The Minneapolis journal., 1904-07-29
CAMERA DECISION
IMPALES PARKER
Woman Quotes Judges Own
View of Promiscuous Photog-
raphy to Prove Him
Wrong
New York Sun Special Service.

New York sun special Service
& Rochester N. Y, July 29.-Miss
Abigail Robertson Of this city brought
suit against the Rochester Folding
box company to restrain 1t from using
q her photograph to adorn packages Of
goods offered for sale. The case was
decided against her in the New York
i court Of appeals, Judge Parker writ
/ Ing the decision.
III Judge Parker's recent protest
against the liberties taken with him
and his family by photographers has
brought out this open letter, which
I has been sent to Judge Parker by Miss
Robertson:
/ Alton B. Parker, Esopus. N. Y
7 My Dear Sir: I have read in the press
4 dispatches that Mrs. Parker was obliged
Ito leave home to avoid the annoyance Of
/ ubiquitous photographers, notwithstand-
ing the warning given by you, and it is
reported in the same dispatches that there
would be no more prOmiscuous photo
] graphing Of yourself and family.
You are quoted as saying: II reserve
the right to put my hands in my pockets
and assume comfortable attitudes, with
I out being everlastingly afraid that I shall
be snapped by some fellow with a
camera"
Has No Such Right.
take this opportunity to remind you
that you have no such right as that which
for my statement, being nothing less than
decision of the court Of appeals of this
state wherein you wrote the prevailing
opinion. -
;z The action in which was the
plaintiff and the Rochester Folding Box
company and enother corporation were
the defendants. You may recollect that
the facts in that case were undisputed and
that it was admitted that the defendants,
without my knowledge or consent, and
knowing that they had no right or author
ity so to do, had secured my photograph
rand, having caused it to be engraved and
Autographed to life size. had circulated
about %, 900 copies thereof as an adver-
tisement Of the commodities in which one
OF the defendants dealt; that the likeness
was posted conspicuously in stores, ware
houses, saloons and other public places
and had been recognized by friends and
others, that my good name had been at
y tackled as a consequence and that as a
result Of the shock and modification upon
&my ascertaining that I had been made
'spublic property Of in this manner was
4actually confined to my bed with nervous
gtroubles and placed under the care Of
physician; that such use of my likeness
%Was being continued and that 7 desired an
sinjunction against the defendants re-
sstraining the further use thereof
How She Lost Her Case.
s1 Inc QueSuon, arose upon demurrer and
z the special term held that the complaint
entitled me to relief. The appellate di-
vision Of the fourth department unani-
mously affirmed that decision, and upon
appeals to the court of appeals this latter
court was divided; three of the Judges de-:
cfded> with you that the facts furnished
no grounds for relief, and three dissented
You referred to my cause of action as a
so called act of privacy and admitted
that such publicity, which some find
agreeable is teaplaintiff very distasteful
and that suffered mental distress, r"when
Others would have appreciated the compli-
ment to their beauty" and In an opinion
sixteen pages long you arrived at the con-
clusfon that had no rights that#could
be protected by your tribunal I sim
cerely hope that if you suffer annoyance
of this kind in some locality where your
decision Is not controlled you may be
granted the relief which you denied me.
: Very truly yours, -
Abigail Robertson.