because of its main tap root reaching deep into the earth, sometimes eight or nine feet, that it cannot thrive in the rocky region, does not appear.

Let one chalk out upon the map of the United States the lines indicated above, and he will see that Georgia possesses more of this pine forest, perhaps, than all the other States put together.

2d. WHAT PROPORTION OF THE FOREST HAS BEEN CULLED of all the valuable merchantable or shipping timber, say trees that will square fourteen inches or upwards? Commencing on the Savannah, it is asserted that all the forest bordering on that river has been culled over for a distance of twelve miles from the river; that it has been culled for a distance of six miles on each side of the Ogeechee River and Central Railroadand for the same distance on each side of the Cannouchee and Ohoopee rivers, and for a distance of eight to ten miles on each side of the Altamaha, and for six miles each side of the Oconee and Ocmulgee rivers. Obstructions near the mouths of the Santillas have prevented rafts from descending, and have thus protected the forest on these rivers from sharing the same fate as that on all the other streams.

Let lines now be drawn on a map of the State parallel with the rivers at the respective distances above indicated, and the intermediate spaces colored, and we have the plan upon which the timber chart is constructed, and which will show at a glance what portions of the forests have been culled, and what remains to draw our future supplies from.

To the people of Savannah this may be of interest, as the public mind there was somewhat agitated in regard to the proper location of the timber depot for the Savannah and Gulf Railroad. It is known that the fields from which the city has heretofore received her supplies will have been gleaned over in a few years-the sources drained, and the Savannah and Gulf Railroad, the only avenue left over which she is to receive her supplies of this important article of commerce. The following figures, taken from public documents, show that whilst hewn timber has almost ceased to be an article of exportation from the northern ports, the shipments have also fallen off from those of Georgia, a pretty sure indication that the supplies are getting short.

The following shows the exports (foreign) of hewn timber, from each collection district-years ending 6th June:

3d. WHAT ARE THE YEARLY DRAFTS MADE UPON THE FOREST.-The following table shows the yearly shipments of lumber, in feet, coastwise and foreign, of our principal ports:

1857.

1853. 1854. 1855. 1856. 1858. Charleston.... 19,709,798 23,844,650 23,852,417 14,523,581 17,198,771 15,312,128 Savannah*..... 49,283,500 28,700,700 34,887,500 44,748,070 27,254,352 37,481,674 Pensacola..... 15,941,632 21,390,518 27.222,937 31,103,074 30,566,298 Mobile+....... 17,680,760 10,482,104 11,232,949 9,359,300

....

The capacity of the mills tributary to the harbor of Pensacola is sufficient to saw three hundred thousand feet per day, and large bodies of pine lands have been purchased in southern Alabama from the United States Government, for lumber and naval stores.

The above tables show that the pine forests are being rapidly swept away. They show that while the shipments are increasing from the ports in the gulf, there is a rapid falling off from the Atlantic ports, and that the choice hewn or ton timber has almost ceased to be an article of export from the Northern ports. It shows, too, that they are sweeping down the forest on the gulf side as if it were inexhaustible. Referring now to the forest of Georgia. The collector's reports from Darien show that the shipments of lumber from that port nearly or quite equal those from Savannah; then there are the shipments from Brunswick, from Jeffersonville, and the Santilla, and St. Mary's, which may all reach a like amount, so that it would be a safe calculation to put the shipments of lumber from the Atlantic ports of Georgia to at least one hundred millions of feet annually. To this may be added for home consumption, plantation uses, house building, &c., fully a like amount. Estimating the average yield of one thousand feet of lumber per acre, would show a yearly destruction of our forest from this source of two hundred thousand acres.

Upon this point the experience of some of our timber cutters, of what would be a fair average for shipping or merchantable timber, and also for the common saw-mill or ranging timber per acre, would be of great

interest.

Large as this amount may seem, it is small compared with the yearly amount destroyed by the planter in clearing land. No estimate of this can be made until the census of 1860 is taken.

The tide of emigration is setting so strong upon this pine belt, particularly on its western side, upon the waters of the Chattahoochee and Flint, that commerce must not look there for timber, for in a few years that whole country will be checkered into plantations. So rapid has been the settlements of portions of that country, and so wanton and prodigal have been the planters in regard to the timber, that where, twenty years since, there was an unbroken pine forest, now in places there is a scarcity of timber for fencing.

To some the sight of this wholesale destruction of forests of fine timber is really distressing; not unfrequently will one planter deaden and destroy a thousand acres in one season.

Who are the customers for this vast amount of lumber? Upon the west we have Texas and Mexico; on the south the West Indies; and every government, on the northern and east shores of South America; on the north every State bordering on the coast from Maryland to Maine. The State of Maine, once the largest lumber exporting State of the Union, is now one of our best customers for this timber.

*The Savannah export for the year 1858 is taken to August 5th, 1859.

