Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

handling it. I have been associated with the firm 8 years and I have never heard of a case of anyone suggesting that they were misled into thinking that a product of Johnson & Johnson was endorsed by or prepared by or for the American Red Cross, or had any association with it.

Mr. CHIPERFIELD. You think that there are some products that the Red Cross emblem has a tendency to deceive the public?

Mr. PERRY. I cannot answer that "yes" or "no," except to say that I think that there has been bad judgment exercised in many instances of legal users, but I am sure that upon their attention being called to such usage the legal users would discontinue and be glad to give up any such usage. I can think of our own instances, where up until the time of the war all advertising copy came before a department of which I was a member for approval, and a poster came in for a particular drive of First Aid Week which seemed to me to be unfortunate. I took that poster and went down to Mr. Hughes, and I said, "I am going down with this and see what they think of it," and Mr. Hughes said, "We do not like it, and we would think it improper. And I said, "It will not be used."

[ocr errors]

That poster cost us $8,500, and we offered it gratis to the American National Red Cross and even offered to have it modified in any way that they wanted to make it useful to them if it could be done, at our own expense. We have cooperated in that way, and we are only too glad to do so.

Mr. TINKHAM. Mr. Chairman, I have one question.

You seem so familiar, or thoroughly familiar with all of the legislation and the history of the Red Cross, is this the first attempt before the Congress in any way of total prohibition of the use of the symbol? Mr. PERRY. No, sir.

Mr. TINKHAM. Will you tell us when it was proposed before now? Mr. PERRY. The 1919 act, when Colonel Hartfield appeared before this committee and spoke, and he was the only witness, I believe, and it was a total prohibition, and there were earlier acts of total prohibition. When Colonel Hartfield testified-I apologize-it was before the Patents Committee and not before the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. TINKHAM. But I had said "before the Congress."

The CHAIRMAN. I wanted to correct that. He said "this committee" and I wanted to get the record straight.

Mr. PERRY. The embarrassments and dangers were adverted to, in that testimony, but no incident cited, and Congress did not find that there were any presented to them, and the bill was not reported, it just lay there in the committee.

Mr. TINKHAM. Now, was there any other occasion except 1919? Mr. PERRY. Yes, sir, I believe that there were occasions back around 1905 and 1906; the original bill of 1904 which became law with amendment in 1905 did have total prohibition in one form or another. There were many amendments suggested.

Mr. TINKHAM. I have a memorandum that this issue in some form, as total prohibition in some form, was raised in 1895, 1898, 1900, 1905, 1910, and also in 1919.

Mr. PERRY. I believe that that is true, Congressman Tinkham, and also in 1890, 1892, 1893, 1894, 1897, and 1900.

Mr. TINKHAM. And each time, of course, it was rejected.
Mr. PERRY. Yes, sir.

(Catalog of bills introduced in Congress is as follows:)

CATALOG OF ALL BILLS INTRODUCED IN CONGRESS FOR THE INCORPORATION OF, OB TO PROTECT THE INSIGNIA AND NAME OF, THE RED CROSS

1. January 31, 1887. H. R. 11001. "A bill to incorporate the American Committee of the Red Cross Association." (No mention of insignia. No action taken on the bill.)

2. January 9, 1888. H. R. 3698. "A bill to incorporate the American ComImittee of the Red Cross Association." (No mention of insignia. No action taken on the bill.)

3. July 23, 1890. S. 4262. "A bill to incorporate the American National Association of the Red Cross." (Would prohibit use of insignia completely except authorized agents of the U. S. Government, the Red Cross, local and foreign, and the Masonic order. No action taken on the bill.)

4. July 28, 1890. H. R. 11566. Association of the Red Cross." the bill.)

"A bill to incorporate the American National (Identical with S. 4264; no action taken on

5. June 17, 1892. H. R. 9266. "A bill to protect the insignia and name of the Red Cross as prescribed by the Treaty of Geneva of 1864, and to incorporate the American National Association of the Red Cross, formed to carry out the provisions of said treaty." (H. Rept. No. 1790; would prohibit all use of insignia except by authorized agents of the U. S. Government, the Red Cross, local and foreign. Committee did not amend section 4. The House did not act on the bill.)

