MAncii 21', IDOU. 



The Weekly Florists^ Review^ 



U99 



f TO PROTECT OWNERS OF 



[ HORTICULTURAL NOVELTIES.^ 



The subject of adequate protection 

 for the originator or owner of a horti- 

 -cultural novelty has been discussed be- 

 fore trade societies since time imme- 

 morial. The matter was thought to have 

 been covered by previous copyright and 

 trade-mark laws but these were found 

 inadequate and a few days ago Represen- 

 tative Allen, of Maine, introduced in 

 congress the following: 



A bill authorizing the registration of 

 the names of horticultural products and 

 to protect the same: 



Be it enacted by the Senate and Hoiisi. 

 of Representatives of the United States 

 of America in Congress assembled, Tliat 

 any person who has discovered, origi- 

 nated, or introduced any new variety 

 of plant, bush, shrub, tree, vine or other 

 horticultural product, and gives and ap- 

 plies thereto a name, shall, upon applica- 

 tion to the Commissioner of Patents, have 

 such name registered in the United 

 States Patent Office under tlie provisions 

 of the act entitled "An act authorizing 

 the registration of trade-marks used in 

 commerce with foreign nations, or among 

 the several states or with Indian tribes, 

 and protect the same, ' ' approved Febru- 

 ary twentieth, nineteen hundred and five: 

 Provided, That no name for which ap- 

 plication for registration under the pro- 

 visions of this act may be made shall be 

 refused registration unless such name — 



(a) Is identical with a previously 

 registered name for the same variety of 

 product ; 



(b) Is identical with a known un- 

 registered name for the same variety of 

 product belonging to a person other than 

 the applicant; or 



(c) Has been dedicated to the public 

 by the discoverer or originator of such 

 variety. 



Sec. 2. That every certificate of regis- 

 tration issued on an application for the 

 registration of a name of a horticultural 

 product shall contain a grant to the 

 registrant, the legal representatives or 

 assigns of such registrant, for the term 

 of twenty years of the exclusive right to 

 propagate for sale and vend such variety 

 or horticultural product under the name 

 so registered throughout the United 

 States and Territories thereof; Pro- 

 vided, That the fniits or flowers pro- 

 duced from such registered variety or 

 varieties may be sold by any person 

 whatsoever for any purpose other than 

 that of propagation. 



Sec. 3. That all applications for the 

 registration of horticultural names ap- 

 plied for as trade-marks pending in the 

 office of the Commissioner of Patents at 

 the time of the passage of this act may 

 be amended with a view of bringing 

 them, and the certificates issued upon 

 such applications, under its provisions, 

 and the prosecutions of such applications 

 may be proceeded with under the provis- 

 ions of this act. 



Upon receipt of word of the proposed 

 bill, which was referred to the House 

 Committee on Patents, the nursery in- 

 terests of Rochester held a meeting at 

 which all the leading firms were repre- 

 sented. It was the unanimous opinion 

 of men like Chas. J. Maloy, of Ellwan- 



ger & Barry; Chas. J. Brown, of Brown 

 Bros. Co., president of the American 

 Retail Nurserymen's Protective Associa- 

 tion; O. G. Chase, of Chase Bros. Co.; 

 Wm. Pitkin, president of the National 

 Association of Retail Nurserymen and 

 secretary of the Eastern Association of 

 Nurserymen; Irving Rouse, the widely 

 known importer, and others that the bill 

 is inimical to the best interests of the 

 nursery trade and a plan was outlined 

 for work against it. The Rochester 

 representative in Congress T^as asked to 

 see that the bill is not passed until tlie 

 wishes of the nursery interests can he 

 consulted and President Albertson, pr<>si- 

 dent of the National Association of Nur- 

 serymen, has been advised that the bill 

 is safely buried in committee where it 

 will remain until such time as a request 

 for its passage comes from the trades 

 affected. 



Here is the opinion of a leading nur- 

 seryman on the bill: 



This bill seems to me too broadly 

 drawn. It would tend to encourage 

 fraud. If the public should be protected 

 by having the Agricultural Department 

 test and pass on the merit of tiie ])ro- 

 posed patented article before dissemina- 

 tion it would perhaps remove the most 

 serious objection. Still, even then, it is 

 a question if the introducer would not 

 do better and make more money in open 

 competition. I do not believe that you 

 will find much indorsement for this kind 

 of a bill among the nursery trade. 



Irving Rousk. 



