Jeffreys v. Boosey, London (1854)

Source: Squire Law Library, Cambridge University

Jeffreys v. Boosey, London (1854), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer,

Back | Record | Images | Commentaries: [1]
Record-ID: uk_1854

Permanent link:

Full title:
Jeffreys v. Boosey (1854) 4 HLC 815

Full title original language:

The second decision of the House of Lords to consider the nature of copyright law. As was the case in Donaldson v. Becket (1774) (uk_1774) the law lords were in disagreement with the majority of common law judges invited to speak to the issue for the consideration of the House. In the course of their opinions, two of the law lords (Lord Brougham and Lord St Leonards) explicitly reject the concept of copyright at common law. Rather than a natural authorial property right, they present copyright as a purely statutory phenomenon specifically grounded in public interest concerns. Ultimately, the Lords decided that a foreign national, resident abroad, but first publishing in Britain, enjoys no protection in his work under British copyright law.

1 Commentary:

  • Deazley, R., Rethinking Copyright: History, Theory, Language (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Press, 2006)

  • Clark, A.J., The Movement for International Copyright in Nineteenth Century America (Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1973)

  • Barnes, J.J., Authors, Publishers and Politicians: The Quest for an Anglo-American Copyright Agreement 1815-1854 (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1974)

Related documents in this database:

Author: N/A

Publisher: N/A

Year: 1854

Location: London

Language: English

Source: Squire Law Library, Cambridge University

Persons referred to:

Addison, Joseph
Alderson, Edward Hall
Ashurst, William
Atticus, Titus Pomponius
Bach, Johann Sebastian
Bellini, Vincenzo
Boosey, Thomas
Bovill, Sir William
Brougham, Henry Peter, 1st Baron Brougham and Vaux
Byles, Sir John Barnard
Byron, George Gordon, 6th Baron Byron of Rochdale
Charles II
Cicero, Marcus Tullius
Coke, Sir Edward
Coleridge, John Taylor
Crompton, Charles John
Elizabeth I
Ellenborough, Edward Law, 1st Baron
Erle, William
Kelly, Sir Fitzroy Edward
Kenyon, Lloyd Kenyon, 1st Baron
Mansfield, William Murray, 1st Earl
Maule, William Henry
Milton, John
Monboddo, James Burnett, Lord
Newton, Sir Isaac
Parke, James, 1st Baron Wensleydale
Platt, Sir Thomas Joshua
Pollock, Jonathan Frederick
Quain, Sir John Richard
Richard I, Coeur de Lion
Ricordi, Giovanni
Rolfe, Robert Monsey, 1st Baron Cranworth
Rousseau, Jean Jacques
Scarlett, James
Shadwell, Lancelot
Sugden, Edward Burtenshaw, 1st Baron St Leonards
Tenterden, Charles Abbott, 1st Baron
Thurlow, Edward, 1st Baron
Voltaire, François Marie Arouet de
Wightman, William
Wilde, Thomas, 1st Baron Truro
William III
Williams, Edward Vaughan
Wood, William Page, 1st Baron Hatherley
Yates, Joseph

Places referred to:

