
    LADD et al. v. OXNARD.
    (Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts.
    April 16, 1896.)
    No. 707.
    1. Application fob Preliminary Injunction.
    It seems that, on an application for an interlocutory injunction, where defendant claims that the bill on its face is demurrable, he is entitled to the advantage of all the questions which could be raised upon demurrer; for the court will not grant an interlocutory injunction on a bill which it sees clearly could not be sustained on demurrer.
    2. Copyright — Protection op Statutes.
    It may well be questioned whether the fact that one has not published, and the consequential fact that he has a remedy at common law, will deprive him of a concurrent remedy under the copyright statutes, when lie has complied with all the requirements for obtaining a copyright.
    3. Same — What is a “Publication. 3’
    The issuance to subscribers, without count as to number, of a book of credit ratings and the iinanclal standing of persons and Arms engaged in a particular line of business, upon a stipulation that the same is merely loaned to the subscriber, 'and not sold, and that, if found in any other hands than those, entitled 1o use it by permission of the publishers, the latter may take possession of it, and annul all rights of the subscriber, is a publication, sufficient to give the compilers a right to the protection of the copyright statutes, where they have taken the necessary steps to secure a copyright.
    4. Same — Deposit op Copies — Evidence.
    Where it appears beyond doubt that complainants forwarded advance copies so early thaj; the respondent could not possibly be prejudiced by any alleged delay therein, the court will no't require any very direct proof that such copies were seasonably deposited in the mail, and it will be sufficient if it is satisfied that the balance of probabilities, as shown by the evidence, is in favor of the complainants.
    5. Same — What will be Protected — Compilations of Credit Ratings.
    A book of credit ratings and financial standing of parties engaged in a particular line of business throughout the United States and Canada, containing information collected from original sources, by interviews and correspondence with persons acquainted with the particular trade, is entitled to protection under the copyright statutes.
    6. Same — Infringement.
    Where a very large proportion of a copyrighted compilation is plagiarized, it is immaterial that the defendant has done considerable work in the nature of corrections and additions thereto.
    ,7. Preliminary Injunctions — When Granted.
    When the result of a. preliminary injunction is not simply to preserve the status quo, but (as often happens in copyright and patent cases) would operate to suspend temporarily the entire business of defendant, or so break it up as to result in permanent destruction, the court will ordinarily look for support of the complainant’s case, either in long acquiescence by the public, or in some prior adjudication, or some other special matter. In view of the mischief that may sometimes be done by the granting of such an ’ injunction by a single judge, the rule should be that a temporary injunction should never be granted in a case of new impression, if it be possible to effectuate justice in any other way. And the fact that the act establishing the circuit courts of appeal authorizes an appeal from an order granting such an injunction does ■ not change the duty of the circuit courts in this respect.
    8. Same — Enjoining Infringement of Copyright.
    Where there was a clear infringement of a copyrighted compilation of the credit ratings and financial standing of persons engaged in a particular business, held that, in view of the fact that publications of this character depend for acceptance on the reputation of the compilers and publishers, so that defendant’s book would presumably not obtain much circulation to the prejudice of complainants, a preliminary injunction would only be granted in the event of the failure of defendant to file by a date fixed a bond in a specified penal sum conditioned for the payment of any damages ultimately decreed against him.
    This was a suit in equity by David M. Ladd and Albert M. Hunt, co-partners doing business under the name of United Mercantile Agency, against Edward P. Oxnard, for alleged infringement of a copyright. The complainants,beginning with the year 1890, have published annually a book, entitled the “United Mercantile Agency Credit Ratings,” which contains credit ratings and the financial standing of marble, granite, and stone dealers and manufacturers in the United States and Canada. About N ovember, 1895, the defendant, under the name of the Marble & Granite Exchange Mercantile Agency Company, published a book of reference, entitled “The Blue Book of the Marble & Granite Exchange Mercantile Agency,” which also contained credit ratings, etc., of marble, granite, and stone dealers in the United States and Canada. Complainants allege that this book was an infringement upon their publications, and especially upon the edition of their work published in June, 1894) and the cause is now heard upon their application for an interlocutory injunction.
    Upon the question of infringement the evidence consisted of affidavits, mainly, by the complainants and by the defendant and his son. The chief affidavit in support of the motion was made by complainant David M. Ladd, and is. here set out in full:
    
      Affidavit of David M. Ladd.
    [Filed February (>, 1896.]
    United States of America, District of Massachusetts.
