mark prior right to the use of that trade-mark and makes it impossible for the real owner of the mark to export his goods to that country without subjecting those goods to the liability of confiscation. For instance, we had one instance of a shipment of a large consignment of American motor trucks to Buenos Aires, and it was found that a German firm there, about one month before the arrival of these goods, had registered this trade-mark, which made it impossible to land those goods without subjecting the real owner to civil liability for infringing the acquired rights of the prior regis

trant.

The establishment of two international trade-mark registration bureaus, the Habana bureau for the entire northern tier of States, including the Central American States and the West Indies, and the establishment of the other bureau at Rio, will protect trademarks throughout the American Continent. As a matter of fact. the United States is, from point of view of the expansion of commerce and the interests of trade, primarily interested in the establishment of those bureaus because of the fact that there is as yet comparatively little trade as between the South American countries. They have not suffered by reason of the usurpation of trademarks as between one another, but we have suffered very seriously and severely on account of this practice in some countries.

To enumerate very briefly some of the other matters that the International High Commission has taken up, I may refer

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Before you leave the trade-mark question, I think, possibly, some members of the committee might desire to ask you some questions. I know I do.

As I understand you, if the owner of, say, Coca Cola shipped a cargo to Brazil, and some one a month before its arrival had taken out that trade-mark, the American merchant would be likely to have his goods confiscated?

Mr. Rowe. That is true of Argentina.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that true of many of the South American countries?

Mr. Rowe. It is true of quite a number. I have not the list of the countries.

The CHAIRMAN. That is immaterial. I merely wanted to get the facts.

Mr. Rowe. This International High Commission is attempting to create a method

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Of protecting these trade-marks? Mr. Rowe. Yes; and has secured it.

The CHAIRMAN. It has secured it?

Mr. Rowe. The bureau at Habana is now functioning.

The CHAIRMAN. Has it the consent of the South American countries?

Mr. RowE. Under the convention-the convention provided two bureaus, one in Habana and one in Rio-as soon as eight of the northern group of States ratified the convention, the Habana bureau became effective.

For the establishment of the Rio bureau there is still necessary the number of two South American States, and we hope to secure that number within a very short time, so that the Rio bureau will also be established. The Rio bureau will not begin to function until two ad

ditional South American States have ratified the convention. The Habana bureau is now doing the work of both bureaus.

The CHAIRMAN. And how is that ratification made-by legislative act?

Mr. Rowe. Yes; very much like our own method of ratification. Mr. ROGERS. What States have already adhered to the convention, Doctor?

Mr. RowE. United States, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Honduras, Panama, Costa Rica, and Haiti. Mr. ROGERS. All those are of the northern group?

Mr. RowE. Yes. Two in the northern group have not ratified it— Mexico and Salvador.

In the southern group five countries have ratified the conventionBrazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Bolivia, and Uruguay, and five have not-Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Peru, and Venezuela.

Mr. ROGERS. The other countries simply have not gotten around to it?

Mr. Rowe. Some of them have not gotten around to it and in some of them there is opposition.

Mr. ROGERS. It apparently is true, is it not, Doctor, that of the southern group the countries which have not ratified are the ones most important in population and in trade, except Brazil?

Mr. Rowe. That is true, and that is to be explained by reason of the fact that in some of those countries there are local interests that are not at all enthusiastic about the general protection of these trademarks; and of course, it is a very important matter for American commerce, because I do not suppose there is any country in the world that has a property value in trade-marks in any way comparable to the United States, and if we once can secure this it will mean the removal of a very serious obstacle to American trade.

Mr. HOUGHTON. Is there no legal remedy?

Mr. Rowe. Of course, any country in which prior registration gives the property right to the trade-mark there is a legal remedy, if you can prove fraud.

Mr. HOUGHTON. It is not shown on the face?

Mr. Rowe. But the difficulty of proving fraud is very great, and the effect on the American manufacturer is that the moment he finds himself involved in litigation of that kind, it is a discouragement to the expansion of his trade.

Mr. CONNALLY. In the absence of a treaty, would not the sovereignty of the country protect the resident in those matters?

Mr. Rowe. In the absence of a treaty, of course, it is a matter of legislation.

Mr. CONNALLY. There would be no legal right of a foreigner in a trade-mark within a country unless founded on a treaty? Mr. RowE. That is right.

