679–1747) made his name as a controversialist in support of Anglican High Church views. He was a friend and supporter of Henry Sacheverell (1674–1724), whose Jeremiads about “the Church in danger” are said to have fired the religious zeal of the young Johnson (Life, I.38–39). No inconsiderable writer in other genres, Trapp was also an accomplished poet, critic, and dramatist. He was the first Professor of Poetry at Oxford (1708–18); he translated the complete works of Virgil into blank verse (1731) and Paradise Lost into Latin (1741–44). In addition, he published his poetry lectures, written in Latin, in three volumes (Praelectiones Poeticae, 1711–19).1

Introducing an unpublished piece of Johnsoniana in the Gentleman’s Magazine for July 1787 (LVII.555), John Nichols reviewed the part of Trapp’s publishing career that particularly affected Edward Cave, the founder of the Magazine, and his “oracle,” Samuel Johnson.

Dr. Trapp, it will be recollected, was a popular preacher; and, about the year 1739, when Methodism might be said to be in its infancy, preached Four Sermons “On the Nature, Folly, Sin and Danger, of being righteous over-much”; which were published by Austen and Gilliver, and had an extensive sale. Mr. Cave, ever ready to oblige his readers with temporary subjects, took an extract from them, and promised a continuation, which never appeared; so that it was either stopped by a prosecution, or made up by other means. On all difficult occasions Johnson was Cave’s oracle. And the paper now before us was certainly written on that occasion.

Trapp preached his sermons in April 1739, in Christ Church, Newgate Street, London, and published them soon afterwards. They vigorously denounce Methodists for their overly rigorous observation of some religious practices and their potentially self-destructive cultivation of doubts, or “scruples,” as religious worries were often called. Cave published an abridgment

Page 48

of the sermons in the Gentleman’s Magazine for June 1739 (IX.288–94). Whoever did the editing took many passages verbatim from Trapp’s work, but broadly summarized others. The first thirty-seven of Trapp’s sixty-nine pages are contained in seven columns of the Gentleman’s Magazine. Nevertheless, Trapp was inclined to sue for breach of copyright. About this time, in the case of Gyles v. Wilcox, Lord Chancellor Hardwicke had ruled in favor of a plaintiff, “for an injunction to stay the printing of a book in octavo, intitled Modern Crown Law,” because it “borrowed verbatim from Sir Matthew Hale’s Pleas of the Crown.”2 The ruling also expressed a belief in the legality of some kinds of abridgments, but Trapp was litigious.3 Although the general law concerning copyright passed in 1710 (8 Anne c.21) might favor him, Cave must have worried about the possibility that case law would be established against him, as in Gyles v. Wilcox, and put him out of the business of assembling a “magazine” of previously printed content. He canceled a promised continuation in July of extracts from Trapp; he rigged up a letter from a reader testifying that he had bought several of the books extracted by Cave, including Trapp’s Four Sermons (June 1740, p. 297); and he hired Johnson to write up points to be used in his legal defense, if it came to that.

Johnson wrote thirty-one numbered “considerations” on ten pieces of galley-paper, the narrow, rough paper used to produce publishers’ proof sheets.

The manuscript, long in the possession of the Nichols family and now in the Donald and Mary Hyde Collection (Hyde Case 9 [14]), is in Johnson’s hand. He probably wrote it soon after the appearance of the abridgment of Trapp in the June 1739 Gentleman’s Magazine.

Johnson’s defense of abridgment rests on his allocation of rights to readers who have purchased a book. They have the right, he says, to judge the book, and abridgment, like translating, confuting, and censuring, is an aspect of judgment.4 Clearly, Johnson was arguing for victory in his work

Page 49

for Cave, and he could argue the other side of the question too, as Boswell reports: “I said, printing an abridgement of a work was allowed, which was only cutting the horns and tail off the cow.——JOHNSON. ‘No, sir; ’tis making the cow have a calf’” (Life, V.72).

In the first publication of the manuscript (July 1787), Nichols took some liberties with Johnson’s words. This was not uncommon, but since the gap between composition and publication is so great in this case, we depart from our usual reliance on printed copy and use the manuscript as our copy-text. Even though they were likely to be changed in publication, we retain Johnson’s capitalization, spelling, and punctuation because we cannot precisely predict how they would have been changed. Readers of this volume will observe, however, that Johnson’s original punctuation is much leaner than that used by the Gentleman’s Magazine at any period. Johnson’s many deletions and interlineations are indicated in the textual apparatus by means of angle brackets (for additions) and square brackets (for deletions). Some changes are not in Johnson’s hand and are so noted. We have adopted some changes made in the Gentleman’s Magazine and made emendations, both of which we indicate in the textual notes. Katie Gemmill assisted us in assembling this complicated textual apparatus.

