The Portland daily press., 1890-11-20
WHAT'S IN A nAmE.
Massachusetts Judges VIII Answer
that amilIar Query.
Especial to the Press ]


BOSTON, November ia very interest
ing case was argued before the Supreme
Court here today. Chief Justice Field pre-
siding, in which many New England busi
ness men are interested. A bill In equity
was brought by the International Trust
Company Of Boston, to prevent the Inter-
national Loan and Trust Company of Kan
sas City, Mo-, from doing business In this
Commonwealth, on the ground that its name
was so nearly identical with that of the com
plainant as to mislead. The action is based
on special statute passed by the Massachu-
setts legislature in 1889. 1t is conceded by
all of the parties that the International
Loan and Trust Company Of Kansas City is
one of the soundest financial institutions do
ing business in New England, that its man
agement is very conservative. The Eastern
branch is under the direction of Hon. Fred
L. Richards of Portland, Me-. an able tinan-
cier and president of the Portland National
Bank. The president of the company is
Hon. Geo. #. Putnam. Nathan 81 Henry b.
Cleaves are the eastern counsel for the de-
fendant company. In presenting the case
Mr.. Cleaves paid a high compliment to
Massachusetts and her supreme court. He
said, II know your hOnors will appreciate
the magnitude and Importance of this case
to the defendant corporation and its stock
holders. If it was financial institution
without responsibility, or an institution
seeking to do business here to the detriment
of any citizen of this state, would not come
from the State Of Maine to ask the courts of
our mother commonwealth to consider for a
moment the legal propositions which we re-
gard as sound and conclusive. as to the
rights of the parties to this controversy. We
represent here, as the case shows your
honors, an Institution OF sound financial
standing, with paid capital of one million
dollars, with growing surplus, with class
Of New England, representing its
business interests and interested in
the advancement and prosperity
of its institutions equally as much as the
complainant. The eastern management IS
under the direction of MIR. Richards, presi-
practically New England institution,
though its corporate life and name are de-
rived from one of the growing states of the
Southwest Massachusetts in the enact
ment of her laws, has never pursued a mar
row business policy. She has given the most
unbOunded freedom to all sound financial in
stitutious Incorporated under the laws OF
other states and countries to do business
within her border, and her courts in constru-
ing her laws have never been governed by
narrow technical views. but by broad and
progressive spirit, which has given to her
people and her own financial institutions,
and to those from other states doing bust
ness within her limits, energy and success
and thus contributed in giving this Com
mOnwealth the strength and power. the pros
perlty and wealth which she possesses. She
believes in the greatest freedom Of exchange
and financial dealing with her sister states,
and this statute upon which this complaint
is founded should, and believe will, receive
a broad and reasonable construction, a con.
struction which is in harmony with her ira
t. f1r xxvtf
views that have characterized the decisions
Of her courts since the adoption of her Con-
stitutiOn."
Mr.. Cleaves proceeded to discuss the legal
propositions involved and the purpose OF the
statute under which the complainant invOk-
ed the aid of the court, c0ntending that the
legislature of Massachusetts in passing this
statute did not intend to establish a stand
ard of financial dealing in the common
wealth that would excuse the public from
reading the newspapers or from exercising
ordinary care in financial dealing, that the
court would not continue the injunction If it
is found that ordinary attention on the part
of the public will enable them to distinguish
between the two corporations, that the
business carried on by the two corporations
is so marked that no person having business
with either can bo misled, that no confu-
sion Of correspondence or business can re-
suit in the present case. No detriment can
come 60 the complainant, because the case
shows that no branch of business now car
ried on by the complainant is proposed to be
carried on by the defendant in this common
wealth. He coatended that there was no
evidence in the case even tending to show
that anyone had been misled, or that the
complainant had suffered the slightest dam
age or inconvenience, or was likely to in the
future, that the complainant should have
no exclusive right to the use of the words
international and "Trust" in this COM
monwealth or be permitted to appropriate
the same to the exclusion of others, citing
many authorities on the question. The ar
gument was listened to with the greatest at
tention by the court, and created most ia
vOrable impression. The decision will be
awaited with much interest.