User:Ottava Rima/Printers

Jonathan Swift employed many printers throughout his life. Some of them went to jail, some sued each other over copyright infringement, and each had their own importance to the life and works of Swift.

During his life, Swift was never satisfied with collected editions of his works, and it wasn't until the end of his life that a complete edition was formed.

Benjamin Tooke
Benjamin Tooke was born in 1642 and died in 1716. He was Swift's original London publisher for many of Swift's works. Tooke originally published the Gazette for Swift in 1711. Tooke also published Swift's Miscellanies in 1711. He later sold the Miscellanies copyright to Benjamin Motte. Tooke later passed his printing business onto Benjamine Motte.

John Harding
John Harding died in 1725. He was publisher for Swift's Irish pamphlets and tracts, especially The Drapier's Letters. After the publication of the fourth Drapier's letter, he was arrested and held for trial. Swift wrote a letter called Seasonable Advice, which won the release of Harding.

Swift most likely heard of Harding through Whalley's News-Letter on April 4, 1719, where it was reported that Harding was wanted for publishing a controversial proclamation by King Philip V of Spain that supported James Francis Edward Stuart's claim to the throne of England.

After Harding died, Swift relied on Harding's widow to print his works until 1730.

Benjamin Motte
Benjamin Motte died in 1738. Motte was a London publisher who took over Benjamin Tooke's publishing business. In 1726, Swift sent Motte a copy of Gulliver's Travels to be printed anonymously. Motte took great care to protect the identity of the author and employeed five publishing houses to speed production of the book and avoid pirating.

In 1727, Motte formed his first direct contract with Swift in order to publish Swift's Miscellanies. As part of the contract, Motte paid Tooke for the original copyright to the work.

George Faulkner
George Faulkner was born in 1699 and died in 1775. He spent five years working in London as a printer under William Bowyer.

Faulkner's Dublin Journal, a newspaper established in 1725, featured many articles written by Swift or inspired by writings of Swift. Between 1727 and 1730, Faulkner published many works attributed to Swift, but many were actually written by others. After 1730, only one of those works printed by Faulkner under Swift's name turned out to be written by someone besides Swift, which suggests to some critics that Swift was working with Faulkner to ensure that only authentic works were printed under Swift's name.

He was the first to publish The Answer to the Craftsman, Swift's final defense of the Irish economy from England's policies. Faulkner was also the first to publish the collected Drapier's Letters as Fraud Detected on October 2, 1725. Faulkner also helped edit An Epistle upon an Epistle around December 1929.

Harding's arrest
Harding was in trouble with the law for printing objectional material a few times in his life.

In response to the printing of the fourth Drapier's Letter, a proclamation was issued for the arrest of the Drapier and his printer.

After swearing that he did not know the identity of the Drapier, Lord Carteret was supposed to have said that Harding was "spirited up to stand the prosecution and persist in concealing the Author" of the Drapier's Letters. Immediately following Harding's arrest, Swift wrote and distributed Seasonable Advice, a pamphlet that responded to the jury members who were to try Harding. In the pamphlet, Swift argued that Harding was "a poor Man perfectly Innocent.

1735 Works lawsuit
A legal suit erupted between Benjamin Motte and George Faulkner over who had the legal authority to publish the works of Jonathan Swift. This was not a normal lawsuit, but became a struggle between the rights of Irishmen to print material that were denied under English law.

On August 14, 1725, Swift wrote to Charles Ford that his work, Gulliver's Travels, was finished, however, he soon added a scene referring to the Drapier's Letters. Swift wrote, in a letter to Pope, "a printer shall be found brave enough to venture his ears". The printer Swift found was Benjamin Motte, and Swift did not control the publication in order to, as some critics say, preserve his anonymity.

Although Swift found Motte willing to print the work, he was not willing to print Swift's additional scene. Swift's lack of control over the publication lead to Swift complaining of "mangled and murdered Pages". This was one of many reasons that Swift turned from Motte as his printer and sought a printer willing to produce his complete works without content removal. On October 9, 1733, Swift wrote:
 * "Now, you may please to remember how much I complained of Motts suffering some friend of his (I suppose it was Mr Took a Clergy-man now dead) not onely to blot out some things that he thought might give offence, but to insert a good deal of trash contrary to the Author's manner and Style, and Intention."