The following letter sets forth the 

 opinion pf a firm which is among the 

 largest buyers and distributers of new- 

 things in all departments of the trade : 



We think the main objection tiic 

 nurserymen have to the bill is the i)ro- 

 teetion that it would give to those who 

 had articles that were absolutely of no 

 value. Anybody could register anything, 

 and the only thing they would have to 

 do would be to select some name that 

 was not already applied to other fruit. 

 There seems no provision to find out 

 whether the articles registered were an 

 improvement on old sorts or not, and you 

 can readily see how all kinds of fakes 

 could be put out a great deal easier and 

 better than they can now. 



The originator of anything new tliat 

 is desirable always puts it out at a 

 high price, and should get a fair re- 

 muneration for his expenses the first 

 year or two that it is introduced. Wo paid 

 $15 for six small plum trees this spring, 

 a new variety to test. We would sell 

 anybody six better trees for $1 of any 

 of the old standard sorts. Under this 

 new arrangement we would be prohibited 

 for twenty years from using any of the 

 buds or propagating wood from these 

 six trees, although the introducer is get- 

 ting good pay tor the new fruit, in the 

 price he is charging, the first year or 

 two, before nurserymen get to propagat- 

 ing it, and it seems to us that such a 

 law would simply put a damper on the 

 trade for all new things. One man could 

 not introduce and furnish all the trade 

 might want in a good many years if it 



amounted to apything. If it did not 

 amdnnt to anything uq one would care 

 to invest money in anything he could 

 not propagate, while the introducer 

 would have papers from Washington to 

 make peo])le believe that it was all right. 

 Stokrs & HakuisoxX Co., 



Per J. H. Davtoii. 



ITeic is ti'e way a leading seed house 

 looks at the matter : 



If this bill were to become a law and 

 if section two of it would hold good in 

 practice as in theory, it would be a good 

 thing for the registrant and would have 

 no material effect on the trade in gen- 

 eral, inasmuch as all would have the 

 same chance to buy and sex^ the artick- 

 unaer the conditions. We do not see, 

 however, how anyone could be legally 

 prevented from disposing of auy sur- 

 plus seed he might grow from any ac- 

 quired quantity of it. Such being the 

 case, the matter would stand just as it 

 does at present, viz.: The originator 

 would only have tlie benefit of the high 

 price for his novelty at the time of its 

 introduction. 



When ''Cleveland's Alaska" pea was 

 introduced a number of years ago it 

 was registered under the trade-mark law 

 and the originator endeavored to have 

 his right to the name protected under 

 the law. There was a ruling made that 

 he had a right to the name as it stood 

 but this did not prevent others from sell- 

 ing Alaska peas the following season; 

 neither did it prevent them from stating 

 that what they ottered had been grown 

 from "Cleveland" stock. 



We recognize the right that a man 

 would have to get a better price for 

 something that he would give especial 

 attention to and insofar as his name 

 attached to the article would benefit him 

 in any way, we think that it would be :< 

 good thing to protect him in it, at the 

 same time considering the trouble that 

 would arise in establishing exclusive 

 rights, and the short time that the extra 

 value of any seed novelty lasts, we hard 

 ly think it would be worth anyone 's 

 while to bother about it. 



Leonard Seed Co. 



Here is the opinion of a man who is 

 not only the raiser of numerous novelties 

 but the disseminator of many raised by 

 others : 



Should the proposed bill boconie a law- 

 it would mean the placing of the origi- 

 nator of a new plant, be it fruit or 

 flower, on the same plane with the in- 

 ventor of a new machine or auy hith- 

 erto undiscovered process or valuable 

 recipe. If this were done it would onlv 

 be doing simple justice to the hybridist 

 or plantsman who, by his own genius or 

 handiwork, jiroduced a valuable new 

 fruit or a new variety of flowering plant. 



It would greatly stimulate the efforts 

 now being put forth and horticulture, 

 and in no less degree floriculture, would 

 be the beneficiaries of the renewed work 

 in this line. All argument which gives 

 the right of the mechanic to the benefit 

 of the fruit of his labor would apply 

 with equal force in the domain of pomol- 

 ogy or floriculture. 



I think in equity such a law should 

 be passed, for it would prove of incal- 

 culable benefit to the trade at large, in 

 that it would protect not only the origi- 

 nator or holder of the certificate of reg- 

 istration, but would enable the partj- in 

 interest to control the markets for a time 

 at least should the new plant or fruit 

 prove of value. 



Whether the bill covers the case in all 