6. July 11, 1892. S. 3404. "To protect the insignia and name of the Red Cross, and for other purposes." (Would prohibit use of insignia except by authorized agents of the U. S. Government, Red Cross, local and foreign, and the Masonic order. No action taken by committee.)

7. September 6, 1893. H. R. 49. “A bill to protect the insignia and name of the Red Cross Association." (Would prohibit all use of insignia except by authorized U. S. Government agents, the Red Cross, local and foreign. No action taken on the bill.)

8. February 3, 1894. H. R. 5580. "To protect the insignia and name of the Red Cross Association." (As introduced, prohibited all use of insignia except by officers and agents of the United States, the Red Cross, local and foreign, the Knights Templar, Masons, and similar secret organizations who adopted such use prior to August 22, 1864, and the Sixth Corps of the Army. Commercial users were given 1 year to stop use unless they should receive permission from the American National Red Cross to continue such commercial use, in which case the charge was to be not less than $500 paid to the Red Cross. As amended in Senate Foreign Relations Committee, use was forbidden only "for the purpose of collecting, soliciting, or receiving money or material," or by those who "do, or attempt to do, similar work to the American National Red Cross without permission Thus amended, the bill passed Senate and House, but did not reach the President in time for signature. (H. Rept. 477.)

*

[ocr errors]

9. May 6, 1897. S. 1913. "A bill to protect the insignia and name of the Red Cross." (Same protection for insignia given in amended H. R. 5580. Passed Senate, but objected to in House on two occasions, and did not pass. H. Rept. 1135.)

10. February 5, 1900. S. 2931. "An Act to incorporate the American National Red Cross." (As introduced, this bill contained same section 4 as did S. 1913 (1897), but Senate Committee on Foreign Relations amended to forbid any "person or organization to use the said symbol or name of the American National Red Cross, to do or attempt to do similar work to the American National Red Cross, without permission * This did not attack commercial users. The House passed the bill as amended in the Senate and it was approved by the President June 6, 1900, to become the first Federal statute on the subject of Red Cross incorporation and protection of its insignia against fraudulent use in similar work. S. Rept. 391; H. Rept. 758.)

*

11. February 5, 1900. H. R. 8061. "A bill to incorporate the American National Red Cross, and for other purposes." (Section 4, as introduced. was the same as that in S. 2931, which was taken up in lieu. No action on the House bill.)

12. December 5, 1904. S. 5704. "An Act to incorporate the American National Red Cross. (Protected insignia and name from all fraudulent misuse in operations similar to those undertaken by the Red Cross, and limited commercial use to those users then "lawfully entitled to use the sign." Became law January 5, 1905, without amendment in either House and replaced the 1900 law as the basic incorporation of the Red Cross. H. Rept. 3146.)

13. December 13, 1904. H. R. 16449. Same bill as S. 5704. No action. 14. February 1, 1909. H. R. 27473. "A bill to amend an act approved January 5, 1905, entitled 'An Act to incorporate the American National Red Cross.'" (This bill attempted to limit commercial users to those "who had acquired rights prior to passage of this act through registration of the red cross as a trade-mark in the office of the Commissioner of Patents." Stopped other users as of December 19, 1911. Was reported, and passed House. No Senate action. H. Rept. 2188.) 15. February 10, 1909. S. 9281. "A bill to amend an act approved January 5, 1905, entitled 'An Act to incorporate the American National Red Cross.'" (Same as preceding H. R. 27473 as it was amended and passed the House. No action was taken on this bill.)

16. March 25, 1909. S. 496. "A bill to amend an act approved January 5, 1905, entitled 'An Act to incorporate the American National Red Cross.'" (Same as preceding H. R. 27473. No action.)