    On this sixth day of February, A. D. 1896, before me personally appeared David M. Ladd, who, being by me duly sworn, deposes and says that he is one of the complainants in the above-entitled action; that he has during the past seven years had personal supervision 'and direction of the compiling, preparation, revision, and transcribing of the manuscript copy of each of the several editions of the United Mercantile Agency Credit Ratings for the Marble. Granite, and Stone Trade; that during that period his firm has continually had as subscribers, with one or two exceptions, all the leading manufacturers, qualifiers, and wholesalers of marble and granite as used for both monumental and building purposes; that his firm and its representatives and agents have repeatedly consulted said subscribers with the aim and purpose in view of securing Hems of experience that would lie of assistance in the revision and correction of said several editions of said Credit Ratings; and that from personal experience he has found it a matter of impossibility and impracticability to secure. from said individual subscribers or members of the wholesale trade, informal ion, corrections, or changes of reliability or value to aid him in connection with the revision of said work, except as may have related to the particular customers or patrons of such individuals or concerns, which would necessarily and naturally be of limited number and a very small minority of all the Arms and parties engaged in the various lines in the several states as included in said work. Said deponent further says that he had personal charge and supervision- of the first edition of said Credit Ratings, issued in June, 3880, and that neither the compilation of that nor any of the several editions of the same work issued since that date iiave been or were compiled or revised from town or city directories or trade lists, but that the information and matter contained in said books were secured through special correspondents, agents, and representatives in all sections of the United States and Canada, and from direct correspondence with the retail dealers in marble, granite, and stone in the various towns and cities of the entire country; that the original answers to such direct correspondence with dealers, and the revised lists as sent in annually by said representatives, a,gents, and special correspondents, are now on file in the office of said complainants, and, in consequence, that if any instances occur where errors and misprints appear in both complainants’ and respondents’ books it cannot lie explained or excused on the ground that both used the same common sources of information, unless it can be shown that complainants’ agents and representatives and special correspondents also acted in the same capacity for said respondents. The deponent further says (hat he has made a careful comparison between the work issued by his firm in June, 1894, and the respondents’ book, and that he finds that clerical errors and misspellings of his own making from the printed cards and letter headings and pen signatures of various dealers are reproduced in said respondents’ book without change; that the names of parties who were never engaged in the marble, granite, or stow; line, but whose names were inserted in Credit Ratings as detectives (or, in other words, for the purpose of enabling said complainants to discover infringements, should any be attempted) are also reproduced in the book of said respondents; that (lie names of towns correctly inserted in every standard atlas and gazetteer, but misspelled through error by said complainants in their book, also appear with like misspelling in the book of said respondents: that names wrongfully classified under towns of the same name in different states also appear reproduced without correction in said respondents’ book, some of -which dre shown in the list or table herewith appearing, and further shown by the several letters and communications on file herewith, marked Exhibits A1 to /, inclusive, and numbers 1 to 15, inclusive. The deponent further says that over ten thousand corrections and changes were made on the 1894 edition of Credit Ratings, as revised and issued in June, 1885, while said Blue Book, issued by respondents in November, 1895, is almost identical with the June, 1891, edition of ('¡-edit Ratings, issued seventeen months previously by the complainants, except that a few corrections were made in Pennsylvania and one or two other states. The deponent further says that on the states of Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, and Georgia the substance of the 1894 book of Credit Ratings is reproduced in the Blue Book, with only five or six alterations and one addition; while in the 1895 edition of Credit Ratings, issued seven months in advance of the Blue Book, several hundred changes, additions, and discontinuances were made in the same states. The deponent further says that no edition of the Credit Ratings issued to date lias contained less than eight thousand changes from the book of the previous year, and that no iwo editions of Credit Ratings, published in different years, bear such close resemblance or show such uniformity in composition and make-up as do the Blue Book of the respondents and the 1894 Credit Ratings issued by complainants. The deponent further says that each year, since 1889, he has personally devoted two-thirds of iris entire • time, working long hours and frequently evenings in the revision of this work, constantly employing, during that period, three assistants in writing and mailing correspondence and lists for revision. The said deponent further says that, in such comparison of said Bine Book with said Credit Ratings of 1894 as he has been able to make (which has been thorough in the above-mentioned states), he finds the similarities given in said lists or tables hereinafter appearing, as to the slates of Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, and California, and says, that the same similarity appears as to the slates of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, and Georgia; and from his examination of other states the deponent believes that a further specification would he simply to recopy both of said books, except that some changes appear in the.states of Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. In the' said list or table hereinafter appearing, the deponent has in some instances added, after the word “Note,” a few words in explanation, and that the word “Note” and explanation following should not be taken as appearing in either of said hooks. And the deponent further says that the following are the letters, characters, and numerals, and their respective significations, as appearing in the said Blue Book and said Credit Ratings:
    CREDIT RATINGS. BLUB BOOK.
    TRADE CLASSIFICATIONS. KEY OP TRADES.
    G Granite M Marble
    M Marble G Granite
    Z Worker S Stone
    R Retail. W Worker
    Q Quarry X Wholesale
    H Building R Retail
    W Wholesale Q Quarry
    I Interior B Building
    —* Monumental I Interior
    B Stone. + Monumental.
