under the statute and under the common law, the latter claim being based on the malicious injury to his business by the circulation of threats where there was clearly no foundation for the charge of infringement.1

The Canadian patent act does not contain any provision similar to section 32 of the English Patents, Designs, and Trade-Marks Act of 1883. The only remedy, therefore, for threats of suit for infringement is such as could be had under the English common law. The Australian and New Zealand laws contain provisions practically identical with section 36 of the English law of 1907.3

LEGISLATION AFFECTING THE USE OF TRADING STAMPS.-Although the trading-stamp system has been in extensive operation in Great Britain, no legislation affecting it has been enacted, though in 1912 the Admiralty forbade the sale by canteens of any kind of goods with which prize coupons are given.*

Several of the British colonies have enacted laws prohibiting in some instances and in others regulating the issuance or use of trading stamps. Somewhat lengthy parliamentary debates attended the enactment of this legislation. The advocates of the measures urged that the sale of such stamps to merchants by trading-stamp companies, which subsequently redeemed them, tended to create monopolies and to restrain trade by restricting the use of the stamps. to particular traders; that it was an unfair method of competition, and that it diverted business from its accustomed channels. They further urged that it was neither a desirable nor a fair method of advertising and not a satisfactory method of giving discounts. On the other hand, the opponents of the legislation urged that the system afforded a novel method of advertising at a low cost, particularly adapted to small traders, and an effective means of giving discounts

1 Dredge v. Parnell, 13 R. P. C., 392 (1896); Lycett Saddle, etc., Co. v. Brooks & Co., 21 R. P. C., 656 (1904); Alfred Appleby's Twin Roller Chain (Ltd.) v. Albert Eadie Chain (Ltd.), 16 R. P. C., 318 (1899).

2 Audette's Practice of the Exchequer Court, p. 508.

3 Australia Commonwealth Acts, 1909, Act No. 17, sec. 16; New Zealand Stats., 2 Geo. V, No. 17, sec. 38.

For substantially similar legislation, see also Leeward Islands, patents act, 1906, sec. 34; India, patents and designs act, 1911, sec. 36; Barbadoes, patents act, 1903, sec. 35; Transvaal, patents proclamation No. 22, 1902, sec. 48; Southern Rhodesia, patents ordinance, 1904, sec. 49; Gold Coast Colony, patents ordinance, 1900 (as amended in 1902 and 1903), sec. 35; Seychelles Islands, patents ordinance, 1901, sec. 36; Mauritius, patents (amendment) and designs ordinance, 1913, sec. 15; British Central Africa Protectorate. patents, designs, and trade-marks ordinance, 1903; Gambia, patents ordinance, 1900 (as amended, 1904), sec. 36; Northern Nigeria, patents proclamation, 1902, sec. 35; Ceylon, patents ordinance, 1906, sec. 37; Hongkong, patents ordinance, 1892, sec. 5; Uganda Protectorate, African order in council, 1889, art. 55; Nyasaland, patents, designs, and trade-marks ordinance, 1903; the China, Japan, and Korea order in council, 1899; the Siam order in council, 1899; Falkland Islands, patents ordinance, 1903: Gibraltar order in council, 1884, and patents ordinance, 1913; St. Lucia, patents ordinance, 1899, sec 38; St. Vincent, patents ordinance, 1898, sec. 37; Grenada, patents ordinance, 1898, sec. 37; British Guiana, patents ordinance, 1902, sec. 34.

Crew on Secret Commissions and Bribes, p. 115n.

on small purchases. They further asserted that it did not tend to monopoly, as any number of trading-stamp companies might enter the business; that, in fact, the stamps furnished an effective weapon with which the small trader could fight his larger competitors, particularly the so-called chain stores; and that the principal opponents of the use of the stamps were the large dealers. Finally, they urged that prohibitive legislation would protect one class against the legitimate competition of another, and that it was not unfair competition to attract trade from a business rival by such methods.

A Canadian statute prohibits the issuance of trading stamps by parties other than merchants or manufacturers, thus, in effect, abolishing trading-stamp companies. The issuer, giver, and receiver of stamps issued in violation of the act are all subject to punishment. An offer by a manufacturer upon a wrapper, box, or receptacle of a premium or reward is exempted from the operation of the statute.

Prior to the passage of the Canadian general law, Ontario and Quebec authorized cities, towns, and villages to forbid the issuance of stamps by trading-stamp companies. By-laws passed under the authority of the Quebec act were declared unconstitutional, but those passed in Ontario were held valid.3

The Australian Commonwealth appears not to have passed any law regarding trading stamps, but several of the States have statutes on the subject. Victoria, Tasmania, and Western Australia prohibit the issuance or giving of trading stamps by any stamp company, trader, or other person.* In order, however, to provide a ready and simple means by which merchants can give a discount with cash purchases the Tasmanian Government sells discount stamps to business men at their face value and redeems them when presented in quantities aggregating in value not less than 1 shilling. South Australia prohibits the issuance of any trading stamp not "redeemable at the particular shop or warehouse at which the goods in respect of which such stamp was issued were purchased."5

New Zealand prohibits the issuing or giving of trading stamps by either trading-stamp companies, tradesmen, or other persons, As in the case of Tasmania, however, the New Zealand Government

1 Rev. Stat. of Canada, 1906, ch. 146, secs. 335, 505–508.

2 Similar legislation has been enacted in Jersey. Recueil des Lois, Tome 7 (1907), p. 616. * Senate Debates, Dominion of Canada, session of 1905, pp. 905-912; Ontario Stats., 1 Edw. VII, ch. 26, sec. 26; Quebec Stats. (1903), ch. 39.

