The New York herald., 1872-10-06
NEW YORK HERALD SUNDAY SHEET
LEGAL TRADE MARKS.


Important Decision BY Acting Comm
sioner Thacher-Masonie symbols Cam
mot BE Used as Trade Marks.
WASHINGTON, Oct. s. 1872.
Upon an appeal rom the decision OF the ex-
aminer Of trade marks, Acting Commissioner
Thacher has given the following highly interesting
decision In q case involving the use OF Masonic
symbols as q trade mark
In the matter Of the application OF John +. Tole
for the registration OF trade marks.-Apphcant is
manufacturer and vender Of nOur in the city OF ST.
Louis, Mo. He has two establishments upon
streets, and he seeks to register as
TRADE MARKS
to be used upon the barrels containing his -four the
words ''Cherry street Mills' in one case and MAR
ket street Mills" In the other drespectively
with well-known Masonic emblem--the square
and compass. These combinations and words and
symbols, II Is strenuously maintained, embrace all
the requisites and come within none OF the negative
exceptions or limitations Of the law defining legal
trade mark.
Applying the comprehensive test laid down by
the Commissioner in eI parte Dawes flaming,
00acial Gazette. VOL l., page 27, it is said tnat
neither Of the combinations claimed is the name Of
person, firm or corporation, or is calculated to
deceive the public as to the true origin or charac
ter OF the article TO which II is applied, Is gen.
eric or descriptive OF quality; and finally it is
asserted that each, when applied to the commodi-
ties for which it is adopted as trade mark, VIII
distinguish them from others OF the same class
The essence Of these alleged trade marks is the
Masonic SYMBOL
THE SQUARE AND COMPASS.
1t has already been determined that the words
alone do not possess the characteristics OF lega
trade mark, and in order to make it appear that
the addition OF the square and compass do confer
these characteristics it is also insisted that this
Masonic symbol is not used with its ordinary sig
nifcation.
II this emblem were something other than pre-.
cisely what 1t is, either less known less signifi-
cant or fully and universe lily understood, all this
might readily be admitted. but, consider
ing its peculiar character and relation to
ae ae@ an m i pGis
device SO commonly worn and employed by Ma
sons has an established mystic significance uni
hended by all or not Is not material to this issue.
Considering the antiquity the traditional origin.
the profound secrecy; the magnitude and extent
character OF the Masonic organization, seriously
question whether its embems are not to be re-
garded as its property at least in such sense that
no person can monopolize them as trade mark de-
vices.
It IS not proposed, however, to do more than
sion here. The ground for this decision lies in
another direction and to my mind Is
OBSCURED BY NO CLOUD OF DOUBT.
In view Of the universally OF Masonry the mystic
tie that binds all nations In one common fraternity
and the Interchangeable characteristics of emblems
appealing with the same force to the brotherhood
in all parts Of the earth, 1t Is impossible to divest
these SYMBOLS or at least this particular symbol,
perhaps the best known of ALL OF its ordinary sgni-
hcatiOn wherever displayed, either an arbitrary
character or otherwise. 1t will be universally un-
derstood or misunderstood as having Masonic
nRon n a q n Ia ma mn
stantly work deception. Nothing could be more
mischievOus than to create as a monopoly and
as applied to Of 20 be msnter
preted to mislead all classes and to constantly
foster suggestions OF
MYSTERY IN AFFAIRS OF BUSINESS.
There was time when the cross and crescent
and the red and white roses OF the houses OF York
and Lancaster possessed as symbols such a sig
nifcance and occupied such place in the public
mind in portions OF the Old World as would affect
common affairs, and could not properly be disre-
appear. If they were now held In the same esti-
nation In this country who imagnes that they
could be divested OF their general significance so
that they could successfully be adopted to cOnsti
tute trade marks or parts Of trade marks and be
displayed before the public in that capacity ?
In some respects dltrerent, to be sure, yet
1t is in important particulars similar, and
the same objections lie to their use in the manner
proposed. am clearly OF the opinion, therefore,
that the proposed combinations cannot properly
suDserve the ends OF trade mark. Among
MaSOnS, WItn WHOu lHlS COkeu has u moral SlxnlH
cance its use in that capacity would undoubtedly
be regarded as
BASE PROSTITUTION
OF 1t to mercerary purposes while with others its
mystic force would often dissipate Its virtues as q
trade mark, and, perhaps in some instances place
the article 1t appeared upon under ban. Thus IL
these trade marks could be sanctioned they would
tend to defeat the fundamental object OF the trade
mark law, which is an OffshOot of the ancient claw
merchant and like that designed to advance
trade and manufactures
The decision OF the examiner of trade marks
must be affirmed.
J. M. THICKER, Acting Commissioner.