Page images
PDF
EPUB

any commodity or in the business of any person, firm, corporation or association, in commerce among the several states of the United States, with foreign nations or with Indian Tribes, shall be deposited in the Patent Office as hereinafter provided:

(2) The depositor shall file in the Patent Office a statement in writing, signed and verified, specifying the name, citizenship, domicile, street and post-office address of the depositor, a statement of all goods upon or in connection with which the trade or identifying mark, name, label or device is used; or if not used upon goods, then a description of the business in which the same is used; a statement of the mode in which the same is applied to or affixed to the goods or used in connection therewith or in the said business; the length of time during which the trade or identifying mark, name, label or device has been used, and a statement of how title thereto was derived; the depositor shall file with such statement twenty copies or facsimilies of such trade or identifying mark, name, label or device as actually used; shall pay into the Treasury of the United States the sum of Two Dollars and shall comply with such regulations as may be prescribed by the Commissioner of Patents.

(3) The Commissioner of Patents may at any time require the user of any trade or identifying mark, name, label or device in commerce among the several states or with foreign nations or with Indian tribes to deposit such trade or identifying mark, name, label or device, as herein provided, and after said demand shall have been made, in default of the deposit thereof within three months from any part of the United States, except the outlying territorial possessions of the United States, or from any foreign country, the user of such trade or identifying mark, name, label, or device shall be liable to a fine of one hundred dollars.

(4) No action or proceeding shall be maintained for infringement of any trade or identifying mark, name, label or device required by this act to be deposited until the provisions hereof with respect to deposit shall have been complied with.

(5) All trade or identifying marks, names, labels or devices required by this act to be deposited shall be redeposited every five years and failure so to redeposit shall be deemed an abandonment thereof.

(6) The Commissioner of Patents may make classifications, rules and regulations.

PROCEEDINGS

OF THE

CRIMINAL LAW SECTION

A meeting for the organization of the Criminal Law Section of the American Bar Association was held on Tuesday, August 24, in the Circuit Court of Appeals room in the Federal Building.

Edwin M. Abbott, Esq., of Philadelphia, Chairman of the Special Committee on Organization, presided and read a paper on "Modern Penology."

(For address of Mr. Abbott, see page 425.)

Circuit Attorney Lawrence McDaniel, of St. Louis, welcomed the members and in an extended talk made a recommendation that in all criminal cases the verdict of a jury should be rendered in accordance with the vote of nine or more of its members. This matter was referred to the Council for further consideration next year. He also said that something should be done relative to delays in trial. No delays should be allowed for more than thirty days, he urged, unless for illness of indispensable parties. Another paper was presented by Judge A. H. Reid, of Wausau, Wis., on "Interstate Extradition for Extra-Territorial Crimes." (For address of Judge Reid, see page 432.)

A complete set of by-laws was adopted which was submitted to the Executive Committee of the American Bar Association for their approval.

Dean Wigmore, of the Northwestern University Law School, Chicago, Ill., made a motion that two committees be appointed to report next year, one on Criminal Law and the other on Criminal Procedure. This was authorized.

At the election which followed, the following officers were chosen for the ensuing year: Chairman, Ira E. Robinson, of Charlestown, W. Va.; Vice-Chairman, William O. Hart, of New Orleans, La.; Secretary and Treasurer, Edwin M. Abbott, of Philadelphia, Pa.; Council, Roscoe Pound, Dean of the Harvard

University Law School; John G. Buchanan, of Pittsburgh, Pa.; Frank G. Drenning, of Topeka, Kan.; W. H. Clifton, Aberdeen, Miss.; F. B. Crosley, of Chicago, Ill.; Lawrence McDaniel, of St. Louis, Mo.; Earl C. Arnold, of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Thomas J. O'Donnell, of Denver, Colo.

After the meeting adjourned the Council organized and elected Roscoe Pound as Chairman. The Secretary outlined a plan of securing the interest of lawyers generally in this Section, which was approved.

EDWIN M. ABBOTT, Secretary.

MODERN PENOLOGY.

BY

EDWIN M. ABBOTT,

OF PENNSYLVANIA.

It is but a short step from the day of Blackstone to the present, and when we consider that in the age of that great legal luminary over 150 crimes, many of them insignificant, were punishable by death, then truly can the present system of penology be called modern.

Nearly all of the reforms in the methods of treating prisoners have found birth in the last fifty years, and the greatest progress has been made in the past two decades.

Truly the old theory of an "eye for an eye" has been supplanted by the realization that mankind is his "brother's keeper," and we have long since discarded the view that the only punishment which should follow the commission of a crime must be imprisonment, degradation and banishment from the realms of organized society forever. Today crime is studied as a science, and in many instances it is halted in its incipiency while hundreds of thousands of children and adults are steered back into orderly channels.

In other words, as one great penologist has well said, "the modern penal institution should become a repair shop and not a dump heap."

Many crimes have been superinduced by the misfortunes of birth, environment and lack of education, while other misdeeds have resulted from the astute mind endeavoring to circumvent modern laws and institutions. This is the age of law and lawmaking, and every embryo legislator feels it his bounden duty, immediately upon election to some law-making body, to prescribe for all present and future ills with some panacea of his own concoction. The result has been a multiplicity of laws and an incomprehensible number of law-breakers, most of whom go undetected. Perjury is common, but rarely punished, and many other crimes follow a like course. The income tax, the prohibi

tion of the sale of liquors, the restriction as to the sale or use of drugs, the automobile regulations, all contribute their quota of law-breakers, and when, finally, an offender is caught in the net and dragged before the public to stand trial for one of these offences, is he to become an outcast forever?

Most of these crimes, had they existed one hundred years ago, would have been punishable with death, while in other instances the culprit would have been severely punished and then turned loose upon society, to prey upon it or become a dependent of the most vicious kind.

The juvenile criminal of Dickens' time would have met such a fate. It was the criticism of this great author which roused public opinion and awakened Great Britain, so that the first Reformatory School Act was enacted in 1854 and secured the substitution of the school for the gaol and a change in the system of child punishment which has since grown and developed in the United States and abroad. Previously all prisoners when arrested were herded together. The arrest of a child for an offence and subsequent confinement with adult prisoners never resulted in any good. Today the juvenile is immediately segregated, an investigation made of his history, a separate hearing held in a juvenile court, and he is either placed on probation and helped to find his proper sphere outside of an institution or is sent to a reform school and educated for a useful existence. Over fifty schools of this character are to be found in England today, and innumerable numbers of children have been saved since such reformatories have been established. The history of the Denver Court, presided over by Judge Ben Lindsay, is world-renowned, but his humane example of how to handle the cases of juvenile delinquents is now followed in nearly every judicial district in this land. I might qualify this statement in one important respect. I refer to the juvenile who transgresses the laws of the United States. There is no proviso in the Federal statutes for special care of juveniles. In some instances arrangements are made with state or local authorities for the care of such children, but there is a great need in the national code for special custody and care of juvenile offenders. And the results of this special treatment of children have been well worth all the expense and labor involved. The records show that the greater percentage

« PreviousContinue »