Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 09.pdf/595

 552

edged to entitle it, the ordinary deed of real estate, to be recorded. Deere v. Losey is therefore over ruled." The section correctly set forth is as follows : "Such assignment shall be in writing, and shall he executed and acknowledged in the manner in which a conveyance of real estate is or shall be required to be executed and acknowledged in order to entitle the same to be recorded." The trouble was the in terpolation of a comma after the latter " acknowl edged," which changed the application of "the same." GOAT NOT A PERSON. — The Queen's Bench Di vision has decided that a goat is not a person or mankind. Osborne ''. Chocqued [1896] 2 Q. B. 109. This was an action of damages by the bite of a dog. The plaintiff failed to show that the dog had ever bitten any person before, but did show that he had bitten a goat. This was held not to be an equivalent.

KOBUERV OF GUEST BY INNKEEPER'S SERVANT. — Judge Dent, in Cunningham?'. Mucky, p. 675, an action by a drunken guest at an inn for robbery by the innkeeper's servant, quoting from Judge Dixon, in another case, says : " If drunk, the plaintiff might still have claimed the protection of his host, as did Falstaff when he fell asleep behind the arras, and might say with him : • Shall I not take mine ease in mine inn, but I shall have my pocket picked?1"

THE TOBACCO HABIT. — If any of our readers are afflicted with this habit, they will be entertained by reading the report of Sterling Remedy Co. т. Kureka, etc., Manuf. Co., 46 U. S. App. 709. This was a bill in equity, on behalf of the proprietors of a cure for the tobacco habit, called '• No-to-bac," to restrain the defendant from selling a similar article called "Baco-curo."' It was held that there was no infringe ment of trade mark nor any unfair competition in trade. The complainant alleged that his trade had fallen off since the defendant started business. The

court accounts for this by "judicious advertising, and also by the fact that, unlike the complainant, the de fendant insists that during the time of taking the supposed remedy, the patient should not discontinue the use of tobacco," observing: " In this we think the defendant has the decided advantage, because it does not insist upon the exercise of the will, but cures, or professes to cure, in despite of the will. Therein it strikes a 'great popular chord,1 in that it enables one to indulge a habit of which he desires to be rid, while partaking of the cure. An easy road to health will always be as popular as an easy road to wealth." So one need not be oft" with the old love before he gets on with the new. But is " No-to-bac" a valid trade mark anyhow? Is it not merely descriptive?

A TRANSFORMATION. — State v. Glenn, 119 N. C. 804, is a funny case. Glenn and the co-defen dant. Amis, were indicted for an affray. G. had been walking up and down the street, swearing he could whip a man, and struck A. a blow in the face with his fist, knocking his head against a post, so that the "lick " was heard across the street. A. retorted with a pair of iron plyers. G. then put his hand in his pocket as if to draw a knife, whereupon A. caught and held his arms fast, but G., getting loose, jumped upon a box, announced that he was an officer, and commanded the peace. A. pleaded guilty, and the court gave G. ihirty days in jail on a verdict of guilty. Chief-Justice Haircloth, observed : "We are not in formed whether the weapons used were deadly weapons or not, but we do observe that the application of the pair of iron plyers, whatever they may be, had an immediate and salutary effect by transforming a sixfoot clubber into an officer, who at once began to discharge his duties by commanding the peace . . . If we were permitted to consider the question we think we could approve this verdict. We have no doubt that his honor in pronouncing judgment gave the defendant full credit tor his good intentions in trying to preserve the peace." Amis ought to have got off free.