# Primary Sources on Copyright - Record Viewer
Letters from Sumner to Story, Washington D.C. (1834)

Source: Library of Congress, Joseph Story Papers

Citation:
Letters from Sumner to Story, Washington D.C. (1834), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org

Back | Record | Images | No Commentaries
Translation only | Transcription only | Show all | Bundled images as pdf
            Chapter 1 Page 2 of 8 total

No Translation available.

or dissenting from the opinion of the Court. He agreed
with Judge Thompson upon the common law right
& further said that he must dissent from another
point of the opinion of the Court - viz. that the U. States
qua U.S. had no common law. Judge Mclean,
after Baldwin had concluded, made an expla-
nation of the opinion of the Court on the Statute
point - he re-stated his own opinion which was based
upon the Statute of 1790 - & said that this was all
clearly stated in the opinion he had read. Judge
Thompson, with intemperate warmth, said that
if it had been clearly stated there would have been
no need of explanation. The Chief Justice here
made a statement of the opinion of the Court on
the debated point - which was listened to with
great attention. McLean then read the very
words of the opinion & added that this dialogue
across from one to another was very unplea-
sant. Thompson rejoined with a good deal
of warmth, while Baldwin, by looks & motions,
& [XXX] whispers, evidently sided with him.
The Chief Justice then said that unless he had
thought that the opinion as read needed
explanation, he should not have made it.
He feared lest the public should think the Court
were [equally] divided, as to the necessity of complying
with the requisites of the 4th section of [the] Statute of

    

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) (www.copyrighthistory.org).

You may not publish these documents 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