The National Register.
London, England, 1820-02-20 00:00:00

QA

.. 1p

LAIV INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KINO's BENCH, GVILDNALL, Fce. 13.

LAZENRI V. COI.

Th.s was an action oil the ease brought by Mrs. Lazenby,
he s.st. r, anti pi officio'. iif Harvey's tish-sauce against tar
defendant. a medical bookseller, mid (Hinter and eagraver,
the Borough. 'lite dectaration stated that the plaintiff
was proprietor of Kart ty's ash-sauce, and charged defen-
dant with having pubisheal labels slat to those a iich
were stuck alma the plai atilt 's butt les, and having sold i hem
hi Messis. flatlet and Hardie, chi mists and drit4ists,
I,ltteen !street, Cheapside ; by means whei emof the plaintiff
a as slut only hipped to the sale of her wince, but the sauce
n quired a bat! charcier.
'lime facts of this ease were, that Mr. Harvey, who for-
merly kept an mu at Willow, was the inventor of the cele-
brated sauce known by his mime. In the year 1193 he gave
I lie receipt to his sister, Mir. Lazenby, who carried out a
profitable Bade iu this urtim le in La aard Street, Pittman
tsipiase. Mrs. Lazenby afterwa dr retired front business
hich she gave up to her sun. Mrs. Laseuby had been long
aware that spurious sorts of sauce had been sold for her's,
but she was tout able to discover by whom; at length an ac-
cident happened N hech led to a discovery. A boy calleolon
Mrs. Lazenby a ith a parcel containing 300 labels. Nis
Lazenby, not having murdered any labels, inquired f
et lioni lie had brought them. 'file boy said they came front
the defendant, who had been in the habit of prtuting Mrs.
Lazentsy's labels for mummy yea's. On looking ;Ii the labels,
Des. Lazenby observed that the labels, though at Snit stain
they resembled thoselised by herself, were, upon a minute
e %emanation, different in some trifling circumstances—the
wood " Loudon' in the one being printed in small letters
in the same line with Edviard.street ; in the other. thi,
stood was printed in capitals in a line by itself. Upon
this she sent her attorney to the defendant. He showed
him the labels, and asked him whether he had printed
dienti The defendant acknowledged that he had en-
gi aved a plate from which the labels, were printed some
years before. He said he had dune so without the privity
consetit of Mrs. Lazenby it was dime by the order
of lessts. flatlet and Hardie, who had labels printed from
it front ulna to time, as they required them. The parcel
sin question was printed fora gen Beaten, who, as defendant
'relieved, Was the successor of Messrs. Haller and Hardie.
They were to be called for ; being left in the shop, and
the boy seeing the name of Lazenby upon them, had
'cart it d them by mistake to the plaintid 'it. The defendant
said, he was willing to give tip the plate, which the
attorney declined. The defendant said he saw no impro-
iety in doing what he had done.
Tits-Lord Chief Justice said, that the defendant seemed
to think lie had a right to act in the manner be had done
it was fit it should be publicly known that this was un-
less/ill. A person might tell any cots:audit), lie pleased,
pros bled he sold it as his own, but it was unlawful for hint
to sell it as time invention of another person. His Lordship
sail this might affect the inventor, not only by decreasing
t is sale of his goads, but if the substituted article was an
inferior one it *ovoid injure the reputation of the original
invention. It was not only unlawful to sell a substituted
commodity, it was also mllBOllll for a printer to enable a
person to to this, by supplying hint with bills similar to
used by the original proprietor,
The plaintiff's counsel said, the object of the plaintiff
in hi ingiug this swim: was to try the right, and give
publicity to it. He would therefore not require more than
nominal damages.
The Jury accordingly gave a verdict for the plaintff,
damages 10s.