case the company OF stationer against SEYVIOUR a royal patent to the stationer  company grant they the exclusive right of print almanac be bad S C 3Keb carter  show Wern Mod skin Mod more Noy Ch case Mod Inst Bac Abr notorious facts hawk  p c burr Bl corn Bl Rep the company of stationer bring a action of debt  against Seymour for print gadbury almanac without their leave upon a special  verdict find the question be whether the letter patent whereby the company of  stationer have grant to they the sole print of almanac be good or not the jury  find the statute of car c a see the appendix to Mr Ruffheads edition of the  statute a concern print they find a patent make by king James of the same  privilege to the company in which a former patent of queen Elizabeth be recite  and they find the letter patent of the king that now S then they find that the  defendant have print a almanac which they find in word et shape and that the  say almanac have all the essential part of the almanac that be print before  the book of common prayer but that it have some other addition such as be  usual in common almanac c Pemberton sergeant the king may by law grant the  sole print of almanac the art of print be altogether of another consideration  in the eye of the law than other trade and mystery be the press be a late  invention but the exorbitancy and licentiousness thereof have ever since it be  first find out be under the care and restraint of the magistrate for great  mischief and disorder will ensue modern to the commonwealth if it be under no  regulation it have therefore always be think fit to be under the inspection  and control of the government and the statute of the car c recite that it be a  matter of public care in England it have from time to time be under the king  own regulation so that no book can lawful be print without a imprimatur grant  by some that derive authority from he to licence book but the question here be  not whether the king may by law grant the sole print of all book but of any  and of what sort of book the sole print of lawbook be not now in question that  seem to be a point of some difficulty because of the large extent of such a  patent and the uncertainty of determine what shall be account a lawbook and  what not and yet such a patent have be allow to be good by a judgement in the  house of peer b this seem to be the case of roper v streater skin see also the  case of basket v the university of Cambridge Bl Rep burr b when sir Orlando  Bridgman be chief justice in this court there be a question raise concern the  validity of a grant of the sole print of any particular book with a  prohibition to all other to print the same how far it shall stand good against  they that claim a property in the copy paramount to the king grant and opinion  be divide upon the point but the defendant in our case make no title to the  copy only be pretend a nullity in our patent the book which this defendant  have print have no certain author and then accord to the rule of our law the  king have the property and by consequence may grant his property to the  company the court there be no difference in any material part betwixt this  almanac and that which be put in the rubric of the commonprayer now the  almanac that be before the commonprayer proceed from a public constitution it  be first settle by the Nicene Council be establish by the canon of the church  and be under the government of the archbishop of Canterbury so that almanac  may be account prerogative copy those particular almanac that be make yearly  be but application of the general rule there lie down for the movable feast  forever to every particular year and without doubt this may be grant by the  king this be a strong case than that of lawbook which have be mention the lord  in the resolution of that case rely upon this that modern print be a new  invention and therefore every man can not by the commonlaw have a liberty of  print lawbook modern er p and since print have be invent and be become a  common trade so much of it as have be keep enclose never be make common but  matter of state and thing that concern the government be never leave to any  man liberty to print that will and particular the sole print of law book have  be former grant ill other reign though print be a new invention yet the use  and benefit of it be only for man to publish their work with more ease than  they can before a see Ann c and the case of literary property burr a man have  some other way to publish their think before print come in and forasmuch as  print have always be under the care of the government since it be first set on  foot we may well presume that the former way be so too queen Elizabeth king  James and king Charles the first grant such patent as these and the law have a  great respect to common usage we ought to be guide in our opinion by the  judgement of the house of peer which be express in the point the ultimate  resort of law and justice be to they there be no particular author of a  almanac and then by the rule of our law the king have the property in the copy  those addition of prognostication and other thing that be common in almanac do  not alter the case no more than if a man shall claim a property in another man  copy by reason of some inconsiderable addition of his own accord judgement be  give for the plaintiff nisi causan c b but see the case of the stationer  company v carnan where on a case out of chancery it be certify by the judge of  the common plea first that the grant make to the company by James the first  for the exclusive print of all almanac allow by the archbishop of Canterbury  and bishop of London be restrain to such almanac only as shall be allow by the  say archbishop and bishop or either of they for the time be and second that  the crown have not a prerogative or power to make such a grant to the company  exclusive of any other or other easter term Geo Bl Rep b