Minister Rockhill
to the Secretary of State.
American Legation,
Peking,
China
,
January 25,
1906.
No. 209.]
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of the department’s dispatch No. 70, of November 8 last, and
unnumbered dispatch of December 9 last, the former expressing the
department’s views regarding the penalizing of infringements of
trade-marks and informing me that there is no statute of the United
States making the infringement, counterfeiting, etc., of a trade-mark
criminal, and that the department is of the opinion that the word
“punishment” should not be used in the draft of notes exchanged.
On learning the department’s views as to the use of the word in question,
I addressed a note to each of the ministers with whom I had exchanged
notes on the subject, a copy of which I inclose, informing them “that
the word punishment must be understood to refer to a civil action only,
and not to a criminal procedure as might be inferred from the use of the
word without the present explanation added thereto.”
I have also informed the various consuls that the word punishment must
not be interpreted to include a criminal offense, and have called to
their attention sections 16, 19, and 25 of our trade-mark law (act of
Feb. 20, 1905).
I have the honor, etc.,
[Page 232]
[Inclosure.]
Mr. Rockhill to
the ministers of Great Britain, France, the
Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, and
Italy.
Peking
,
January 22,
1906.
Mr. Minister and Dear Colleague: In
connection with the notes winch I had the honor to exchange with
your excellency on Great Britain, June 28, 1905; France, October 3,
1905; the Netherlands, October 23, 1905; Belgium, November 27, 1905;
Germany, December 6, 1905; Italy, December 18, 1905, looking to the
reciprocal protection from infringement by our respective nationals
in China of trade-marks belonging to them I duly transmitted copies
of the same to my Government.
In reply the Secretary of State has called to my attention, as
possibly misleading, the use made in my note to you of the word
“punishment” by our consular courts in China of American citizens
who may have infringed in China trade-marks the property of persons
under the jurisdiction of Great Britain, France, the Netherlands,
Belgium, Germany, and Italy.
In view of the fact that there is no statute in the United States
making the infringement, counterfeiting, etc., of a trade-mark a
criminal offense, and that effectual provision exists by a civil
action for damages by the owner of a trademark, my Government is of
the opinion that the word “punishment” should be understood to refer
to a civil action only, and not to a criminal procedure, as might be
inferred from the use of the word in question without the present
explanation added thereto.
I beg leave to call your excellency’s attention to the above
provision of our law, so that nothing in my notes of June 28,
October 3, October 23, November 27, December 6, and December 18,
last, may be construed as conflicting therewith.
I avail myself of this opportunity to renew to your excellency the
assurances of my highest consideration.