+ Besides the above, there was shipped from Mobile, in 1855, of masts and spars, 2,357; of tons of timber, 2,207, and deck plank, 351,60 feet. In 1857, of masts and spars, 1,263; hewn timber, 547 tons; of deck plank, Io0,45 feet. in 1858, 1,164 masts; of hewn timber, 16,796 tons.

It is entering so largely into the construction of our shipping, that it would be a very expensive, if not a difficult, matter to build a vessel without it. The sharp clipper shape of the vessels built of late years allows this material to be used for planking, where formerly only white oak would answer.

In Europe, we have for our customers Portugal, Spain, France, Ireland, Scotland, England, and every government bordering upon the Atlantic waters; while it is sent up the Mediterranean to its very eastern shores, and camels are no doubt at this time transporting it to the Holy City. Think of that! Georgia pines slung upon camels' backs going to Jerusalem! The following table from public documents, (commerce and navigation,) shows the values drawn from our pine forest and shipped to foreign ports for the past three years:—

1858. $292,163 1,158,847 100,679 1,464,210 1,089,232

$3,260,826

$5,012,384 $4,104,681

Here we have the value of four to five million dollars yearly shipped to foreign ports, whilst the amount consumed in the United States must be at least double.

And this is the forest which we have among us, that to some is a bugbear; whilst it is skinned, bled, cut, and mangled, yielding to us the sum of twelve to fifteen millions of dollars annually, without hardly a thought being bestowed upon the value of the remaining carcass.

What protection do the laws of the State give to the owners of these forest? None. If a man steals a cow worth ten dollars, or a pig worth three, he is provided with accommodations in the penitentiary, but if he steals a pine tree, worth perhaps fifty dollars, as it stands, (and some of these trees bring in market three to four hundred dollars,) nothing can be done with him, unless caught in the act, and then only a civil suit can be instituted, and being tried, may be, by sympathizers or persons engaged in the same business, is easily acquitted. Thus every man that owns this kind of property is completely at the mercy of these highland pirates. There is no security for him unless he employs a special agent to look after it. The want of laws to protect this property is often attended with serious consequences. When the price of timber advances, thousands of irresponsible persons pitch into the business of timber-getting. To hunt up the owners and purchase the lands is often the last thing they think of, for why should they? when they can take what they want without fear of anything but a civil action. Thus all interests are made to suffer—the regular timber-getters and merchants, by glutting the market, and the owner of the land by the depreciation of his property, in the loss of his timber. In Florida they have the most rigid laws to protect their forest, while the citizens of Georgia are pillaged by the people from that quarter, cutting and rafting the timber off on the streams that flow out of the State.

The government of the United States, doubtless looking to the rapid destruction of the pine forest, and foreseeing a scarcity of this valuable timber for her naval purposes, has withdrawn from sale large quantities of her pine lands lying upon the Suwannee River in Florida, and under date 3d March, 1859, perfected a most stringent law protecting her forest trees.

VOL. XLIII.-NO. IV.

29

JOURNAL OF MERCANTILE LAW.

IMITATION OF TRADE MARKS-SIMILAR FIRM NAME-CONTINUANCE OF FIRM NAME BY STRANGERS-ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHT TO A TRADE MARK.

In the New York Superior Court.-April, 1860. Hon. MURRAY HOFFMAN presiding. J. & P. Coats vs. Platt, et al.

In January last an injunction was granted to restrain defendants from selling an article of spool cotton, made by the firm of J. & T. COATS, (or rather by their successors.) and so marked, got up in imitation of the plaintiff's spool cotton, and having the plaintiff's emblems or trade marks on the wrappers. A motion was made to dissolve this injunction, upon which, after argument by A. BOARDMAN and J. W. GERARD for the motion, and by CHARLES EDWARDS and WM. M. EVARTS contra, the following decision was rendered by-

Hon. MURRAY HOFFMAN, J.--The plaintiffs are residents of Paisley, in Scotland, and are partners, trading under the name of J. & P. COATS." They are manufacturers and sellers of cotton sewing thread on spools.

This firm, under the same name and style, has been in existence and engaged in the same business since the year 1830. It originally consisted of JAMES COATS and PETER COATS. THOMAS COATS subsequently became a partner. JAMES died about the year 1847, and the business was continued by the survivors in the same name. The present plaintiff, JAMES COATS, Jr., was brought in about the year 1856.

This continuation of the original firm name, even in the interval between the death of JAMES in 1847, and the introduction of JAMES, Jr., in 1856, was legal and common by the law of England, and, I am warranted in saying, by that of Scotland.

As early as 1844, the firm introduced the spool cotton thread into the United States. HUGH AUCHINCLOSS & Sons became agents for its sale, and have continued so until the present time.

When so introduced the present style of the wrappers and labels, as exhibited on this motion, was adopted by the makers and has continued until the present day.

