To Surppress Theft

The playwrights of the are asking Congress for the passage of an act which will adequately protect them and their property from robbery. At present there is only a theoretical proteetion for the author of a play. He has his copyright and his common-law rights, it is true, but they cannot be effectively enforced. If a play be sucessful, dishonest managers set about stealing it a cynical disregard of the laws, both human and moral, that is born and bred of long usage. It has become the custom to steal plays, and often there are several companies in the country playing versions of the same play and robbing the author of his profits. It is true that the despoiled author can obtain an injunction from the Circuit Court of the United States. But the injunction can be enforced only in the circuits or territory over which the judge granting the writ has jurisdiction. The despoiler with his company is able to go into the adjoining jurisdiction and there produce the stolen play and rob the author until a new injunction is obtained. The process of prevention is not only expensive and troublesome to the author, but it is ineffective. It does not break up the trade of dramatic piracy. The dramatic authors have for some years been trying to obtain from Congress a law that would recognize and remedy the wrong that is thus done them, and there is now pending a bilí that seems sufficient to accomplish their object. By a simple provisión amendatory of the existing law it is proposed to make an injunction restraining the presetation ' of a protected play effective in every part oí the United States. In other words, if this bill pass, one injunction will be sufficent to suppress one stolen play. Of cource the party to be restrained is to be permitted to move for a dissolution of the injunction in any circuit in which its enforcement is sought, just as he may move for a dissolution in the circuit where the writ was granted. In the interest of common honesty, as well as of the dignity of the courts of the United States, whose one command should be made sufficient, this bill for the suppression of theft ought to be passed. Congress, it is reported, is not to be permitted to indulge in general legislation, but the edict of this effect, we imagine, is based upon the fear that if the floodgates were open, dangerous questions, questions upon which Presidential candidates fear to express an opinión, might be introduced, and might lead to unpleasant debate, and perhaps unpleasant conclusions. But surely a simple bill intended to make effective the laws that bestow rights of property upon dramatic authors cannot be dangerous to the most timid of candidates. This bill might be named "A Bill to promote Respect for the law." Ko one can refuse to further such an object. -