Victoria Acts of Parliament, Acts No. 1750 (1901) and No. 1794 (1902); Tasmania Acts of Parliament, Act No. 56 (1900); Western Australia Acts of Parliament, 1st and 2d Edw. VII, 1901-2, pp. 654a-654b.

South Australia, Acts 1904, No. 859.

New Zealand, Cons. Stats., vol. 5, Act No. 197 of 1908, reenactment of Act No. 65 of

30035°-16-35

sells discount stamps to tradesmen and redeems them when presented in specified quantities.1

CONFUSION OF CORPORATE NAMES.—An English statute prohibits the registration of a company name identical with that of an existing registered company or so nearly resembling it as to be calculated to deceive, unless the company previously registered is being dissolved and signifies its consent to the adoption of the name in such manner as the registrar requires. Provision is made for a change of name in case of the inadvertent registration of a company in contravention of the foregoing enactment.2

Substantially similar prohibitions are found in the statutes of the various States of the Australian Commonwealth, though in South Australia and Western Australia no specific provision is made for a change of name in case that of some other corporation is inadvertently adopted. The statutory requirements in New Zealand are similar to those in the Australian States. The Canadian law on this subject is practically the same as the English."

Misbranding or FALSELY MARKING GOODS.-The English Merchandise Marks Act of 1887 makes it an offense for any person to apply any false trade description to goods respecting their number, quantity, measure, gauge, or weight, or the place or country of their origin, or the mode of manufacturing or producing them, or the material of which they are composed, or to make any false description, statement, or other indication respecting any goods being the subject of an existing patent, privilege, or copyright. It is a defense to this part of the act, however, if the person accused prove that he

1 In Bermuda trading stamps issued by parties other than merchants or tradesmen are required to have a redeemable value in money printed thereon, which shall not be less than one-fifth of a penny, and must be redeemed in money when presented in numbers aggregating in face value not less than 3 pence, but it is not required that any trading stamps, the face value of which is a fractional part of a penny, be redeemed. Merchants or tradesmen who redeem their own stamps, and foreign merchants or manufacturers, as well as local merchants or tradesmen who place coupons, etc., in or upon any wrappers or goods which are supplied by them in that condition to others for sale are exempted from the provisions of the act (Bermuda Acts, 1905, Act No. 7). Natal, Union of South Africa, has extended its lottery acts to prohibit the offer of any prize, reward, or gain in connection with the purchase or sale of tobacco or intoxicating liquors (Natal, Acts, 1909, No. 31, sec. 5).

* Companies (Consolidation) Act, 1908, sec. 8.

New South Wales, Stats. 1899, No. 40, sec. 234; Queensland Stats., vol. I. p. 148; South Australia Laws, 1892, No. 557, sec. 23; Tasmanian Stats., vol. 1, p. 373; Horwitz's Victorian Stats., vol. I, p. 194; Western Australia Stats., vol. III, p. 29.

New Zealand Cons. Stats., vol. 1, p. 361.

Canada Rev. Stats., 1906, ch. 79, secs. 7a, 21; British Columbia Rev. Stats. (1911), vol. 1, p. 307; Manitoba Rev. Stats. (1913), vol. 1, p. 228; New Brunswick Con. Stats. (1903), vol. I. p. 788; Northwest Territories Ordinances (1911), p. 137; Nova Scotin Stats. (1900), ch. 11, sec. 21; Ontario Rev. Stats., vol. 2, pp. 1867-1868; Quebec Rev. Stats., vol. 2, art. 6015; Saskatchewan Rev. Stats. (1909), p. 735; Yukon Cons. Ordinances (1914), ch. 18, sec. 18.

50 and 51 Vict., ch. 28; Kerly on Merchandise Marks (Ed. 1909). See also Special Report on Merchandise Marks Act (1862) Amendment Bill (London, 1887); and Annual Report of the Commercial Control Branch of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, 1913. [Cd. 7354.)

"Goods" are defined as anything which is the subject of trade, manufacture, or merchandise.

acted without intent to defraud. It is also an offense for any person to sell, expose for sale, or have in his possession for sale or any other purpose of trade or manufacture any goods or things to which any false trade description is applied, unless he proves that, having taken all reasonable precautions, he had no reason to suspect the genuineness of the trade description, and that he gave the prosecutor, on demand, all the information in his power with respect to the persons from whom he obtained the goods, or that otherwise he acted innocently.