Considerationsa

on the case of Dr T.—s Sermons

abridg’d by Mr Caveb

1. That the Copy of a Book1 is the Property of the Authour, and that he may by sale or otherwise transfer that property to another, who has a right to be protected in the possession of that Propertyc so transfer’d, is not to be denied. 2. That the Complainants ared lawfully invested with the property of this copy is likewise granted. 3. But the Complainants have mistaken the Nature of this Property, and in consequence of their mistake have supposed it toe be invaded by an act in itself legal, and justifiable by an

Page 50

uninterrupted series of precedents from the first establishmentf of printing among us down to the present time. 4. He that purchases the Copy of a Book purchases the sole right of printing itg and ofh vending the Books printedi according to it, but has no right to add to it, or take from it without the Authours Consent, who still preserves such a right in it, as follows from the right everyj Man has to preserve his own reputation. 5. Every single book so sold by the Proprietor becomes the property of the Buyer, who purchases with the book the right of makingk suchl use of it as he shall think most convenient either for his own improvement orm amusement, or the benefit or entertainment of Mankind. 6. This right the Reader of a book may use many ways to the disadvantage both of the Authour and the Proprietor2 which yet they have not any rights to complain of because the Authour when he wrote and the Proprietor when he purchased the copy, knew or ought to have known, that then one wrote and the other purchased under the hazard of such treatment from the buyer and Reader, and without any security from the bad consequences of that treatment except the excellenceo of the Book. 7.p Reputation and Property are of different kinds, one kindq of each is more necessary tor be secured by the Law than

Page 51

another, and the Law has provided more effectually for its defence. My character as a Man a Subject or a Trader is under the protection of the law, but my Reputation as an Authour is at the mercy of the Reader who lyes under no other obligations to do me justice than those of Religion and Morality. If a Man calls me rebel or Bankrupt, I may prosecute ands punish him, but if a Reader calls me Ideot or Plagiary I have no remedy, since by selling him the Book, I sell him likewise the privileget of judging and declaring his Judgement, and can appealu only to other readers if I think myself injured. 8. Inv different Characters we are more or less protected; to hiss a pleader atw the Bar would perhaps be deemed illegal and punishable, but to hiss a dramatic writer is justifiable by custom. 9. What is here said of the writer extends itself naturally to the purchaser of a Copy since the one seldom suffers without the other. 10. By these Liberties it is obvious, that Authours and Proprietors may often suffer and sometimes unjustly, but as these Liberties arex encouraged and allowed for the same reason with writing itself, for the discovery and propagation of Truth though like other human Goods they have their alloys and ill consequences yet as theiry advantages abundantly preponderate,z they have never yet been abolish’d or restrained. 11. Thus every Book when it falls into the hands of the Reader, is liable to be examined,a confuted, censured, translated, and abridg’d, any of which may destroy the credits of the Authour orb hinder the sale of the Book.

Page 52

12. That all these Liberties are allowed,c and cannot be prohibited without manifest disadvantage to the publick may be easily proved, but we shall confine ourselves to the Liberty of making Epitomes,d which gives occasion to our present enquiry. 13. That an uninterrupted Prescription confers a right will be easily granted, especially if it appears that the Prescription pleaded in defence of that right might at any time have been interrupted had it not been always thought agreeable to Reason and to Justice. 14. The numberless abridgements that are to be found of all kinds of writings afforde sufficient evidence that they were always thought legal, for they are printed with the names of the Abbreviators and publishers, and without the least appearance of a clandestine transaction. Many of the Books sof abridged were the properties of Men who wanted neither wealth nor interest, nor Spirit to have sued for justice,g if they had thought themselves injured.h Many of these Abridgements must have been made by men whom we can least suspect of illegal practises, fori there are few books of law that are not abridged. 15. When Bishop Burnet heard that his History of the Reformation was about to be abridged, he did not think of appealingj to the Court of Chancery, but to avoid any misrepresentation of his History epitomised it himself, as he tells us in his Preface.3 16. But lest it should be imagined that an Authour might

Page 53

do this rather by choice than necessity; we shall produce two more instances of the like practise where it would certainly not have been born if it hadk been suspected of illegality. The one inl Clarendon’s History which was abridged in 2 vols 8vo and the other in Bp Burnets Hist of his own time abridged in them same manner.4 The first of these Books was the property of the University of Oxf. a body tenacious enough of their rights, the othern of Bishop Burnet’s Heirs whose circumstances were such as made them very sensible of any diminutiono of their inheritance. 17. It is observable that both these abridgementsp last mentioned with many others that might be produced, were made when the act of Parliament for securing the property of Copies was in Force5 and whichq if that property was injured afforded an easy redress, what thenr can be infer’d from the Silence and Forbearance of the Proprietors, but that they thought an epitome of a book no violation of the right of the proprietor? 18. That their opinion so contrary to their own interest was founded in Reason, wills appear from the Nature and end of an Abridgementt