    ESTIMATED WEALTH. KEY OP RATINGS.
    1 $1,000,000 and above. .......to $1,000,000 " B00,000 400.000 300.000 250.000 200.000 150.000 100.000 75 000 500.000 i 400.000 300.000 250.000 200.000 150.000 100.000 75.000 50.000 35.000 20.000 10,000 5.000 3.000 2.000 1,000 500 0 50.000 35.000 20.000 10,000 5.000 3.000 2.000 1,000 500 0 AA $1,000,000. 300,000 to $500,000 100,000 75.000 40.000 20.000 10,000 5,000 2.500 *• 1.500 “ 600 “ 1 “ First-Class Pay Prompt Pay Pair Pay Moderate Pay Investigate Pay. 300.000 100.000 75.000 40.000 20.000 10,000 5,000 2,500 1,600 600
    And said deponent submits the following list or table:
    
      CREDIT EATINGS. BLUE BOOK.
    ALABAMA. ALABAMA.
    Anninston Calhoun. ♦M — Jewell, W. P. & Co. 15 F. Birmingham Jefferson MB — Alabama Marble & Stono Co. (Cap. paid in $12,300.) * M Birmingham Marble Works (See Thos. H. Holt) , *M Holt, Thos. H. 17 F Calera Shelby "M Evans, Samuel J., 20 Decatur Morgan :‘‘M Hummel, J., 20 J Stewart, W. P., 19 J Eufaula Barbour Tansey, James, , 13 E Florence Lauderdale Eldred, C. B. 17 J Florence Marble Works (See C. B. Eldred) Fort Payne De Kalb -•M Little, N. B. 19 K Gadsden Etowah ' M Darnell, M. S. & Co. Ha rtseir s Morgan :M Moore, & Stinson 19 J Anniston, Calhoun Co. GM+ Jewell, W. P. & O. I. K3 Birmingham Jefferson Co. GMS — Alabama Marble and Stone Co. (cap. paid in $12,300.) GM-f- Birmingham Marble Works (See Thos. H. Holt) GMf Holt, Thos. H. L 3 Calera, Shelby Co. GM-{- Evans, Samuel J„ 5 Decatur, Morgan Co. GM-f Hummel, J 5 GM-f Stewart, W. P. P 4 Eufaula, Barbour Co. GM-f Tansey, James H 3 Florence, Lauderdale Co. GM-f Eldred, C. B L 3 GM-f- Florence Marble Works, (See C. B. Eldred) Fort Payne, De Kalb Co. GM4- Little, N. B. 8 P 4 Gadsden, Etowah Co. GM-f Darnell, M. S. & Co. Hartsell’s, Morgan Co. GM-f- Moore & Stinsom P 4
    Noto. W. S. Stinson had succeeded Moore & Stinson. (See 1895 Credit Eatings.)
    Huntsville Madison f-M Bakers & Conway :-M Hummell, Schaake & Co. Huntsville, Madison Co. 14 E GM-f Bakers & Conway J 3 J GM-f Hummell, Schaake & Co. 5
    Note. J. F. Hummel & Sons had succeeded Hummell, Schaake & Co. (See Exhibit Al and error in spelling.)
    Isbell Franklin (Atty. Sheffield, 24 Miles) BQ Isbell Quarry Co. Jacksonville Calhoun VM Jacksonville Marble Works (See S. F. Lively) "M Lively, S. F Isbell, Franklin Co. (Atty. Sheffield 25 miles) SQ Isbell Quarry Co Jacksonville, Calhoun Co. GM-f- Jacksonville Marble Works (See S. F. Lively) GM-f- Lively, S. F. 4
    Note. Calvin Wright had started new at Jasper, before June 1» 1895.
    Mobile Mobile M McDonald, March & Co. 158 'North Royal St. 5 M Mobile Marble Works (See McDonald, March & Co.) Montgomery Montgomery !'M Curbow-Clapp Marble Co. Opelika Lee r M Kinney, Geo., Rockwood Franklin BQ Fossick, T. L. Co. (tnc.) (See Sheffield) Selma Dallas :'-M Montgomery, J. N. & Son Sheffield Colbe-BQ Fossick, T. L. Co. (Inc.) (cap. paid m $!;>(,*.uj Mobile, Mobile Co. 10 D GM-f McDonold, March & Co. 158 North Royal St. GM-f Mobile Marble Works (See McDonald, March & Co.) Montgomery, Montgomery Co. 14 E GM { Curbow-Clapp Marble Co. Opelika, Lee Co. 19 J GM-f Kinney, Geo. Rockwood, Franklin Co. SQ Fossick, T. L. Co. (Inc.) (See Sheffield) Selma, Dallas Co. 14 E GM-f Montgomery, J. N. & Son Sheffield, Colbert Co. SQ Fossick, T. L. C.. (inc.) D (Cap. paid in $150m) B 2 J 8 P 4 J 2 3
    
    Note. T. L. Fossick Oo. should read (See Rockwood) after name.