The act of 1887 also prohibits any person from falsely representing that any goods are made by a person holding a royal warrant, or for the service of Her Majesty, or any of the royal family, or any other Government department. And in 1905, at the suggestion of the Association of Royal Warrant Holders, it was provided that any person who, without the authority of His Majesty or of a member of the royal family, uses in connection with any business or profession the royal arms in such a manner as to lead others to believe that he is duly authorized to use the same may be restrained by injunction at the suit of any person authorized to use such arms, or is authorized by the Lord Chamberlain to take proceedings in that behalf.2

3

The Canadian Criminal Code prohibits any person from putting a "false trade description" upon any goods or from selling or exposing for sale goods knowing them to be falsely described. The law applies to any materially false description, statement, or other indication, direct or indirect, as to the number, quantity, measure, gauge, or weight of any goods, the place or country in which made or produced, the mode of manufacturing or producing, and the material of which composed, as well as to any goods being the subject of an existing patent, privilege, or copyright. It also forbids the use of any figures, words, or marks to induce persons to believe that the goods are the manufacture or merchandise of some other person, and the use of any false names or initials of any person.

The Commonwealth of Australia and the States of New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, and Western Australia have statutes prohibiting any person from putting any false description upon any goods. These acts are similar to the Canadian law. The Commonwealth and Queensland acts, however, do not include a specific prohibition applying to the use of figures, words, or marks to induce persons to believe that the goods

1 Ib.. sec. 20. See also Patent and Designs Act, 1907, ch. 29, sec. 90.

2 Trade-Marks Act, 1905, ch. 15, sec. 68. See also Royal Warrant Holders Assn. r. Slade & Co. (Ltd.), 25 R. P. C., 245 (Ch. Div., 1908), and Royal Warrant Holders Assn. v. Kitson, 26 R. P. C., 157 (Ch. Div., 1909).

* Rev. Stats, of Canada, 1906, ch, 146, secs. 335-337, 341, 488, 489.

• Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act, 1905, Consol. Laws of Commonwealth of Australia, 1901-1911, vol. II, p. 1031; Stats. of New South Wales, 1900, Act No. 19, secs. 13, 19-21, 31: Queensland Stats., vol. II, p. 1715, trade-marks act, 1864, secs, 13-15 and 26; Acts of Parliament of South Australia, 1892, No. 551; Acts of Parliament of Tasmania, 1893, 57 Vic.. No. 6; Horwitz's Vic. Stats., vol. 9, p. 14, 54 Vic., No. 1146; Stats. of Western Australia, 1913, No. 28 (Criminal Code), secs. 496, 497, 499, 501, and 507.

are the manufacture or merchandise of some other person or to the use of any false names or initials of a person. The Commonwealth act applies only to exports and imports, while the State laws apply to merchandise or anything which is the subject of local trade or manufacture.

New Zealand and India have statutes similar to the Canadian law, prohibiting any person from putting any false description upon any goods. As in Canada, the laws cover the use of any figures, words, or marks to induce persons to believe that the goods are the manufacture or merchandise of some other person and the use of any false names or initials of any person.

Falsely marking gold ware.—By an act passed in England in 1854.* it is provided that if any assayer, officer, or employee of any company or corporation authorized to assay and mark gold vessels, plate, or manufactures of gold, shall mark or suffer to be marked any gold vessel, plate, or manufacture of gold of a lower standard with any die or other instrument used by such company or corporation for marking such manufactures of gold of a higher standard, the company shall forfeit a specified sum. It is further provided that any officer or employee convicted of such offense shall be discharged from his office with said corporation and shall thereafter be incapable of holding any office or employment in or under the same or any other such company or corporation. Provision is made, by reference to the act of 7 and 8 Victoria, chapter 22, for the seizure, defacement, and in certain instances the melting of such falsely marked plate, and for the disposition of the proceeds thereof.

Canada's Gold and Silver Marking Act requires, where any mark is used, a registered trade-mark on all plated articles and all flat and hollow ware, and both the trade-mark and a quality mark on all gold and silver articles not stamped under the laws of another Government. Any additional mark not calculated to mislead or deceive may be used except on plated articles. On these the only other marks allowed are, an identification number and the name or initials of a dealer. Articles are not to be described as gold or silver unless they are of a fineness required by statute, and the use of any guaranty marks on plated ware as to its durability is prohibited.

Miscellaneous statutes regarding false marking.-There are several special English statutes which prohibit the misbranding or alteration of marks on fabrics and cutlery. The linen trade-marks acts of 1713 and 1714 imposed a penalty for the erasure of marks required on Irish linen or for indicating by false marks that other linen is made in Ireland. When made in Ireland by hand loom weavers,

1 New Zealand Consol. Stats., 1908, vol. IV, No. 140; Indian Merchandise Marks Act. Act IV, 1889.

17 and 18 Vic. (1854), ch. 96, sec. 5.

* Canada, Stats,, 1913, ch. 19.

17 Geo. II, ch. 30; 18 Geo. 11, ch. 24, sec. 3.