Explanatory Notes        Apparatus Notes ()

Source: Salt Lake City Tribune, 1875.02.09 ([])

Cue: "Being further peremptorily"

Source format: "Paraphrase, telegram"

Letter type: "telegram"

Notes:

Last modified:

Revision History: HES

Published on MTPO: 2007

Print Publication: v6

MTPDocEd
To Tilford and Hagan
per Telegraph Operator
8 February 1875 • (3rd of 3) • Hartford, Conn. (Paraphrase: Salt Lake City Tribune, 9 Feb 75, UCCL 11986)

Being further peremptorily instructed, Messrs. Tilford & Hagan prepared and filed a bill in equity, in the Third District Court, for an injunction to enjoin the representation of “The Gilded Age” in this city. The case was heard before Chief Justice McKean, at Chambers, at half past five o’clock in the afternoon, Judge Sutherland resisting the application. After argument of counsel on both sides, the Court held, substantially, that upon the bill, as a matter of law, the plaintiff, Clemens, was entitled to be protected by injunction under the copyright statutes of Congress, whereupon it was ordered that a writ issue accordingly, which was done, with the result above stated.1explanatory note Mark Twain is ahead, and our next notice of “The Gilded Age” will be made when Raymond comes “Roughing It” to Salt Lake City, and then everybody can see that “There’s millions in it!”

Textual Commentary
8 February 1875 • To Tilford and Hagan , per Telegraph Operator • (3rd of 3) • Hartford, Conn.UCCL 11986
Source text(s):

Paraphrase, “Mark Twain in Court,” Salt Lake City Tribune, 9 Feb 75, 3. Copy-text is a microfilm edition of the newspaper in the Newspaper and Microcopy Division, University of California, Berkeley (CU-NEWS).

Previous Publication:

L6 , 375–376.

Explanatory Notes
1 

According to the Salt Lake City Herald,

The legal gentlemen representing Mr. Clemens did all in their power, consistent with Messrs. Sutherland & Bates, to arrange the matter so that the piece could be played last night, but it was claimed that the contract between Mr. John T. Raymond and Mr. Clemens was such that neither party was at liberty to dispose of the right to any one else; and so the “Gilded Age” was not played last night, but the management, determined that their audience should have some “gilt,” put upon the boards in a few minutes’ notice “All that Glitters is not Gold.” (“An Injunction,” 9 Feb 75, 3)

Gill was represented by Jabez G. Sutherland (formerly a circuit judge in Michigan) and George C. Bates (the former United States attorney for Utah). The case was heard before James B. McKean, the chief justice of Utah Territory (Sloan, 249, 282, 301). The revised copyright statutes of 1873 stated that “the circuit courts . . . shall have power, upon bill in equity, filed by any party aggrieved, to grant injunctions to prevent the violation of any right secured by the laws respecting copyrights” (Solberg, 57).

Top