    Talladega Talladega Talledaga, Talledaga Co. :M Taylor, Lafayette, 18 F GM+ Taylor, Lafayette N 2 Note. At Tuscaloosa James Gaudln and Wildman & Gardner had started new (see Exhibit B), and T. II. Wildman had succeeded before Oct. 13, 1895.
    ARIZONA. • ARIZONA.
    Flagstaff Yavapai B Arizona Sandstone Co. (See Los Angeles, Cal.) B English & Padgham Flagstaff, Yavapai Co. S Arizona Sandstone Co. (See Los Angeles. Cal.) 19 J S English & Padgham P 4
    Note. W. H. Smith had started new before June 1, 1895.
    
      CREDIT RATINGS. BLUE BOOK.
    ARIZONA — Continued. ARIZONA — Continued.
    Phoenix Maricopa *M Bliss & Ligier 18 F M Cohise Marble & Onyx Co. *M Gregory, J. M. 13 E M Phoenix. Marble & Stone Co. (Cap. $50m.) Phoanix, Maricopa Co GM-f Bliss & Ligier N 4 GM-f Cohise Marble & Onyx Co. GM-f Gregory, J. M. N & GM Phoenix Marble & Stone Co. (Cap. $50m)
    Note. L. R. Ligier had succeeded E .iss & Digier before June 1, 1895.
    Prescott Yavapai *M Mair, Jacob, Tombstone ' Cochise *M Ritter & Taylor 20 J Prescott, Yavapai Co. GM-f Mair, Jacob, Tombstone, Cochise Co. GM-f Ritter & Taylor 4
    ARKANSAS. ARKANSAS.
    Batesville Independence BQ Bartlett, Jesse M. 17 J BZ Cone, J. C. BZ Joblin Frank, 19 J *M Wiebusch, H. J. 19 J Batesville, Independence Co. SQ Bartlett, Jesse M. L 4 SW Cone, J. C. SW Joblin, Frank P 4 GM-f Wiebusch, H. J. P 4
    Note. Jessé M. Bartlett and J. C. Cone had discontinued June 1, 1895.
    Bentonville Benton Bentonville, Benton Co. Holland & Pearson GM-f Holland & Pearson *M McWhirter & Corley GM-f McWhirter and Corley
    Note. Corley & Backus had succeeded Holland & Pearson, McWhirter Bros, had succeeded McWhirter & Corley before June 1, 1S95.
    Camden Oauchita Camden, Oauchita Co. *M Camden Marble Works GM+ Camden Marble Works (See C. A. Weller) (See C. A. Weller) *M Weller, C. A. GM-f Weller. C. A.
    Note. Weller & Wilson had succeeded C. A. Weller before June 1, 1895.
    Clarendon Monroe Clarendon, Monroe Co. *M Rawlings, Tucker W. 19 J GM+ Rawlings, Tucker W., * P 4 Clarksville Johnson Clarksville, Johnson Co. *M Caldwell, Zach. GM-f Caldwell, Zach.
    Note. Zach. Caldwell discontinued business before June 1, 1895, and Rufus Norton and Henry L. Bunch had started in business before said date.
    Dardanelle Yell *M Bennett, & Urmston 18 J Eureka Springs Carroll *M Abbey, M. A. J *M Eureka Onyx Co. (Cap. paid $20m) Fayetteville Washington BQ Morley, Albert H. 20 K Dandanelle, Yell Co. GM-f Bennett & Urmston N 4 Eureka Springs, Carroll Co. GM-f Abbey, M. A. 4 GM-]- Eureka Onyx Co. (Cap. paid in $20m.) Fayetteville, Washington Co. SQ Morley, Albert H. 5
    Note. Before June 1, 1895, William Davenport had started new, and Albert H. Morley had admitted his son, changing the style to A. H. Morley & Son.
    Fort Smith Sebastian *M Daley, Farrell 19 J 400 Towson ave Fort -Smith Marble Works (See Smith & Tobey) *M Smith & Tobey 15 E 911 Garrison ave Hope Hempstead ■*M Welcome, Wm. W. Fort Smith, Sebastian Co GM-f Daley, Farrell P 4 400 Towson Ave GM-f Fort Smith Marble Works Inc. 200M (See Smith & Tobey) GM-f Smith & Tobey S 911 Garrison Ave Hope, Hempstead Co. GM-f Welcome, Wm. W.
    Note. W. L. Warmack had started ' ifore June 1, 1895.
    Hot Springs Garland *M Hill, Theodore, 19 J 121 Oauchita St. Jonesborough Craighead *M Taylor, Dempsey, 19 J Hot Springs, Garland Co. GM-f Hill, Theodore P 4 121 Oauchita St. Jonesboro, Craighead Co. GM-j- Taylor, Dempsey P 4
    Note. E. Stull succeeded Dempsey Taylor before June 1, 1895.