Page 54

19. The Design of an Abridgement is to benefit mankind by facilitating the attainment of knowledge, andu by contracting arguments,v relations, or descriptions, into a narrow compass, to convey instruction in the easiest method withoutw fatiguing the attention burdening the memory, or impairing the health of the Student. 20. By this method the original Authour becomes perhapsx of less value, andy the Proprietors profits are diminished, but these inconveniences give way to the advantage received by mankind from the easier propagation of knowledge. For as anz incorrect book is lawfullya criticised, and false assertionsb justly confuted, becausec it is more the interestd of mankind that error should be detected and truth discover’d, than that the proprietors of a particular book should enjoy their profits undiminish’d, so a tedious volume may no lesse lawfully be abridged because it is better that the proprietors should sufferf some damage thang that the acquisition of knowledge should be obstructedh with unnecessary difficulties and the valuable hours of thousands thrown away. 21. Therefore as he that buys thei copy6 of a Book, buys it under this conditionj that it is liable to be confuted if it is false, howeverk his property may be affected by such a confutation,

Page 55

so he buysl it likewise liable to be abridged if it be tedious however his property may suffer by the abridgement. 22. Tom abridge a Book therefore is no violation of the right of the Proprietor, because to be subject to the hazard of ann abridgement was ano original condition of the Property. 23. Thus we see the right of abridging authours established both by Reason and the Customs of Trade. But perhaps the necessity of this practise may appear more evident from a consideration of the consequences that must probably follow from the prohibition of it. 24. If Abridgements be condemned as injurious to the proprietor of the Copy. Where will this argument end?p Must not confutations be likewise prohibited for the same reason? or inq writings of entertainment will not criticisms at least be entirely suppressed, as equally hurtful to the Proprietor, and certainly not more necessary to the publick? 25. Will not Authours who write for pay and arer rewarded commonly according to the bulk of their work be tempted to fill their bookss with superfluities and digressionst when the dread of an Abridgment is taken away, as doubtless more negligences would be committed and more falsehoods published, if men were not restrained by the fear of censure and confutation? 26. How many Usefull works will the busy, the indolent, and the less wealthy part of mankind be deprived of. How few will read or purchase forty four large volumes of the transactions of the Royal Society, which in abridgements are generally read to the great improvement of Philosophy. 27. How must general Systems of Sciences be written which are nothing more than epitomes of those authours who have

Page 56

written on particular branches and whose works are made less necessary by such collections. Can he that destroys the profit of many copies be less criminal than he that lessens the sale ofu one? 28. Even to confute an erroneous Book will become more difficult since it has always been a custom to abridge the Authour whose assertions are examined, and sometimes to transcribe all the essential parts of his Book. Must an enquirer after truth be debared from the benefit of such Confutations; unless he purchasesv thew Book however useless that gavex occasion to the Answer.y 29. Having thus endeavoured to prove the legality of abridgements from Custom,z and the necessity of continuing that custom from reason, it remains only that we show that we have not printed the Complainantsa copy but abridged it. 30. This will need no proof since it will appear upon comparing the two books that we have reduced 37 pages to thirteenb of the same print. 31. Ourc design is to give our Readers a short view of the present controversy and wed require that one of these two positions be proved,e either that we have no right to exhibit such a view, or that we can exhibit it without epitomising the writers of each party.

Page 57

Editorial Notes

1 Latin was then the required language of the lectures given by the Oxford Professor of Poetry. For information about Trapp, we rely on Richard Sharp’s article in ODNB. SJ recommended Trapp’s Praelectiones in his preface to the Preceptor (see p. 183 below).

2 Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the High Court of Chancery, in the time of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke: collected by John Tracy Atkyns, H. Woodfall, and W. Strahan (1767), II.143. We draw on our own introduction to a facsimile of the manuscript of SJ’s “Considerations,” published with our notes and transcription (2007).

3 Hardwicke’s notes of 25 January 1740 indicate that Trapp also intended to sue three men named Ceney, Bishop, and Hill (British Library Add MS 36049, fols. 38r–39v). A. D. Barker contends that Hardwicke’s judgment in Gyles v. Wilcox gave Cave heart and that “There is every reason to expect that Cave would have won the case had it gone to court” (p. 325). In Barker’s view, “faced with evidence that the magazine had helped his book and the uncertainty of outcome of his suit, Trapp may have been willing to let the matter drop” (p. 326).