17. March 2, 1910. S. 6877. "To amend an act entitled 'An Act to Incorporate the American National Red Cross,' approved January 5, 1905." (As introduced, section 4 provides against fraudulent use of insignia and against all commercial use of insignia except that owners of trade-marks registered or applied for prior to January 5, 1905, "shall not be deemed forbidden by this act to use such trademarks in accordance with the terms thereof." The Senate amended the commercial restrictive clause to read "Provided, however, That no person, corporation, or association that actually used or whose assignor actually used the said emblem, sign, insignia, or words for any lawful purpose prior to January 5, 1905, shall be deemed forbidden by this act to continue the use thereof for the same purpose and for the same class of goods." This protected the user who had established common-law rights through use of the mark, regardless of the date of later registration, provided that he could prove use of the trade-mark in such class of goods prior to January 5, 1905. This law was approved and became Public, 258, 61st Cong., 2d sess., and is the third law to be enacted affecting the Federal charter of the Red Cross and the protection of the use of its insignia and name. S. Rept. 722; H. Rept. 1592.).

18. March 4, 1910. H. R. 22311. "A bill to amend an act entitled 'An Act to Incorporate the American National Red Cross,' approved January 5, 1905. (Hearing and report in House. Had same section 4 as S. 6877 both as to sense at introduction and to wording of amendment. S. 6877 was passed in lieu. H. Rept. 1256.)

19. January 13, 1919. H. R. 14330. "A bill to amend an act entitled 'An Act to Incorporate the American National Red Cross, approved January 5, 1905." (Hearings in House Patent Committee, proponents only, then no further action. As proposed, would restrict use completely (except to American National Red Cross, United States Army and Navy sanitary and hospital authorities) for the purpose of trade, advertisement, and sale of goods or for any business or charitable purpose. Fines from $100 to $500 and year in prison.)

20. May 19, 1936. S. 4667. "A bill to prohibit the commercial use of the coat of arms of the Swiss Confederation pursuant to the obligation of the Government of the United States under article 28 of the Red Cross Convention signed at Geneva July 27, 1929." (Passed Senate without debate June 11, 1936 (S. Rept. No. 2054). Passed House without debate June 15, 1936 (H. Rept. No. 2961). Signed by the President June 20, 1936.) The law, Public, 729, 74th Cong., reads as follows:

"Be it enacted, etc., That it shall be unlawful for any person, partnership, incorporated or unincorporated company, or association within the jurisdiction of the United States to use, whether as a trade-mark, commercial label, or portion thereof, or as an advertisement or insignia for any business or organization or for any trade or commercial purpose, the coat of arms of the Swiss Confederation, consisting of an upright white cross with equal arms and lines on a red ground, or any simulation thereof: Provided, That no person, corporation, or association that actually used or whose assignors actually used a design or insignia identical with or similar to that described herein for any lawful purpose

for 10 years next préceding the effective date of this act shall be deemed forbidden to continue the use thereof for the same purpose.

"SEC. 2. Any person who willfully violates the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be liable to a fine of not exceeding $500 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 1 year, or both. Approved June 20, 1936." 21. May 20, 1936. H. R. 12792. Same title and bill as paragraph 20 above. 22. April 7, 1942. S. 2441. "A bill to implement article 28 of the convention signed at Geneva on July 27, 1929, and proclaimed by the President on August 4, 1932 (47 Stat. 2074, 2092) by making it a criminal offense for any person to use the emblem and name of the Red Cross for commercial or other purposes." (Not yet acted on at this writing.)

23. April 9, 1942. H. R. 6911. Same title as S. 2441 above. (Hearings began before House Foreign Affairs Committee April 14, 1942. Continued to April 22.)

Mr. JOHNSON. I have a question.

What business is Johnson & Johnson engaged in? What do they produce or what do they sell?