    
      CREDIT RATINGS. BLUE BOOK.
    ARKANSAS — Continued. ARK AN S AS — Con tinned.
    Little Rook Pulaski BQ Arkansas Stone Co. (Inc.) 224 West W st. GQ Braddoek, J. S. 316 W. Markham st. -M Funston, William L. GQ Little Rock Granite Co. 208 West Markham st. (Inc. cap., 100m.) 18 J Little Rock, Pulaski Co. SQ Arkansas Stone Co. (inc.) 224 West 2d St. GQ Braddoek, J. S. 316 W. Markham st. GM-f Funston, William L. GQ Little Rock Granite Co. 208 West Markham St. (inc; cap. $100m) N 4
    Xote. Tlie Little Rock Granite Co. forfeited its charter before June 1, 1895.
    Nashville Howard !-M Price & Sons Newport Jackson Drummond, A Nashville, Howard Co. GM-f Price #■, Sons Newport, Jackson Co. 18 F GM-f Drummond, A., N 4
    Note. Our printer dropped the initial B in name of A. B. Drummond.
    Ozark Franklin Ozark, Franklin Co. : M McWhirter, L. D. GM-f McWhirter, L. D. Note.' Before June 1,-1895, L. D. McWhirter removed to- Bentonville, and joined McWhirter Bros.
    Paragould Greene Paragould, Greene Co. Mason, C. H. GM-f Mason, C. H.
    Note. O. H. Mason discontinued business before June 1, 1895.
    Pine Bluff Jefferson Pino Bluff, Jefferson Co. '-G Cook, John, 205 Main st. G-f Cook, John, 205 Main St. “M Westbrook & Sheppard 15 F GM Westbrook & Sheppard K 3 GM Cook, John
    Note. Respondents insert John Cook twice, once properly classified with street address, and once wrongly classified without street address. He had discontinued business before June 1, 1895.
    Prairie Grove Washington (Atty. Fayetteville 12 miles) : M Dorman & Baggett Rogers Benton s;M Pearson, J. M. 19 J Russellville Pope ■*M Elgin, T. H. 19 J M Russellville Marble Works (See T. H. Elgin) Searcy White ' M McAdams, F. W. • M Sewell, F. P. & Co. Prairie Grove. Washington Co. (Attorney Fayetteville 12 miles) GM-f Dorman & Baggett Rogers, Benton Co. GM-f Pearson, J. M. P 4 Rusollville, Pope Co GM-f Elgin, T. H. GM-f Russellville Marble Works (See T. H. Elgin) Searcy White Co GM-f McAdams, F. W. GM-r Sewell. F P. & Co.
    Note. Backus Thompson succeeded F. W. McAdams before June 1, 1895.
    Sugar Loaf Sebastian Sugar Loaf, Sebastian Co. SSM Mose, John, GM-f Mose, John,
    Note. John Mose discontinued business before June 1, 1895.
    Texa rkana Millei -\M Smith, Jacob L. 19 J 511 Broad st. Texarkana Marble Works (See Jacob L. Smith) Van Burén Crawford 'M Mitchell, Aaron L. 39 J Texarcana, Miller Co. GM-f Smith, Jacob L p 4 511 Broad St. GM-j- Texarcana Marble Works (See Jacob L. Smith) Van Vuren, Crawford Co. G-f Mitchell, Aaron L. p 4
    Note. T. M. Mitchell succeeded Aaron B. Mitchell before June 1, 1895, and IT H. Hicks started now previous to that date.
    Willcockson Newton KM Randolph, Leo, Willcockson, Newton Co. GM-f Randolph, Lee,
    CALIFORNIA. CALIFORNIA.
    Angel’s Camp Calaveras (Atty. Stockton) *XL Taylor, Allen 17 J Bakersfield Kern -<M Niedoraur, Jacob, 12 E Angel’s Camp, Calaveras Co. (Attorney Stockton) GM-f Taylor, Allen, L 4 Bakersfield, Kern Co. GM-f Niedoraur, Jacob, F 2
    Note. B. K. Stone succeeded Jacob 1 iedoraur before June 1, 1895.
    
      CREDIT RATINGS. BLUE BOOK.
    CALI FO RNI A — Continued. CALIFORNIA — Continued.
    Chico Butte *Z Robie, William, Colma San Mateo *M Barrett, B. J. & Co. *M Dineen, B„ *M. Mullaney, P. D. *M Ziglio, David, Chico, Butte Co. 15 F GM Robie, William, Colma, San Mateo Oo. J GM-J- Barrett, B. J. & Co. J GM-f Dineen, B., J GM-- Mullaney, P. D. F GM-f Ziglio, David, K:
    Note. B. J. Barrett & Co. discontinued business before June 1, 1895.