Cases referred to:
Anonymous 1 Siderf. 171
Arnold v. Arnold 2 Myl. & Cr. 256
Attorney General v. Forbes 2 Clark & F. 48
Bach v. Longman (1777) 2 Cowp. 623
Beard v. Egerton (1849) 3 Com. Ben. Rep. 97
Beckford v. Hood (1798) 7 Term. Rep. 620
Bentley v. Foster (1839) 10 Sim. 329
Bentley v. Northhouse M. & M. 66
Boosey v. Davidson (1847) 18 Law Journ. Q.B. 174; 13 Q.B. Rep. 257
Boosey v. Purday (1849) 4 Ex Rep 145
Boozey v. Tolkien (1848) 5 CB 476
Chappell v. Purday (1845) 14 M. & W. 303
Clementi v. Walker (1824) 2 B. & C. 861
Cocks v. Purday (1846) 2 Car. & K. 269
D'Almaine v. Boosey (1835) 1 Y. & C. 288
Davidson v. Bohn, 18, L.J. C.P. 15
De la Chaumette v. The Bank of England 2 Barn. & Ad. 385
Delondre v. Shaw (1828) 2 Sim. 237
Don v. Lippmann (1837) 5 Clark & F 1
Donaldson v. Becket (1774) 4 Burr. 2408, 2 Bro. P.C. 129
Duke of Queensbury v. Shebbeare (1758) 2 Eden 329
Edgebery v. Stephens 2 Salk 447
Elsworth v. Cole 2 M. & W. 31
Guichard v. Mori (1831) 9 Law J. Ch. 227
Hinton v. Donaldson (1773)
Hunter v. Potts (1791) 4 T.R. 182
Jeffreys v. Boosey (1854) 4 HLC 815
Millar v. Taylor (1769) 4 Burr. 2303
Milne v. Graham 1 B. & C. 192
Ollendorf v. Black (1851) 20 Law J. Ch. 165
Page v. Townsend (1832) 5 Sim. 395
Pisani v. Lawson (1838) 8 Sc. 182; 6 Bing. N.C. 90; 8 Dowl. P.C. 57
Power v. Walker (1814) 3 M. & S. 7
Prince Albert v. Strange (1849), 1 Hall & T., 18 L.J. Ch. 120
Roper v. Streater (1672) Bac. Abr. 6th ed., Vol.IV, 209
Stationers' Company v. Seymour (1677) 1 Mod. 256
The Ipswich Case Godb. 252
The Sussex Peerage Case (1844) 11 Clark & F. 136
Thomas v. Advocate General 12 Clark & F. 1
Tonson v. Collins (1761) 1 Black W. 301
Tuerloote v. Morrison (1611) 1 Bulstr. 134; Yelv. 198
University of Cambridge v. Bryer (1812) 16 East's 317
Wells v. Porter (1831) 3 Scott 141; 2 Hodges 78
Wheaton v. Peters (1834) 33 U.S. 591
White v. Geroch (1819) 2 B. & Ald. 298

Institutions referred to:
Chapel Royal
Court of Common Pleas
Court of Exchequer, England
Court of High Commission
Court of King's Bench
Court of Queen's Bench
Star Chamber
Stationers' Company
Stationers' Hall

Aliens Act, 1483, 1 Ric.III, c.9
Copyright Act, 1801, 41 Geo.III, c.107
Copyright Act, 1814, 54 Geo.III, c.156
Copyright Amendment Act, 1842, 5 & 6 Vict., c.45
Dramatic Literary Property Act, 1833, 3 & 4 Will.IV, c.15
Engravers' Copyright Act, 1735, 8 Geo.II, c.13
Engravers' Copyright Act, 1766, 7 Geo.III, c.38
Engravers' Copyright Act, 1777, 17 Geo.III, c.57
Importation Act, 1739, 12 Geo.II, c.36
International Copyright Act, 1838, 1 & 2 Vict., c.59
International Copyright Act, 1844, 7 & 8 Vict., c.12
International Copyright Act, 1852, 15 & 16 Vict., c.12
Licensing Act, 1662, 13 & 14 Car.II, c.33
Licensing of the Press Act, 1664, 16 Cha.II, c.8
Printers and Binders Act, 1533, Hen.VIII, c.15
Statute of Anne, 1710, 8 Anne, c.19
Statute of Monopolies, 1624, 21 Jac.I, c.3
U.S. Copyright Act 1831, 21st Cong., 2d Sess., 4 Stat. 436

book trade
common law copyright
foreign reprints
music publishing

Responsible editor: Ronan Deazley

Copyright History resource developed in partnership with:

Our Partners

Copyright statement

You may copy and distribute the translations and commentaries in this resource, or parts of such translations and commentaries, in any medium, for non-commercial purposes as long as the authorship of the commentaries and translations is acknowledged, and you indicate the source as Bently & Kretschmer (eds), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900) (

With the exception of commentaries that are available under a CC-BY licence (compliant with UKRI policy) you may not publish individual documents or parts of the database for any commercial purposes, including charging a fee for providing access to these documents via a network. This licence does not affect your statutory rights of fair dealing.

Although the original documents in this database are in the public domain, we are unable to grant you the right to reproduce or duplicate some of these documents in so far as the images or scans are protected by copyright or we have only been able to reproduce them here by giving contractual undertakings. For the status of any particular images, please consult the information relating to copyright in the bibliographic records.

Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900) is co-published by Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, 10 West Road, Cambridge CB3 9DZ, UK and CREATe, School of Law, University of Glasgow, 10 The Square, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK