EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT ' junction," by Edward P. Costigan, Central Law Journal (V. lxiv, p. 402). EQUITY (Accounting)." "A Phase of Accounting in Trade-Mark Cases," by Guy Cunningham and Joseph Warren in the June Harvard Law Review (V. xx, p. 620). In the very recent case of Regis v. Jaynes, 191 Mass., 245, the unusual question was directly pre sented whether, in an accounting in a trade mark case, the defendant can show in relief of himself that he made no sales by reason of the resemblance between the two labels, and that there had been no confusion of the competing commodities in the public mind. The court held, expressly dealing with the case apart from the Massachusetts trade-mark statute, that a defendant must account for all profits earned by the infringing trade-mark irrespective of the question, whether the pur chasers had in fact bought the goods of the plaintiff believing them to be the goods of the defendant. The case was not' governed by any authority in Massachusetts, and the closest authorities are in conflict. The authors contend that the case was wrongly decided. They say the profits, under the facts of the case, being due to the defendant's reputation and not to the plaintiff's, are properly the property of the defendant and the court should not confiscate them and give them to the plaintiff. Against any further confusion, the plaintiffs are amply protected by injunction and ex hypothesi there has been none in the past. Not content with giving the plaintiffs all the money actually earned by the defendants, without the aid of any resemblance to the plaintiff's trade-mark, the court gave in addi tion a fictitious profit by refusing to permit the defendant to charge as a part of the ex penses of the business a fair proportion of rent, heat, light, and clerk hire on the ground that the defendant could not prove that these charges would have been less if the infringed goods had not been sold. This is an artificial profit instead of the real profit as it would be figured by any business man. The authors suggest that if the rule requiring the plaintiff to prove what profits are derived from confu sion, and what are not, is too heavy a burden to place on injured merchants, a just result would be obtained by shifting the burden of proof so as to allow the plaintiff to recover all
435
profits unless the plaintiff can show affirma tively that none were the result of deception. ETHICS. " Ethics of Advocacy," by W. F. Chipman, Canadian Law Review (V. vi, p. 230)HISTORY. " The Monroe Mission to France, 1794-1796," by Beverly W. Bond, Jr., The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Md., 1907. HISTORY (Haywood Trial). The series of articles by C. P. Connelly beginning in Col lier's for May 11, 1907, on the Moyer-Haywood case explain the history of the troubles between the owners and the miners in Colorado and Idaho which have distressed that community for many years and which will be thoroughly aired in the trial now proceeding at Boise. The narrative bears the stamp of accuracy and impartiality and is a great improvement over the current newspaper accounts. The gist of the whole matter is well summarized in the following editorial. "The Moyer-Haywood Case goes far down into the roots of Western life. When the Rocky Mountain States passed from the pioneer age to the period of industrial development they inherited from old years two classes of ' un desirable citizens.' On the one hand were the bad men, the legitimate successors of Slade, Billy the Kid, and their kind. These, when the period of highway robberies, saloon brawls, and cattle rustling were no more, settled down to mine and ranch labor, bringing with them their lawlessness and their love of trouble. On the other hand was the reckless and conscienceless entrepreneur, the mine owner or mine buyer eager only to rip his pile out of the earth and hurry East to spend it. The fight between these two classes goes as far back as Leadville in 1880. In the Cceur d'Alene, in Butte, in Cripple Creek, it was the same old fight. This Moyer-Haywood case is only its most recent round. And whether these men are guilty or not guilty, the moral responsibility for this state of affairs in the Rockies hangs in balance between the two classes." INSURANCE LEGISLATION (Armstrong Committee's Work). In the May-June Ameri can Law Review is found an article by James McKeen on " Mr. Samuel B. Clarke and the Armstrong Committee's Life Insurance Legis lation," (V. xli, p. 321), which takes issue