Mr. DICKINSON. Ought he not to get the approval of the trademark owner before registration?

Mr. RowE. No. For instance, if you register a trade-mark, the presumption is that you are the owner of that trade-mark.

Mr. DICKINSON. And do you not have to show that you are the owner of it before you register it?

Mr. Rowe. In showing that you are the owner, you do not have to show that somebody else in some other country owns the same trade-mark; that is the difficulty.

The CHAIRMAN. On the other hand, if he has to go into the local courts and hire local lawyers and go into the proof of fraud which is always a very difficult matter, it discourages him and he is likely not to bother about the trade at all; is that about the situation?

Mr. Rowe. Yes. In order not to take too much time of the committee, I will review rapidly the matters with which the International High Commission has concerned itself.

The CHAIRMAN. Just before you leave that; in what way did we ratify this convention?

Mr. Rowe. We ratified it according to the usual constitutional procedure, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and the ratification by the President.

The CHAIRMAN. When was that done?
Mr. RowE. 1911.

The CHAIRMAN. Treaty Series, No. 626.

Mr. ROGERS. Then it antedated the International High Commission?

Mr. Rowe. The trade-mark convention did-the convention was signed in 1910.

Mr. ROGERS. I had the impression that this was one of the achievements of the International High Commission.

Mr. Rowe. In a sense it was, because it was made the subject of extended consideration at the first conference of 1915 and at the conference of 1916. The difficulty was that while, of course, we might through diplomatic channels, urge upon our minister to bring to the attention of the minister of foreign affairs the importance of this, there were no groups of influential men who would start and work on this thing with their national respective Congresses; and this organization gave us a group of nine influential men in each country upon whom was placed the obligation of getting this through their legislature.

Mr. ROGERS. And if the other ratifications in South America and Central America come subsequent to the creation of the international conference?

Mr. Rowe. I am just trying now to give you the dates of ratification. It was ratified by seven countries in the northern group before 1915-the United States, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Panama, Honduras. It rested without attention until 1916.

Mr. ROGERS. And about as many countries have ratified since 1916. Mr. ACKERMAN. Doctor, may I ask who decided that Habana should be the location of the northern bureau?

Mr. Rowe. It was provided in the convention. The convention provided two bureaus the northern bureau at Habana and the southern bureau at Rio.

Another matter with which the commission has occupied itself has been the ratification of a commercial travelers' convention, which was proposed by the International High Commission at the meeting at Buenos Aires in 1916.

One of the difficulties with which our merchants have had to deal has been the fact that in quite a few of the countries of South

America there have been a great many local license fees to be paid in he Province, and sometimes in each municipality, by commercial ravelers. It has been a very heavy charge on foreign trade and expansion, and the purpose of this convention was to secure a definite national charge, if any charge was to be made at all, so that our manufacturers would know what charge they would have to meet if they sent a representative to Chile, Bolivia, Argentina, or any other country.

The convention has been signed by Uruguay, August 27, 1918, and since then by Guatemala, Salvador, Venezuela, Paraguay, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Honduras, and Haiti, and other countries are ready to sign, but the diplomatic representatives in Washington are awaiting full powers. Brazil has approved the treaty in principle, but has not yet authorized the signing. Argentina, Cuba, Bolivia, and Colombia are studying it. Chile and Costa Rica are the two countries which have made no decision.

Mr. ACKERMAN. National influence or Teuton influence in Chile? Mr. Rowe. The treaty is actually in force between the United States and Uruguay, the United States and Guatemala, the United States and Salvador, the United States and Venezuela, and so on.

Mr. ACKERMAN. Perhaps I did not make my question plain. I rather gleaned you stated that in Chile and Costa Rica they had made no decision and I asked whether it was because of national influence or Teuton influence that prevented this?

Mr. Rowe. I think it is local influence, in the sense of provincial and municipal influence. In Chile the national Government has all the important sources of revenue; the localities have very little revenue and very limited sources of revenue. The result is that they oppose the elimination of any one source of revenue. The opposition is entirely local.

Mr. HOUGHTON. It is not aimed at any one country at all; it applies to all countries alike.

Mr. Rowe. It would apply to all countries, but, of course, it only applies as between the United States and those countries, because they have not negotiated this treaty with one another. Of course, that is not very important for them, because very few of them send their commercial travelers to another South American country, the trade being between the United States and that country or between Europe and that country.

