6i6 
Editorial. 
(  Am.  Jour.  Pharm. 
\    September,  1920. 
"3.  That  the  name  'Cast or ia'  is  a  purely  fancy  name  in  no  way 
descriptive  of  the  article." 
Comments. — A  fanciful  name  is  one  that  is  used  fancifully.  Is 
the  name  "Castoria"  being  used  fancifully  by  the  Centaur  Co.,  or  is  it 
being  used  descriptively?  The  word  "Castoria"  in  itself,  means 
nothing,  and  the  same  is  true  of  the  words  "cat,"  "dog,"  "hat," 
"buggy,"  "piano,"  and  "porcupine."  In  themselves  these  words 
may  be  with  equal  proprietary  called  fancy  names.  But  when  they 
are  applied  to  the  various  things  which  have  become  known  by  these 
names  they  become,  by  such  use,  descriptive  nouns  of  the  common 
language.  In  this  way  "Castoria"  has  become  just  as  descriptive 
of  the  medicinal  preparation  known  as  Castoria  as  the  name  "salt" 
is  descriptive  of  salt,  and  the  name  "sugar"  is  descriptive  of  sugar. 
"4.  That  in  Canada  the  word  'Castoria'  has  acquired  a  secondary 
meaning  identifying  the  article  sold  under  that  name  as  the  manu- 
facture of  the  petitioners." 
Comments. — Now,  when  it  is  considered  that  the  function  of  a 
trade-mark  is  to  distinguish  between  brands,  and  that  the  name  of  an 
article  cannot  at  one  and  the  same  time  perform  the  function  of  an 
appellative  and  a  brand  mark,  it  becomes  at  once  apparent  that  the 
name  "Castoria"  is  not  being  used  by  the  Centaur  Co.,  as  a  trade- 
mark, and,  therefore,  is  not  in  fact  a  trade-mark.  The  only  reason 
why  the  name  "Castoria"  exclusively  distinguishes  the  manufacture 
of  the  Centaur  Co.  is  because  the  Centaur  Co.  has  monopolized  the 
sale  of  the  product  known  as  Castoria.  Until  the  monopoly  ceases 
there  is  nothing  to  distinguish  it  from.  But  when  someone  else 
commenced  to  make  Castoria  then  two  brands  of  Castoria  came  into 
being,  and  it  logically  follows  that  both  brands  must  be  sold  under 
the  generic  name,  i.  e.,  "Castoria,"  otherwise,  the  manufacturer  of 
second  brand  is  deprived  of  his  rights,  for  he  has  an  equal  right  to 
manufacture  and  sell  Castoria,  and  would  be  deprived  of  that  right 
if  he  could  not  sell  it  as  "Castoria."  It  is  evident  that  the  manu- 
facturer of  the  second  brand  would  be  forced  to  educate  the  public 
to  use  another  name  for  "Castoria,"  claiming  the  preparation  under 
the  new  name  to  be  the  same  as  that  being  sold  by  the  Centaur 
Co.,  under  the  old  name,  and  would  also  be  obliged  to  do  so  under  the 
unfair  handicap  of  charges  of  fraudulent  imitation. 
"5.  That  no  one  in  Canada  can  sell  or  offer  for  sale  a  senna 
laxative  under  the  name  of  Castoria,  without  misleading  the  public 
