“ COPYRIGHT” FOR RAISERS OF NOVELTIES. 475 
the end of six months, they will sell their stock at 1s. each—the 
same price as the raiser is selling his. He has not even a limited pro- 
tection. I can see no reason whatever why the raiser should not have 
the power to retain the sale in his own hands, and be able to bring 
an action at law for infringement, in the same way that one publisher 
cau against another who pirates his productions. A certificate from the 
Royal Horticultural Society would meet the case, if it were made 
illegal for anyone, except the man who holds the certificate, to sell. 
Professor Wittmack : I would like to support the suggestion of Mr. 
Paul. We in Germany have got such protection. But we do not go to 
the Government. We are protected by the laws of our Agricultural 
Society, which is a very great Society. A man who has bought a 
specimen of a novelty from the raiser, dare not himself sell it, within 
three years, so that the raiser may have that time in which to reap the 
due reward of his knowledge, skill, experience, and labour. This is 
done by a law of our Society. Surely a Society like the Royal Horti- 
cultural Society could do the same, and they should expel a man who did 
not do as they wished. 
Mr. James Douglas, V.M.H.: It appears to me that protection would 
cut both ways. If Mr. Paul sends out a new rose, and I get it for 
7s. 6d., I, having bought it, can do what I like with it. It is my 
property. I, too, might send out a new rose, and Mr. Paul might buy it, 
and do what he liked with it. Mr. Paul propagates other people’s new 
roses, and other people propagate his. It is perfectly fair. But pro- 
tection would restrict the sale of the plant, as the people who now pay 
6d. or 1s. would have to pay much more for it. Now, we do not want 
to restrict the sale of plants, but to increase it. I raise carnations and 
send out a new carnation at 3s. 6d. I see they are sold much 
cheaper by others next year. Well, if a man can sell cheaper, let him. 
I do not think you would be glad for long, even if you got legislation. 
Mr. Druery: There is an enormous practical difficulty in applying any 
principle of copyright to plants. The case is different with regard to 
books. You can establish and secure a copyright by depositing a 
volume, and if anybody infringes that copyright you have your remedy, 
and you can refer to the deposited volume for proof; but it is not so in 
the case of a plant. How could you possibly doit? Many raisers may 
be occupied in cultivating the same class of plants, and two or three of 
them might get something very similar, at the same moment—so similar, 
in fact, as to be practically indistinguishable. 
The Chairman: The point raised by Mr. Paul is a most interesting 
one, but there are evidently two sides to it, as to most other things, and, 
unless there were a very decided majority in favour of it, I do not think it 
would be wise for us to move in the matter. 
