Court Opinion

ID: 4144128
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-02-18 03:41:35.248247+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:34:39.067006
License: Public Domain

OFFICE   OFTHE          AmORNEY       GENERALOFTEXAS
                                     AUSTIN

mmorabls &wry mox, chalnuaa
wti0 state 130~zrd0r control
Austin, Texas

th..iutlepmnt,           yell
Penal    cede.         tha
                 You state
mat4 has filed with t&o 8
tion ror neoeusary li@a
the Board Of     ContJtof       ha
~~e~tarap6;         4s      yet
        .

          withtile rat3 in                      ,      u regaeut   our opln-
f011011the roll
                &\I?   p 6th
                                                      /’

                                               on reqravekl or print-
                                               prlntlgg, I. e. Is
                                           the  twtl Qrtntiag ' and
                                          ax stamp a prIntsa  artlclra~~

                                       mtlQle       ew48,   lmmlon'8 Penal

             "(a) xt ahall be the duty of the +mxus
        Liquor Contml 30ard and the ,mird of i;ontml
        to hiwe eqpared or printed all nimesesry lied
        uor sad beor tux et&?npfla8 protided fn both
        ..,rtielasf iad xxx 0r this ,ot.  3uch stsmpa
                                                                         294

            shell be of suo& design aarddW       tion aa
            the Taxias Ll12 Fed. 97, as outhorlty for t&e proposition that
printing and ewering    are always to be distinguished.      Law
booka such as Corpus Juris are referred to a8 text or aour
books owl me authorities only bwftr       a8 they em sup orted
by the aesea cited tharoin. Wa ham ocnreiully      ttmai.m g the
~88e of xattss of ~~r1w.m mnkxmte Co,, wpra, and rind
that thZs deal&on ua8 renbsrcrd by a lower Court in New York.
on Surther exawlnetlon,  we f’lnd thrt t&la dealsion (of the
lower oou?t) we8 r~veroed by the r;gpellate Ciirlolon of New
York, People (IXml. merloari Banknote C3. vs. Norgan, 40
F;.y. tiupp. llQ9, and this nreraal was affirmml by the hlgh-
eat court OS the State of New York. Wopla ex re1. hlornrioan
Banknote Co. vs. Borgan, 57 N. 2. 1120.

          we ham id.80 emml.ndl the oam of YuenWw      vu.
schils (Clroult Court, Now Yook l&52), I2 fed. 97, and do
not bellem, Chat this case is in point.   fn that ease, the
oopyrlght statutes of the Federal Government under conalder-
et&on provided, S.n aubateam, that a oltiaan or resident of
this country might obtain a eopyr[rrlght
                                      ot any book, zssp,~
print ohrom, anb othbr siallar artioles OS whlah ho was
proprietor. The twiurt held, in mbl)taaea, that -8 print‘
scant eny aark or fora made by lmpresalon or print&     an;l-
ehtng printed, OS Q pb3ture hpassf3d frtnn an ewrnfe & plate.
          Trusting that tbla satisiaotarlly   amwere   your
r;uestions, we em