Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/46

 38 FEDERAL REPORTER �to sell his own goods as the goods of another, and, therefore, he -will not be allowed to use the names, marks, letters or other indicia of another, by which he may palm off his own goods to purchasers as the manufacture of another. DiSer- ence between the exhibits undoubtedly exists, still it is mani- fest that the general appearance of the package, in the respects mentioned, and others -whioh might be suggested, is well cal- culated to mislead and deceive the unwary, and ail others who purchase the article without opening the box and examining the label." �The decree of the circuit court was affirmed, enjoining the respondent from using his own name upon any label or wrap- per for boxes or packages of pills resembling or in imitation of the labels or wrappers or trade-mark of the complainant, whether in style of engraving, printing or lettering, but the decree for account was reverscd upon the ground of inex- cusable laches and delay in filing the bill. �We have corne to the conclusion in the case before us that the respondent should be enjoined from putting up his goods in the manner in which he has been doing, as shown by the exhibits, or in any other manner so simulating the form, color, labels and appearance given by the complainant to his goods as to mislead purchasers into mistaking one for the other. �What we decide is that whether the complainant has a trade-mark or not, as he was the first to put vip bluing for sale in the peculiarly shaped and labeled boxes adopted by him, and as his goods have become known to purchasers, and are bought as the goods of the complainant by reason of their peculiar shape, color and label, no person has the right to use the complainant's form of package, color or label, or any imitation thereof, in such manner as to mislead purchas- ers into buying his goods for those of the complainant, whether they be better or worse in quality. And ûnding, from the exhibits and proof in the cause, that the bluing put up by the respondent is not only well caleulated so to mislead purchasers, but has actually done ao, to the injury of the com- ��� �