There was a Red Cross Society organized in 1881 in this country, but it never developed into an organization until the following year, 1882. There have been three incorporated Red Cross societies. The present one was not incorporated until January 5, 1905, but it was expressly provided in the charter, by article III thereof, that the present society should succeed to all the rights and property which have been hitherto held, and to all the duties which have heretofore been performed by the American National Red Cross, incorporated by an act of Congress of June 6, 1900. So that, while the date of the present charter is 1905, it is a continuation of the work of the society organized in 1882. Again we incorporated in 1894, and again on June 6, 1900.

When this act to create the present Red Cross was passed it was recognized that some protection should be given to the emblem; that this emblem not only was to be used by the American National Red Cross, but it was being used by all of the Red Cross societies of the various countries and by the Medical Departments of the Army and Navy, and the bill as prepared gave to the Red Cross the exclusive right to the use of the emblem and provided that it should be unlawful to use it for trade and commercial purposes. A penal provision for violation of the statute was incorporated into the law. I am informed, but, of course, I cannot state this on my own knowledge, that at that time, largely at the instance of a very large company manufacturing surgical dressings and surgical goods in New Jersey, and which had commenced to use the emblem in 1894, twelve years after the United States had become a party to the Geneva convention of 1864, there was opposition to the bill in the form it was originally prepared, and as a result of that opposition there was added when the statute was finally amended in 1910 the clause reading:

Provided, however, That no person, corporation, or association that has actually used, or whose assignor actually used 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.

The effect of that provision was, of course, to say that anyone who prior to January 5, 1905, had used for commercial purposes and as a trade-mark in their advertising matter the Red Cross emblem should not be liable to criminal punishment thereafter for using it. It was then represented, I am informed, to the House committee which had the bill under consideration that there were but a few business houses that would by reason of this provision have the right to use the emblem. As it turns out, it had been used as a trade-mark, either by having it registered in the office of the United States Patent Office or by having used it in interstate commerce, by several hundred concerns that now claim the right to use this Red Cross emblem.

We have had compiled and submit herewith a list merely of those who, prior to 1905, had registered the name in the Patent Office, and this list is, of course, quite incomplete.

(The list referred to is copied into the record in full, as follows:)

Registered trade-marks, United States Patent Office, in which symbol or name of Red Cross or semblance thereof appears, Jan. 1, 1909.

You will observe that it includes several kinds of wines, liquors, beers, mineral waters, medicine, skin diseases, cattle medicines, cough drops, sausage colorings, pills, malt liquors, pile remedies, insect powder, toilet paper, suspensory bandages, fertilizers, washboards, whisky, and a very extensive advertiser of the emblem is a concern that manufactures dynamite and explosives. I do not need to dilate at length on the fact that it is certainly an anomaly to have appearing on the same sheet of a publication of the Red Cross, using its emblem as a messenger of mercy, and on the same sheet an advertisement of dynamite using the same emblem.

Mr. CROSSER. The two go together, do they not?

Mr. HARTFIELD. We have followed in the wake of dynamite heretofore, but we hope it will not be true hereafter. The activities of the Red Cross in the present war, of course, have increased the value of these trade-marks and I can say to this committee without any reservation at all, that there is not a single day goes by that we do not receive a complaint from some lady or man in America, calling our attention to the use of the Red Cross emblem; and we are constantly and daily receiving letters, particularly from small dealers who want to start in business and use the Red Cross emblem, asking why it is that we attempt to prevent them from using the emblem when concerns such as the large powder factory referred to and this large surgical concern in New Jersey are permitted to use the emblem, and to advertise it extensively. This concern in New Jersey, which is the principal offender, in my opinion, because it makes a class of articles where the emblem particularly lends itself to their interests, Johnson & Johnson, have gotten out even a Red Cross magazine or "Messenger," which they distribute to the drug stores throughout the country, and, unless you examine the publication with the greatest care, will lead to the impression that it is a real Red Cross publication and not a trade publication.

Mr. PURNELL. In what particular does that hamper the work of the Red Cross?

Mr. HARTFIELD. It hampers it in that the use of the emblem for commercial purposes tends to cheapen it, tends to make it appear to be a commercial proposition, tends to make it appear that we are lending our name and emblem to the commercial advantage of these people; and in a good many of these cures it tends to cheapen the emblem, just as the use of the American flag upon a pile cure, upon a toothache cure, or anything of that kind, tends to bring into bad repute the flag. The Supreme Court of the United States, speaking through Mr. Justice Harlan, in the Nebraska case

Mr. CROSSER. Have you found any concrete illustration of serious interference with your activities, as a result of this?

Mr. HARTFIELD. As I said just before you came in, every day we are written to by members of the Red Cross or chapter officials that these advertisements interfere with the operation of their work. For instance, a party in a town advertises a Red Cross shoe, the other merchants of the town will say, "Why can they use the name Red Cross, which gives the impression that it has either been approved by the Red Cross Society and that it is a health shoe in that it will preserve the shape of the foot, etc., and why is it that we cannot use the emblem?" The use of the emblem for commercial purposes