    Coloma El Dorado Coloma, El Dorado Co. *M Hanna, Adam 16 F GM-j- Hanna, Adam ^ K 3
    Note. The name of Adam Hanna appeared under Coloma through clerical error, and should appear under Colma.
    Colton San Bernardino B California Marble & Building Stone Co. (inc.) *M Hubbard, W. L. *M Martin, W. G. 18 J Columbia Tuolumne •■M McNamee, John, Colusa Colusa GZ Frank, Joseph, 19 J *M Martin & Gardner J Davisville Yolo *M -Lichtfers, Philip, 19 J Declezville San Bernardino *M Los Angeles Marble & Granite Works. East Los Angeles Los Angeles. (See Los Angeles) Eureka Humboldt *M O’Neil, John, 17 J Fresno Fresno *M Doyle Bros. 16 F *M McKay, J. S. J Colton, San Bernardino Co. B California Marble & Building Stone Co. (Inc.) GM-J- Hubbard, W. L GM-f Martin, W.-G. N 4 Columbia, Tuolumne Co. GM-J- McNamee, John Colusa, Coluse Uo. GW Frank, Joseph, 0P 4 GM-f Martin & Gardner 4 Davisville, Yolo Co. GM-f- Lichtfers, Philip, P 4 Declezville, San Bernardino Co. GM-f Los Angeles Marble & Granite Works. East Los Angeles, Los Angeles Co. (See Los Angeles) Eureka, Humboldt Co. GM-f O’Neil, John L 3 Fresno, Fresno Co. GM-f Doyle Bros. K 3 GM-f McKay, J. S. 4
    Note. Corney & McKay succeeded J, S. McKay before June 1, 1895.
    Grass Valley Nevada Grass Valley, Nevada Co. *G Ahearn, Thomas J. & Alex J. 18 F G-f Ahearn, Thos. J. & Alex. J. N 4 *M Lord James H 20 J GM-f Lord, James H. 4 Note. Thomas J. Ahearn purchased the interese of Ales. J. Ahearn beforé June 1, 1895, and continued alone.
    Halleck San Bernardino (Atty. San Bernardino 48 miles) ■*M Lemon, C. S. 19 J M,Wyman, Gruendike & Co. E Hanford Tulare *M Johnston, W. A. *M Ragan, C. K. 13 E Halleck, San Bernardino Co. (Attorney San Bernardino 48 miles) GM-J- Lemon, C. S. P 4 GM Wyman, Gruendike & Co. 2 Hanford, Tulare Co. GM4- Johnston, W. A. GM-J- Ragan, C. K. H 2
    Note. O. K. Ragan went into insolvency previous to June 1, 1895.
    Haywards Alameda 4iSM Jackson, T. B. Healdsburg Sonoma *M Fisher & Kinslow (See Santa Rosa) Lincoln Placer BG Coffey, T. L. *M Grimes & Co. ■“M Jetter Thos. W.f 13 E 18 J F J Haywards, Alameda Co. GM-J- Jackson, T. B. Healdsburg, Sonoma Co. GM-J- Fisher and Kinslow (See Santa Rosa) Lincoln, Placer Co. SG Coffey, T. L. GF-J- Grimes & Co. GM-f Jetter, Thos. W. . H 2 N 4 4 4
    Note. T. L. Coffey discontinued business before June 1, 1895.
    Livermore Alameda *M Keily, Edward, 14 E Los Angeles Los Angeles B Arizona Stone Works (See H. C. Clement & Co.) BZ Clement, I-I. C. & Co. 19 J Santa Fe ave. *M Declez Granite Co. (inc.) E 114 N. Los Angeles st, *M Lane Bros. 14, J 519 S. Main st. Livermore, Alameda Co. GM-J- Keily, Edward Los Angeles, Los Angeles Co. S Arizona Stone Works (See H. C. Clement & Co.) SW Clement, H C. & Co. Santa Fe Ave. GM-J- Declez Granite Co. (Inc.) 114 N. Los Angeles St. GM-f Lane Bros. 519 S. Main St. J 3 P 4 2 J 3
    
      CREDIT RATINGS. BXjUIO book.
    OAT/f FO RNJLA- -Con tinned. CALIFORNIA -Continued.
    
      m Messerly, A. E. 19 J 719 N. Main st. ■'M Murray, Wrm. M. 39 J 722 Grand ave. Los Angeles. GM Pacific Granite & Marble Co., 931 East 1st st. 13 E MG Southern California Marble & Granite Works, (See Lane Bros.) MQ Victor Marble & Granite Co. 227 West 1st st. B7j Ward, Frank F. 143 West 23d st. GM-J- Messerly, A. E. 5 719 N. Main St. GM Murray, Win. M. P 4 722 Grand Ave. Los Angeles. GM Pacific Marble & Granite Co., 931 E. 1st St. MC-f- Southern California Marble and Granito Works. (See Lane Bros.) MQ Victor Marble & Granite Co. 227 West 1st St. 8 SW Ward, Frank F„ 141 West 23d St. J
    Noto. ed (seo Bxhibit D). Go. Imd started. M. Craig liad start-* Weifenbaeh Granite Before June 1, 1895, Brown & Ford had started. A. IS. Messerly had discontinued.