Mr. PERRY. Johnson & Johnson is a holding and an operating company. Its charter was granted under the laws of New Jersey in 1887. There are today approximately 25 active subsidiary and affiliated companies, a number located in this country, involving 3 separate textile mills-1 in New Hampshire, 1 in Massachusetts, 1 in Georgia— a very large plant in Chicago, plants in New Brunswick, 4 or 5 of them, and all over the world; in Australia, 2 plants; in Canada 1 plant; in England 2 plants and an office apart from the plants; in South Africa 1; in Brazil both textiles and surgical dressings; in the Argentine also textiles and surgical dressings; and in Mexico surgical dressings.

The general line of products is surgical dressings, but the enterprise has branched into a number of kindred products. The red cross is used only by the parent company and only on its regular line of products of the classes manufactured prior to 1905. The red cross is not employed by the subsidiaries, except Seabury, Inc.

Mr. JOHNSON. How many different articles of merchandise did your company use in 1905, by means of the mark of the red cross, or prior to 1905, how many different articles of merchandise?

Mr. PERRY. I have not counted them. I have here a price list, dated January 1, 1905, which will give you there are 31 pages listing items, and they are surgical dressings. I know this, that we recently made an investigation and determined that in the surgical dressing line there are approximately 250 generically different types or classes of products; for instance, a suture or ligature is different from a band-aid, and adhesive plaster is different from cotton, and gauze might be a third product.

Now, there are approximately in surgical dressings about 250 generically different products.

Mr. JOHNSON. What I wanted to know was how many additionalor, in other words, what is your use now of the red cross? Do you use or do you manufacture and use the trade-mark of the red cross upon additional articles to those used in 1905, or do you just use them on the same articles?

Mr. PERRY. We use them on the same articles, and we use them on articles of the same class of goods, which are substitutions for articles that were used in 1905.

The surgical dressing science and technique and technology_have changed, of course, just as surgery has and other fields have. Today carded and sterile cotton is used where lint might have been used in 1900.

Now, we had the red cross on lint in 1900, and today we have it on the carded sterile cotton.

Mr. JOHNSON. You use nothing else, no different types of articles than those used in 1905, but just a different form of the same article; is that right?

Mr. PERRY. That is correct, sir, unless through inadvertence we have erred in our judgment as to what is the same class of goods, and the same purpose. We have adhered strictly to the interpretation that we will not mark anything with the red cross that is not of the same class of goods and for the same purpose.

Mr. JOHNSON. You do export, your company does export to foreign countries?

Mr. PERRY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JOHNSON. How many different countries, would you say?

Mr. PERRY. We only export from the United States in the Western Hemisphere, and then not to Brazil nor to Argentina nor to Mexico; we have plants in those three countries.

We do export to Latin America from New Brunswick, and we export from England to those points in the British Empire where we do not have plants.

Mr. JOHNSON. Do you export any to any of the oriental countries? Mr. PERRY. England exports to the oriental countries.

Mr. JOHNSON. But your trade-mark, then, your goods then, that are so marked, or do you put your trade-mark, the red cross, onto the goods that you send to England?

Mr. PERRY. We do not ship to England.

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, the countries that you do ship outside of the territorial limits of the United States?

Mr. PERRY. Very seldom. We have this as a policy, that since there are prohibitions, and since we cannot have a separate package for everyone of the Spanish-speaking countries, and everyone of the foreign-langue countries, we have a red-chain trade-mark but

Mr. JOHNSON. Is there any law that prohibits you from shipping abroad that way or is it just because of your own policy of the company?

Mr. PERRY. There are in some countries prohibitions against the receipt of red-cross-marked goods.

Mr. JOHNSON. So your rule is to make it uniform, and not use the red cross on any goods that are exported from this country?

Mr. PERRY. That is correct. There are exceptions, of course. The suggestion has been made that we could easily do as we have done in England and Australia and Canada and Brazil and the Argentine and other countries, eliminate the red cross, and why is it that we use the red cross here and the red chain there?

The answer is simply that we did not start manufacturing in those countries until the twenties, and, of course, when we started, a number of these countries did have prohibitory statutes even though they were partial, and since we had no reason to use a red cross and since there was a possibility that there would be prohibitions or limitations, we

« PředchozíPokračovat »