At the time of the introduction of the plaintiffs' spool-cotton thread into the United States, there were known in the market various other specimens of such thread, TAYLOR'S, CLARK'S, &c., but all of them were plainly and essentially distinguished by marks and emblems, &c., from the thread of J. & P. COATS.

The establishment of a reputation in the United States for the thread of the plaintiffs, with a right to the use of distinguishing marks and symbols, devised by and appropriated to themselves, and their own thread. is fully made out.

Before the year 1851, JOHN and THOMAS COATS, of Glasgow, Scotland, were manufacturers of silk thread, and in that year commenced the manufacture of cotton thread at Paisley. The firm was composed of JOHN COATS and THOMAS COATS. In the year 1855 THOMAS died, JOHN COATS was the son of THOMAS, was educated as a surgeon, and has never been engaged in the conduct of any business whatever except that of his profession, and except as sworn to that he and the widow continued the work by their agents or licensees, and received payment therefor in the shape of a percentage. Prior to the death of THOMAS an arrangement had been made with one ANDERSON, a cotton-thread manufacturer of Glasgow, by which they commenced manufacturing cotton thread at Paisley, near the manufactory of J. & P. COATS, with the sign affixed of J. & T. COATS. After the death of THOMAS the manufacture was continued by ANDERSON and those associated with him, under an agreement made by him with the said JOHN COATS and the executrix of said THOMAS COATS, until the insolvency or bankruptcy of the said ANDERSON, in September, 1859. At some period during this time, one HILL and one MCKENZIE had been introduced into the concern with ANDER

SON.

In 1851 the thread of J. & T. COATS began to be introduced into the New York market, through the house of GODFREY, PATTISON & Co., and was so continued down to the bankruptcy of such last-named firm, in 1859. Large quantities of such thread were sold in the city of New York and elsewhere in the United States.

The manufacture thus continued until September, 1859, when ANDERSON and his associates became bankrupt.

In September, 1859, an agreement was entered into between JonN COATS and the executrix of THOMAS COATS with one JOHN W. DAWSON, relating to the manufacture and sale of cotton-thread, and the use of the name of J. & T. COATS; the executrix and said JOHN COATS were to have the right of inspecting and examining, to receive a percentage upon the amount of sales of such thread and, to institute and carry out legal proceedings to prevent the infringement of their trade marks. Under the arrangement so made, the manufacture and sale of thread, under the old name and style, has been continued to this day.

The boxes, labels, stamps, cuts, &c., used by the parties acting in the name of J. & T. COATS, on the packages, large and small, prior to the fall of 1859, were, in all material respects, so dis-similar to those of the plaintiffs that I do not know how the former could be interfered with, unless upon the ground of the use of the name of J. & T. COATS--a point hereafter examined. Though the wrapper was a similar color, the vignette was totally different. There was really nothing to justify the charge of simulation.

This thread of J. & T. COATS, so put up, it is proven, did not meet with a ready sale in the United States.

During some part of the connection between ANDERSON, MCKENZIE, and HILL, under the permission of the executrix and JOHN COATS, the style of the firm was J. & T. COATS & Co. The word company is omitted, and it is attempted to be explained by PLATT on the ground of a wish to have the full benefit of the old firm name, and the inconvenience of altering plates.

In the fall of 1859 the former vignette or emblem of J. & T. COATS on the wrappers, which was simply the royal arms of Great Britain, was changed for all cotton thread sent to the United States, and the label or vignette now complained of was substituted.

Upon one branch of the case my opinion is clear. I consider it fully made out that J. & P. COATS first designed as an emblem and trade mark a combination of the arms of Great Britain and the United States, signified by a lion and eagle, and the English and American shields and flags; that they were the first to use such an emblem in England and the United States; that they have used such a symbol and trade mark since 1844 in the United States, and without any interruption of their exclusive use of it, until the fall of 1859; that the abandonment of their former symbol by the parties acting under the style of J. & T. COATS, and adoption of the present mark, was a plain and intended violation of the plaintiffs' rights; and that the simulation is too decided, and the differences too unimportant as to the wrappers stamped with these emblems to protect the defendants from an injunction to that extent.

I am far from saying that there are not marked differences in arrangement, and in some variation and additions or omissions. But I consider that the plaintiffs had acquired a right to the great and leading elements of these arms, flags, shields, and mottoes, in combination; and a device which used them all was a violation of the right.

The next question is of more difficulty. The difficulty is increased, from the strong impression which the facts leave upon the mind, that the whole course of manufacturing in the name of J. & T. COATS was a concerted and adroitly contrived scheme to profit by the established repute of J. & P. COATS' thread. But if this impression is warranted I am still compelled to the conclusion that the parties have not gone beyond the confines of the law, though they tread upon its verge.

It cannot but be conceded that THOMAS COATS had, in 1851, the absolute legal right to unite his son JOHN with him, though a minor, and to leave his silk