    Marysville, Yuba Condon, David ”M Plymire, W. H. Marysville, Yuba Co. GM-J- Condon, David GM-j- Plymire, W. H.
    Note. Before June 1, 1895, George H. Voss had started.
    19 E 15 E 37 F D Merced, Merced *M Delong, A. Napa City, Napa Kelly, P. Newman & Wing Oakland, Alameda *M Amador Marble Co. (inc.) Piedmont avo. MG American Granite & Marble Works (See A. W. Combs) ';M Combs, Angus W., J 468 9th st *M Dinneen, Michael, F 717 78th st. „ '•M Dwyer, Daniel, IB I Booth, near Broadway _ *31 Gross, Willidm, 39 F 3340 Kirkham st. Oakland „„ „ ’••M Kelly, James F. 36 F 7th and Brush sts. *G Oakland Marble & Granite Works, (See Michael Dinneen) BZ Perine, William D., 19 457 9th st. Oakland. G Rocklin Granito Co. E (see Rocklin) Penryn Placer *M Griffith, David, F P 3 K 2 L 4 Merced, Merced Co. GM-j- Delong, A. Napa City, Napa Co. GM-J- Kelly, P., GM-!- Newman & Wing Oakland, Alameca Co. GM j- Amador Marble Co. (Inc.) 1 Piedmont Ave. MG American Granite & Marble Works (See A. W. Combs) GM-J- Combs, Angus W., 3 468 9th St. GM-J- Dinneen, Michael 2 717 78th St. GM-J- Dwyer, Daniel N 4 Booth, near Broadway, GM-]- Gross, William, P 4 3310 KirJsham St. Oakland. GM-J- Kelly, James F. K 8 7th and Brush Sts. G-f Oakland Marble & Granite Works (See Michael Dinneen.) GW Perine, William D. & 457 9th St. Oakland. G Rocklin Granite Co. gr (See Rocklin) Penryn, Placer Co. GM+ Griffith, David 4
    
    Note. David Roberts started new before June 1, 1895.
    Petaluma Sonoma *M Evans, E. W. M. Pino Placer (Atty. Auburn 10 miles) GQ Carlaw Bros. (See Sacramento) GQ llealy, M. J. & Co. Plaeorville El Dorado “M House, John L., , Red Bluff Tehama S-M Masterson, D. E. Redding Shasta <M Bentley & Brown *M Redding Marble Co. Petaluma, Sonoma Co. F GM+ Evans, E. W. M, Pino, Placer Co. (Attorney Auburn 30 miles) GQ Carlaw Bros.) (See Sacramento.) 16 F GQ Healy, M. J. & Co. Placerville, El Dorado GM-J- House, John L. Red Bluff Tehama Co. 18 J GM-j’ Masterson, D. E. Redding, Shasta Co. J GM Bentley & Brown J GM-}- Redding Marble Co. K 3 N 3
    Note. F. A. Plymire succeeded Bentley & Brown before June 1, 1895.
    Riverside San Bernardino MZ Squire, Mrs. Stephen, 18 E M Stone Bros. (See San Bernardino) Rocklin Placer C Allen, Ira P„ Riverside, San Bernardino Co. MW Squire, Mrs. Stephen N S M-J- Stone Bros. (See San Bernardino; Rocklin, Placer Co. G Allen, Ira P.
    
      CREDIT RATINGS. BLUE BOOK.
    CALIFORNIA — Continued. CALIFORNIA — Continued.
    *G Degan, & Brady • (See San Francisco) • GQ Eureka Granite Co G Rocklin Granite Co. (See Oakland) G-f Degan & Brady (See San Francisco) GQ Eureka Granite Co. G Rocklin Granite Co. (See Oakland)
    Note. Before June 1, 1895, Carroll Hoyt & Co. and Copp & Waters and Levi Fletcher had started, and P„ Degan had succeeded Degan & Brady.
    St. Helena Napa “M Kelly, John J. 19 J Spring st. Sacramento Sacramento *M Aitken, Andrew, 13 E ■*M Bo ne, William, 13 F MG Carlaw Bros. 15 F Sacramento *M Carroll, J. & Son 17 J *M Cranley, Prader & Co. J *M Devine, J. H. *M Luce & Glover 16 F GM Sacramento Granite & Marble Works (See Carlaw Bros.) St Helena, Napa Co. GM4* Kelly, John J. P 3 baring St. Sacramento, Sacramento Co. GM-f Aitken, Andrew, H 2 GM-f Boyne, William H 4 MG-f Carlaw Bros. H 4 Sacramento GM-j- Carroll, J. & Son, L 3 GM-f Cranley, Prader & Co. 4 GM-j- Devine, J. H. GM-f Luce & Glover K 3 GM-f Sacramento Granite and Marble Works (See Carlaw Bros.
