reduce the term of sixty years would divide with him. "Do not,"
he said, "give me your support, if all that you mean to grant to
men of letters is a miserable addition of fourteen or fifteen
years to the present term. I do not wish for such support. I
despise it." Not wishing to obtrude on the learned Serjeant a
support which he despised, I had no course left but to take the
sense of the House on the second reading. The circumstances are
now different. My noble friend's bill is not at present a good
bill; but it may be improved into a very good bill; nor will he,
I am persuaded, withdraw it if it should be so improved. He and
I have the same object in view; but we differ as to the best mode
of attaining that object. We are equally desirous to extend the
protection now enjoyed by writers. In what way it may be
extended with most benefit to them and with least inconvenience
to the public, is the question.

The present state of the law is this. The author of a work has a
certain copyright in that work for a term of twenty-eight years.
If he should live more than twenty-eight years after the
publication of the work, he retains the copyright to the end of
his life.

My noble friend does not propose to make any addition to the term
of twenty-eight years. But he proposes that the copyright shall
last twenty-five years after the author's death. Thus my noble
friend makes no addition to that term which is certain, but makes
a very large addition to that term which is uncertain.

My plan is different. I would made no addition to the uncertain
term; but I would make a large addition to the certain term. I