The Express.
London, England, 1846-12-08 00:00:00

ujny.-
injunction

Before the Vice-Chancellor of England.
SPOTTISWOODE e. CLARKE.—INJONCTION TO RESTRAIN
At: IMITATION OF THE "PICTORIAL ALMANACS."—Mr.
Stuart and Mr. Moore moved to dissolve an injunction ob•
tained last Wednesday to restrain the defendant from print-
ing and publishing an almanaek, being an imitation of one
published by the plaintiff, entitled The Pictorial
Almanack, or Ytar Rook for 1847, and Royal Greenwich
Astronomical Calendar; for the Gardener, Sportsman,
Naturalist, and Alan of Easiness. The cover of the
almanack published for the defendant was entitled in the
same manner, with the addition of " Old Moore's Family"
at the head of the title-page. On the plaintiff's alrnanark
*ere was a wood-cut representing the Greenwich
Observatory, and on the defendant's there was a repre-
sentation of the top only of the Greenwich Observatory.
It was now contended that this was not such an imitation of
the plaintiff's work as to induce the court to continue the in-
junction, and that the plaintiff could have no protection for
the common title of Pictorial Almanack.—Mr. Bethel and
Mr. Hallett appeartd in support of the injunction.
The Vice-Chancellor said in all these cases of fraudulent
imitation some slight difference was always introduced, but
the question was whether the defendant in this case had not
so far copied the title of the plaintiff's work as to mislead,
(not the trade, for they were sufficiently knowing about the
matter) ; but the foolish public who went to purchase the
alnsanack. Persons might have heard of the plaintiff's
almanac's being' very useful for the gardener, sportsman,
naturalist, and man of business, and would ask at a shop for
such a werk—they would be told that the defendant's
almanaek was just such a one as they inquired for,
and would necessarily be misled, since all the first part of
the defendant's title-page was precisely similar to that of the
plaintiff's. The defendant might swear he had not copied
from the plaintiff's work, but it was evident that he, or
some one else, must have done so, or they never co dd have
exactly selected the same terms. Such a fortuitous circum-
stance was most improbable. He considered that there was
evidently such an Imitation as would induce the public to
buy one for the other; and ho would therefore. be doing
wrong if he did not continue the injunction. directing the
plaintiff, at the same time, to bring such action as he might
be advised, or try the question at law.
Stow- O. 110 LE.—CONDUCT OF SUITORS IN WRITING
LETTF.US TO TUE JUDOES.—Upon
• motion in this case to
dismiss the bill for want of prosecution, the Vice-Chan-
valor observed that he had received al 'feral letters from
Ike defendant respecting the proceedings before the court ;
whic'e he bad, ot course, thrown into tbe fire imw.edia.ely
but he tole himself bourd to state, that it was most im-
proper c mine on tot part of suitors to a.idrees the judge
of
tht court on the subject of their causes

F.ewre weAtanors.tx Wigran•
OATTY r. PHILLIPSON.-PZITILIOED DOCUMENT.-Mr.
Smith, for the plaintiffs, moved for the production of certain
doeuments mentioned in the schedalee to the answers of the
defendants, and admitted to be in the custody or power of
*c defendants. Mr. Reach, contra, read a statement from
sae of the answers to the effect that the defendants were
brother and
since whom the latter bid been resident on
the Continent the institution ot the suit, end that