Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1907, (In two parts), Part I
File No. 406–96.
Minister Rockhill to the Secretary of State.
Peking, August 30, 1907.
Sir: I have the honor to inclose herewith newspaper clippings stating that a proclamation has been issued by the Shanghai taotai for the protection of British trade-marks from infringement in his district.
I have suggested to our consul-general at Shanghai (copy inclosed) that he endeavor to secure similar protection for American trademarks in that district.
I have, etc.,
[Inclosure 1.]
trade-marks in china.
We are glad to be able to call attention to a proclamation which has recently been issued by his honor the Shanghai taotai, on the subject of the infringement of British trade-marks by Chinese. From the free translation, which we give in another column, it will be seen that the Taotai Jui has readily responded to the request of his majesty’s consul-general, and has taken the most practical steps in his power to check an evil which has formed the subject of very general complaint throughout China. The proclamation in question recognizes the existence of this “very intolerable business competition,” and, although in deference to the wishes of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce special stress is laid upon two kinds of articles, cigarettes and soaps, the purport of the document is to prevent the general infringement of trade-marks within the jurisdiction of the taotai. Such a proclamation has the force of law, and, in view of the good relations now subsisting between British and Chinese authorities, of which the proclamation is a happy illustration, there can be no doubt that punishment will be meted out to those who offend against its provisions. It is not the first occasion on which Taotai Jui has met the wishes of his majesty’s consul-general in similar matters and it is right that such action should receive general recognition.
The need for such a proclamation arises from the fact that in spite of article 7 of the treaty of Shanghai of 1902 nothing has yet been done by the Chinese Government to protect British trade-marks against infringement, imitation, or colorable imitation by Chinese subjects. Nor has the Chinese Government fulfilled its undertaking “to establish offices within the jurisdiction of the superintendents of northern and southern trade where foreign trade-marks may be registered on payment of a reasonable fee.”
The first attempt on the part of the Chinese Government to carry out the provisions of this article was the appearance of some draft regulations drawn up by the board of commerce in 1904. As this document proved altogether unacceptable to the representatives of several powers, steps were taken in the following year to prepare a series of trade-mark regulations embodying the main views of foreign governments. For fifteen months or more the Chinese Government successfully ignored this document, and in November, 1906, produced yet another set of regulations which again bore no relation to foreign wishes on the subject. Very rightly, the representatives of the powers in Peking will have nothing to do with this fresh draft and insist that the document prepared by them in 1905 should form the basis of all further negotiations. As far as can be judged, the attitude adopted by the Chinese authorities is prompted as much by inability to grasp the importance of the subject as by a foolish anxiety to get the better of foreign merchants. Provided the registration of trade-marks can be made sufficiently remunerative to the Government, they affect to see no reason for the full protection of industrial property.
[Page 260]This attitude of the Peking Government throws into stronger relief the action of Taotai Jui in meeting British wishes, in so far as his jurisdiction is concerned; the more so as he has had occasion to complain, himself, of the indiscriminate publication, by foreign publishing houses in the settlement, of Chinese books, to the detriment of native publishers. In the actual circumstances obtaining no breach of the law has been committed by the foreign publishers, but it is natural that it should appear strange to the Chinese mind that the evil can not be remedied by the simple procedure of issuing a proclamation. China’s redress, however, in this matter can only lie in her becoming a party to the international convention of 1883 for the protection of industrial property. In the meantime it must be admitted that she sins in the matter of the infringement of trade-marks more than she is sinned against. The latest complaint comes from Japan, and although there is much truth in the Japanese allegations it is to be feared that any aspersions cast upon China at the present juncture are intended as a counterblast to the charges brought against Japan herself. Of the powers mainly interested in trade and commerce in the Far East, the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, and Italy have agreed to afford their nationals mutual protection in the matter of trade-marks. As the Japanese Government has refused to join this group it has to face all responsibility for the offenses against international copyright committed by unscrupulous Japanese merchants and others, and no amount of protestation or inveighing against Chinese shortcomings will satisfy foreign traders of the sincerity of the Japanese Government in protecting individual property in its own country. It is possible that the unsatisfactory attitude of Japan in this matter, her failure to cooperate with the four powers in protecting the interests of their nationals, and the bad example set by individual Japanese are responsible for the dilatoriness displayed by China in carrying out her treaty obligations.
trade-marks.
The following is a free translation of a proclamation recently issued by his honor Taotai Jui Cheng on the subject of British trade-marks:
I, Jui Cheng, the taotai of Shanghai, etc., do hereby issue this proclamation for the information of the public that H. B. M. consul-general Sir P. L. Warren has written me to the effect that he has repeatedly received complaints from British merchants in regard to Chinese manufacturing and retailing certain qualities of English-made goods, purporting same to be manufactured by those factories, for which they (the British merchants) are the sole agents. This is a great detriment to the British interests. The quality of the goods, which are imitated according to English patterns, is very poor and of great difference, although the packing, color, pattern, and chop are quite similar to those of English make. Therefore, when the Chinese is charged with copying patterns he generally denies the charge by pointing out the slight difference of patterns between the two kinds of goods. This is a very intolerable business competition in the market. Recently such malpractice is daily increasing, and therefore litigation on this question will keep on increasing also. As such would more or less strain the commercial relation of the two countries, he requests me to prohibit further copying of patterns by Chinese people. The Chinese Chamber of Commerce, upon being notified of this matter, has replied that such prohibition is the right step taken for commercial protection, and asks to be informed of the different patterns which are most frequently being copied in order to cooperate in the prohibition. In compliance with my request, the British consul-general has furnished me with a list of the cigarettes manufactured by the British-American Tobacco Company (Limited) depot, and also a list of the soaps for which Messrs. A. R. Burkill & Sons are the sole agents. These two articles are more often manufactured by the native according to their patterns. The consul-general says that he has on several occasions called the attention of the viceroy of Nanking to this matter, and, moreover, he requests me to issue this proclamation, to be posted everywhere, to prohibit further imitation of English-made goods. The chamber of commerce having been asked to observe this order, I hereby warn the general public that henceforth such malpractice on the part of our people should once and for all be stopped. Anyone found to be violating this law will be punished without leniency.
Minister Rockhill to Consul-General Denby.
Peking, August 29, 1907.
Sir: Referring to the proclamation recently issued by Taotai Jui Cheng of Shanghai, at the instance of the British consul-general, for the protection of British trade-marks in his district (published in the North China Daily News of August 20), it has occurred to me that we should secure similar treatment. I would accordingly suggest that you take up the matter with the taotai and endeavor to have him issue a similar proclamation or an official statement to the effect that American trade-marks will be protected in like manner as British marks. I would also suggest that you furnish the taotai with exemplars of such American trade-marks as are most largely infringed and arrange to file in his office from time to time copies of other American trade-marks as occasion may require.
In giving effect to this suggestion, the legation would be glad to have you pursue such course as may recommend itself to you as most likely to secure the end in view.
I am, etc.,