Mr. ACKERMAN. Have they, may I ask, negotiated this sort of treaty between Great Britain and Holland and France?

Mr. Rowe. No.

Mr. ACKERMAN. We are the only country enjoying these privileges for commercial travelers?

Mr. Rowe. The draft convention was formulated and presented at the 1916 meeting at Buenos Aires of the International High Commission, and it has not been taken up with any other country.

The CHAIRMAN. In connection with your testimony in regard to that matter, I would like to make a part of the record the agreement between the countries, and also in regard to the trade-marks. I think those can be abbreviated very materially, so that the committee will have the meat of the agreements.

Mr. RowE. Suppose we submit a summary to be put into the record?

The CHAIRMAN. We would appreciate that.

(The summaries of agreements referred to, submitted by Mr. Rowe, are here printed in full, as follows:)

CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF TRADE-MARKS.

Their Excellencies the Presidents of the United States of America, the Argentine Republic, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Salvador, Uruguay, and Venezuela:

Being desirous that their respective countries may be represented at the Fourth International American Conference, have sent thereto the following delegates, duly authorized to approve the recommendations, resolutions, conventions, and treaties which they might deem advantagecus to the interest of America:

United States of America: Henry White, Enoch H. Crowder, Lewis Nixon, John Bassett Moore, Bernard Moses, Lamar C. Quintero, Paul Samuel Reinsch, David Kinley.

Argentine Republic: Antonio Bermejo, Eduardo L. Bidau, Manuel A. Montes de Oca, Epifanio Portela, Carlos Rodríguez Larreta, Carlos Salas, José A. Terry, Estanislao S. Zeballos.

United States of Brazil: Joaquim Murtinho, Domicio da Gama, José L. Almeida Nogueira, Olavo Bilac, Gastão da Cunha, Herculano de Freitas.

Republic of Chile: Miguel Cruchaga Tocornal, Emilio Bello Codecido, Anibal Cruz Díaz, Beltrán Mathieu.

Republic of Colombia: Roberto Ancízar.
Republic of Costa Rica: Alfredo Volio.

Republic of Cuba: Carlos García Vélez, Rafael Montoro y Valdés, Gonzalo de Quesada y Aróstegui, Antonio Gonzalo Pérez, José M. Carbonell.

Dominican Republic: Américo Lugo.

Republic of Ecuador: Alejandro Cárdenas.

Republic of Guatemala: Luis Toledo Herrarte, Manuel Arroyo, Mario Estrade.

Republic of Haiti: Constantin Fouchard.

Republic of Honduras: Luis Lazo Arriaga.

Mexican United States: Victoriano Salado Alvarez, Luis Pérez Verdía, Antonio Ramos Pedrueza, Roberto A. Esteva Ruiz.

Republic of Nicaragua: Manuel Pérez Alonso.

Republic of Panama: Belisario Porras.

Republic of Paraguay: Teodosio González, José P. Montero.

Republic of Peru: Eugenio Larrabure y Unánue, Carlos Alvarez Calderón, José Antonio de Lavelle y Pardo.

Republic of Salvador: Federico Mejía, Francisco Martinez Suárez.

Republic of Uruguay: Gonzalo Ramírez, Carlos M. de Pena, Antonio M. Rodríguez, Juan José Amézaga.

United States of Venezuela: Manuel Díaz Rodríguez, César Zumeta.

Who, after having presented their credentials and the same having been found in due and proper form, have agreed upon the following Convention for the Protection of Trade-Marks.

ARTICLE I. The signatory nations enter into this convention for the protection of trade-marks and commercial names.

ART. II. Any mark duly registered in one of the signatory States shall be considered as registered also in the other States of the union, without prejudice to the rights of third persons and to the provisions of the laws of each State governing the same.

In order to enjoy the benefit of the foregoing, the manufacturer or merchant interested in the registry of the mark must pay, in addition to the fees or charges fixed by the laws of the State in which application for registration is first made, the sum of $50 gold, which sum shall cover all the expenses of both bureaus for the international registration in all the signatory States.'

ART. III. The deposit of a trade-mark in one of the signatory States produces in favor of the depositor a right of priority for the period of six months, so as to enable the depositor to make the deposit in the other States.

Therefore the deposit made subsequently and prior to the expiration of this period can not be annulled by acts performed in the interval, especially by another deposit, by publication, or by the use of the mark.