4 On the legal basis of SJ’s argument, see E. L. McAdam, Jr., Dr. Johnson and the English Law (1951), pp. 10–14, and William J. Howard, “Dr. Johnson on Abridgment—A Re-examination,” Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America, 60 (1966), 215–19.

a <Dr Johnson’s> Considerations MS, not in SJ’s hand

b <Dr Trapp.> MS, added below title, not in SJ’s hand

1 Copy of a Book: the right to reproduce the book, also called “copyright” at least as early as 1735 (OED).

c [purchase?] MS

d [are] <may be> MS, not in SJ’s hand

e [an act] <it to> MS

f [two or three illegible characters] <ment> MS

g <it> MS

h <of> MS

i [that copy. And he] <the Books printed> MS

j [Which] every MS

k [use] making MS

l [what] <such> MS

m or [the] MS

2 Proprietor: the bookseller or publisher who purchases the copyright of the book.

n the[y] MS

o [value] excellence MS

p [6] <7> MS

q [of] <kind> MS

r [secure and] <necessary to> MS

s [him] <and> MS

t [sell him likewise the] <admit his> (not in SJ’s hand) privilege MS

u [am obliged to] <can> appeal MS

v [When] In MS

w at emend] a MS

x [be] <are> MS

y the<ir> MS

z preponderate [illegible character] MS

a [censured] examined MS

b [and] <or> MS

c That all these [have been] <Liberties are [allways]> allowed MS

d Epitomes emend] Epitome MS

e [are a proof] <afford> MS

f <so> MS

g to have [obtained] <sued for> justice emend] to [have obtained] <sued for> justice MS

h if they had thought themselves injured [and could have the Courts of Justice]. MS

i [or illegible word] <for> MS

j [does] <did> not <think of> appeal<ing> MS

3 Gilbert Burnet (1643–1715), The Abridgement of the History of the Reformation of the Church of England (1682), sig. A4r.

k [it was] <it had> MS

l [first is] <one in> MS

m [likewise] <in the> MS

4 Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon (1609–74), History of the Rebellion (3 vols. folio, 1702–4) was first abridged in octavo in 1703, but SJ refers to Ex-trait de l’histoire de la rebellion d’Angleterre: Mr. [Jean] Le Clerc’s Account of the Earl of Clarendon’s History of the Civil Wars. Done from the French printed at Amsterdam. By J. O., 2 vols. octavo (1710). Burnet’s History of My Own Times (2 vols. folio, 1724–34) was first abridged in octavo in 1724.

n other emend] othr MS

o [disadvantage] <any diminution> MS

p [Instances] <abridgements> MS

5 “An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by Vesting the Copies of Printed Books in the Authors or Purchasers of such Copies,” 10 April 1710 (c.19), known as the “Statute of Anne,” granted copyright to authors or purchasers (i.e., publishers) for a period of fourteen years, renewable once.

q [so that] [<whi>] and which MS

r <then> MS

s [and] <will> MS

t Abridgement [and] MS

u <and> MS

v [those] arguments MS

w easiest method without GM] easiest without MS

x <perhaps> MS

y [but] and MS

z [it] an MS

a [to] <lawfully> MS

b [two or three illegible characters] assertions MS

c [though] because MS

d [better that] <inte>rest MS

e [with equal] <no less> MS

f [be] suffer MS

g tha[t]<n> MS

h [or discovery of truth] <should be obstructed> MS

i [a Book] <the> MS

6 copy: copyright, right to publish.

j [con] <condition> MS

k [and] <however> MS

l [that] buys MS

m [And a] <To> MS

n [the property was at first acquired] <to be subject to the hazard of an> MS

o <an> MS

p end GM] stop MS

q [the] <in> MS

r and are MS] and who are GM.

s books MS] works GM

t digressions GM] digression MS torn

u of emend] MS torn

v [w] <purchases> MS

w [the] the MS

x g[i]<a>ve MS

y [Must every bad Authour be preserved and purchased, lest the Proprietor of the Copy should suffer by its being abridged in the Confutation?] <Must an enquirer after truth be debared from the benefit of such Confutations; unless he purchases the Book however useless that gave occasion to the Answer.> MS

z [reason and] Custom MS

a complainants MS] complainant’s GM (see Yale, XVIII.306, for SJ’s view of plural possessives)

b [Four]<thir>teen MS

c Our GM] [to the damages they pretend . . .] MS torn

d <we> MS

e proved, GM] proved^ MS

Transcription

Document Details

Document TitleConsiderations on the case of Dr T.—s Sermons abridg’d by Mr Cave

AuthorJohnson, Samuel

Creation Date1739

Publ. DateN/A

Alt. TitleN/A

Contrib. AuthorNichols

ClassificationSubject: Copyright; Subject: Joseph Trapp; Subject: Author; Subject: Publisher; Subject: Abridgement; Genre: Legal brief

PrinterN/A

PublisherNichols

Publ. PlaceLondon

VolumeSamuel Johnson: Johnson on Demand

Login Required

Your subscription has expired.