Three editions of Gulliver's Travels were produced in London during 1726 and a "corrected" edition of Motte's works were printed by John Hyde in Dublin. Although Herbert Davis thought that the Hyde edition would not please Swift, some critics argue that Swift involved himself in helping Hyde make some corrections to the edition that was based on Motte's London edition. The next year, Risk, Ewing, and Smith printed in Dublin a simple reprint of Motte's original print with minor corrections. Motte then produced his "second edition" (his fourth version) of Gulliver's Travels in 1727 with many corrections. Many of the corrections of Motte's later editions were based on Swift's corrections sent to the printer via letters.

The edition published by Faulkner includes over 500 corrections to the original text, surpassing any other editions. Faulkner's version also contains over 50 passages that either not present in the original or expanded on from the original text. This has suggested to some critics that the Faulkner edition was a later rework of Gulliver's Travels and not just a correction to printing related mistakes. The inclusion of these many additions was later seen by critics as part of Swift's disapproval of Motte's versions, but others see Motte's version as being more true to the anti-government spirit of Swift's work, which confuses Swift's motivation in allowing Faulkner to reprint the work.

Swift's other works were previous collected in a four volume set edited by Alexander Pope called Miscellanies, but Swift wanted to have a "proper" edition of his works. Some critics speculate that Swift turned to having his work printed without public sponsorship because he was afraid of breaking his commitments to Pope and his publisher Motte.

Even without the backing of Swift, Motte turned to the English legal system to halt the introduction of Faulkner's edition. Although works like the Drapier's Letters were not under Motte's copyright, the complete work was legally brought to a halt from being published in England by a ruling on November 28, 1735.

It is uncertain if Swift allowed Faulkner to publish the works in order to allow an Irish publisher to compete against an English publisher or if Swift had no say in the matter and Faulkner published the works against Swift's will. In a letter to Motte in May 1736, Swift did not defend Faulkner's legal right to publish the works but made sure to admonish the attitude and action of Motte as a publisher for prosecuting Faulkner instead of coming to an agreement that Faulkner would be allowed to reprint the copyrighted material.

However, some critics believe that Swift used the incident to "enlarge the affair into another example of English oppression of the Irish." Swift wrote in a letter to Motte on May 25, 1736:
 * "the cruel oppressions of this kingdom by England are not to be borne. You send what books you please hither, and the booksellers here can send nothing to you that is written here. As this is absolute oppression, if I were a bookseller in this town, I would use all the safe means to reprint London books, and run them to any town in England, that I could, because whoever offends not the laws of God, or the country he lives in, commits no sin.... But I am so incensed against the oppresions from England, and have so little regard to the laws they make, that I do, as a clergyman, encourage the merchants both to export wool and woollen manufactures to any country in Europe, or anywhere else, and conceal it from the Custom-house officers, as I would hide my purse from a highwayman, if he came to rob me on the road, although England hath made a law to the contrary; and so I would encourage our booksellers here to sell your author's books printed here, and send them to all the towns in England, if I could do it with safety and profit; because I repeat, it is no offence against God, or the laws of the country I live in."

This is much debate in the academic community on which printer produced the "authoritative" edition of Swift's works, especially Gulliver's Travels. Harold Williams was one of the major proponents of the Faulkner edition being "correct". However, some critics argue that the Faulkner edition was instead a "corrected" edition that added new revisions, and that neither text can truly be called authoritative.

In legal terms, the report of Motte vs. Faulkner of November 28, 1735 is no longer in existence, but was cited in a later legal decisions on copyright issues, such as Miller vs. Taylor of 1769 which read:
 * "In the case of Motte vs Falkner, 28 November, 1735 an injunction was granted for printing Pope's and Swift's Miscellanies. Many of these pieces were published in 1701, 1702, 1708; and the counsel strongly pressed the objection, as to these pieces. Lord Talbot continued the injunction, as to the whole: and it was acquiesced under. Yet Falknor, the Irish bookseller, was a man of substance; and the general point was of consequence to him: but he was not advised to litigate further.