The Sun.
London, England, 1840-12-21 00:00:00

ROYAL COURT OF PARIS•

IMPORTANT DECISION.
ki:the following question was brought on for discussion on
30th of November, and decided in tho affirmative :
" Has the forein manufacturer the right to cause the
1111,Pression of hiss ame and signature assumed in Franco
French manufacturer of a similar article, and placed
oq
uv.aes, flagons, &c. ?" In the course of the discussion
ti-14"e interesting details were submitted to the Court as to
e forgeries of patent medicines, and celebrated articles of
the toilet, practised in France, Belgium, end England.
I%IM. Gueland, Guesnot, and Co., perfumers in Paris,
totylpealed against a decision of the Tribunal of Commerce,
which they were ordered to pay 3,000 francs damages
° Messrs, Rowland and Son, proprietors ol the universally
admired " Macassar Oil," to which Lord Byron's allusion
t-8 gi,en so much celebrity. The action had been insti-
eted by the Sieur Bouverct, agent for its sale at Paris, in
Qtl ntlequence of a counterfeited article with Rowland's
2030 on the labels having been extensively sold. The
'ante precise principle which was involved in the legal
.li_rgurnent applies to every description of patent medicine
1q which England is so prolific, and of which the sale is
gaily increasing in the continer.tal cities.
Ilsl. Gueland arid Co. on an inquisition being made nt
I_ll 'r laboratory, produced a great number of Ws con-
taining Macassar Oil, which they did not deny to beco of
n-
tainingheir own manufacture, and bearing on the labels the name
and address of ‘• Rowland and Son ; ' but they alleged that
perfectly
this fabrication of a foreign production waslegal
in France. Rowland's agent thereupon abandoned the
charge of forgery, and confined himself simply to re-
claiming against the usurpation of his name, seal, and
address.

The Chamber of Council, in an ordinance prepared
'With great care, pronounced that no action lay against the
kccused, and this ordinance was confirmed by a decree of
t!ten
Chamber of Accusation. The same question Laving
ten reproduced shortly after, in a trial relative to the
labrication of a Parisian imitation of some patent English
Needles, received the same solution by a decree of the
.1.4410 Chamber. It would thus have appeared that, accord-
ing to the legislation t f France, the facts eith %Nliich the
French perfumers were reproached by the London house
could not be criminatcd. They were, however, subsequently
tUremened by Rowland's agent to appear before the Tri-
un4l of Commerce, where damages to the amount of
10,000 f. were claimed. The Tribunal in question decided in
e_°r,land's favour, and condemned each of tbefive members of
s'ue Parisian firm of perfumers to the payment of 600 f. da-
4g". The Tribunal's decision contained the following
lords ,—" The name of a man engaged in any particular
itr,..ttde often becomes a valuable property, which the laws
x,
I 411 countries aught to respect ; to such a name a corn-
tercial value is often attached, which becomes a real fa-
IttlilY patrimony. I lie fabrication of Macassar Oil is open
fecturep° thepublic in France, but no one has a right to menu-
it under A NAME WHICH DOES NOT BELONG TO HIM ;
4.114 the care which the defendants have taken to ,ffix the
rplaintiff's name upon tl:eir vials proves the plaintiff's inte-
°t in preserving the integrity of that name. Good faith
I,_, equity arc of all countries, and the tribunals of France
ib(3'lld not suffer the public to be deceived by speculations
Pugnant to both good faith and equity. It it be al-
Jged, that in similar matters Frenchmen trading in Eng-
',:tad are exposed to similar spoliations, these allegations
re net justified; and, even it they were, it is not the less
incumbent
on the Tribunal to do legal justice to foreigners
Piecing themselves under the protection cf the French laws,
with a. view to commanding and obtaining the Same pro-
ttetion for Frenchmen abroad."
The Paris an perfumers sought to upset this creditable
decision by appeal ng to the Royal Court of Paris.
Choix d'Est-Ange, in support of the appeal, availed
himself of the French legal axiom, " Una via decta
neldatur recursus ad al,crant." He held therefore that
.11:14 decision of the original tribunal (dc Conseil) should
47e been binding, and cited numerous authorities in sup-
vort of this view. He contended that the laws which
licknowledge this sacredness of literary and industrial
property Fr' ceu oely he epp, Hied to by Frenchmen.
Qtraegere were to, merly field in Feence to be in seine
Illeeeure serfs. TuLir ~ituetioe became giadualiy amelio-
14ted; but they obtained no civil rights. The droit
4u4aine remained in force ; the publicists, more