AN UNUSUAL CASE.

Hokitika Guardian, 2 October 1923, Page 4

AN UNUSUAL CASE.

RIGHTS OF AUTHOR AND EDITOR

AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION. LONDON, Sept. 26 The legal right of an editor to “cut” the work of a famous novelist during serial publication was raised, by Mr Stephen M'Konna, in an notion against the newspaper “Referee” to-day. It was stated that the “Referee” purchased for £SOO the serial rights of a novel entitled “Gloria.” Mr Curnoek, the editor, later invited Mr M'Konna to make alterations. The author refused, hut on July 22 the ■Referee” published an instalment in which heavy “cuts” had been made. The author alleged that these amounted to an infringement of his copyright, but the editor contended that the passages omitted were unsuitable for publication in the “Referee,” particularly two elaborate accounts of the seduction of married and unmarried women. Counsel for the “Referee” urged that a newspaper was not like a book, which could he put away if desired. A newspaper was always open to The children and servants to road. Mr M'Kenna’s counsel retorted that if the “Referee" had made a bad bargain it need not have printed the stun at all. but it had no right to interloro with the author's work. Mr Justice M'Cnrdic asked: “Did the omission of the two seduction stories injure Mr M'Kenna’s literary reputation Counsel: He is the liest judge ol his own reputation. His Honor: Excuse me; no man is the best judge of his own reputation. Counsel: Ho is as gootl a judge as an editor. llis Honor: lam not so sure of l -i n t . The Judge added that, in his view, the author had treated the episode with gr-.'at plow'd - , great ai?i anti great realism. This was a question between the realistic school of novelists and the journalistic school. Finally, Mr M’Kennit decided to accept the editor’s promise not to make any further "cut" in the story. The Judge said that nothing in Due ease had lowered the literary reputation of the author.