VETOES.

BILLS RETURNED TO THE LEGISLATURE BY THE GOVERNOR, WITH HIS OBJECTIONS THERETO, DURING ITS REGULAR SESSION, ENDING APRIL 20, A. D., 1899.

No. 1.

AN ACT

To protect the public from the unlawful use of bottles, jars, vessels, or other packages, in the sale and delivery of milk and cream and their products. Section 1. Be it enacted, &c., That any person who shall use any bottle, vessel, jar, or other package, upon which is stamped, blown or engraved the name, title or mark other than that of the person so using the same, in the sale, exchange and delivery of milk or cream, or their products, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof shall be fined not exceeding one hundred dollars and imprisoned not exceeding six months, either or both, at the discretion of the court.

JOHN R. FARR,

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

J. P. S. GOBIN,

President of the Senate.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,

Executive Department,

Harrisburg, Pa., April 8, 1899.

To the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsyl

vania:

I return herewith, without my approval, House bill No. 15, entitled "An act to protect the public from the unlawful use of bottles, jars, vessels, or other packages, in the sale and delivery of milk and cream and their products."

This act is evidently intended as a supplement to the act approved May 4, 1889, entitled "An act to prevent and punish the wrongful use or detention or misappropriation of milk cans, butter tubs and market boxes from the owners thereof, and the mutilation or obliteration of the name or residence of the owner on such cans, tubs or boxes," but varies from it in important particulars. The act of 1889 imposes a penalty for the use of milk cans, butter tubs or boxes of other persons without their consent.

This act when literally construed imposes a penalty upon any person who shall use any bottle, vessel, jar or any package upon which is stamped, blown or engraved the name, title or mark of any other person than himself, and might before ignorant or partial magistrates be used as a means of much annoyance to people who had not violated the rights of others in the trade. Besides, the act of 1889 imposes a fine "not exceeding one hundred dollars, or imprisonment not exceeding thirty days, or both, or either, at the discretion of the court," while this act imposes a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars and imprisonment not exceeding six months, either or both, at the discretion of the court. The imprisonment of six months seems to be too great for the offense. This act simply intends to impose a fine or imprisonment upon any person who shall use the trade mark of another without his consent. The courts are open to restrain by injunction any person who shall use the name, design or trade mark of another without his consent, not only in the milk business, but in any other legitimate business, and will award damages for such unwarranted use.

I can see no reason why this business should be protected by the imposition of a penalty so severe, more than any other business, and am not disposed to favor legislation which seeks to redress injuries of this kind by so severe and, in my judgment, unwarranted remedies. The title of the act is, "To protect the public from the unlawful use of bottles, jars, vessels, or other packages, in the sale and delivery of milk and cream and their products." The public is already protected by penalties, under the acts of May 25, 1878, and July 7, 1885, for the sale of milk or cream adulterated in any manner, but the body of the act does not seek to protect the public, but to impose a severe penalty on any person who shall use any bottle, vessel, jar, or other package, upon which is stamped, blown or engraved a name, title or mark other than his own.

The bill apparently, under the intention declared in its title, masks the purpose which might be used by designing persons to destroy that free and unrestricted competition in a legitimate business which should be open to all.

WILLIAM A. STONE.