    Note. J. Oarroll & Son became insolvent before June 1, 1895. J. H. Devine was a clerical error, and should have read J. C. Devine.
    San Bernardino San Bernardino MZ San Bernardino Marble & Granite Co. (See Stone Bros.) _ *M Stone Bros. 16 F San Diego. San Diego G Clark-Rockfellow Granite Co. (Cap. paid in $5m.) MZ San Diego Marble Works (See Simpson & Pirnie) MZ — Simpson & Pirnie 18 E San Francisco San Francisco WM Allan, John D. (See Jones Bros. & Co.) G Barclay Bros. & Co. E MG Brown, W. S. & Co. F 1629 Mission st. BZ California Marble & Building Stone Co. (Inc.) E 216 Bush st. M' California Verde Antique Marble Co. (Inc.) 308 Pine st. 'MQ Carrara Marble Quarry 1219 Market st MQ Columbia Marble Co. 347 Brannan st *M Clark & Lloyd F Harrison, near 13th st, *M Corauth, Edward 12 E 12 Golden Gate ave. *M Daniel, John & Co. 18 J Entrance Laurel Hill Cemetery. . *M Davidson & Sons 6 Mills Bldg. (See Chicago, 111.) San Francisco BZ — Degan & Brady 16 E East 11th st. *M Dumontelle, Eugene F • 523 5th st. MZ Flohr, Frederick, J 1133 Mission st. BZ Gray Bros. Artificial Stone Paving Co. (Inc,) 316 Montgomery st. *M Haring, J. J. F 115 Kearney st. MZ Hawthorne, C. R. 15 E 3 Henderson ave. MQ Inyo Marble Co. (Inc.) F ' 13 Mills Bldg. ♦LÍ Isham & Blanchard • J Ocean View WG Jones Bros. & Co. cor. Second and Brannan sts. (See Jones Bros., Boston, Mass. San Bernardino, San Bernardino Co. MW San Bernardino Marble and Granite Co. (See Stone Bros.) GM-J- Stone Bros. K 2 San Diego, San Diego Co. G Clark-Rockfellow Granite Co. (Cap. paid in $5m) MW San Diego Marble Works. (See Simpson & Pirnie) MW Simpson & Pirnie N 3 San Francisco, San Francisco Co. XM Allan, John D. (See Jones Bros. & Co. G Barclay Bros & Co. ’ 2 MG Brown, W. S. & Co. * 3 1629 Mission St SW California Marble & Building Stone Co. (Inc.) 2 216 Bush St. GM California Verde Antique Marble Co. (inc.) 308 Pine St. MQ Carrara Marble Quarry, 1219 Market St. MQ Columbia Marble Co. 347 Brannan St. GM-j- Clark & Lloyd 2 Harrison, near 13th St. GM-f Comuth, Edward, P 2 12 Golden Gate Ave. GM-j- Daniel, John & Co. N 4 •Entrance Laurel Hill Cemetery. GM-f Davidson & Sons 5 Mills Bldg. (See Chicago 111.) San Francisco SQ Degan & Brady K 3 East 11th St. GM-j- Sumontelle, Eugene, 4 523 5th St. MW Flohr, Frederick, 4 1133 Mission St. SW Gray Bros. Artificial Stone Paving Co. (inc.) 316 Montgomery St. GM Haring, J. J. 2 115 Kearney St. MW Hawthorne, C. R„ K 1 3 Henderson Ave. MQ Inyo Marble Co. (Inc.) 2 13 Mills Bldg. GM-j- Isham & Blanchard 4 Ocean View. XG Jones Bros. & Co., cor. Second and Brannan Sts. (See Jones Bros., Boston, Mass.)
    
      CREDIT RATINGS. BLUE BOOK*
    CALIFORNIA — Continued* OALIFORNIA — Continued.
    *M Jones, Geo. H. 6 Flood Bldg. •M McCormick, W. H. 1422 Market st. *M MaeNutjt, A. H., 432 Bryant st. *M Maestretti, Frank A., 206 Central ave. BZ Matthews, William & Co.* cor. Turk & Wood sts. *M Miller, Charles, MZ Morris, Abraham, 216 5th st MZ Musto, Joseph, 713 Battery st MZ Myers, Leon R.* 20 Gold st. •M Nunan, John J. 1*734 Market st. *M Nutting, John F. GZ Ocean View Granite Co. (See Isham & Blanchard) •M Paltenghi, Andrew & Co.* 1219 Market st. San Francisco *M Pierce, John O. 216 Linden ave. *M Pierce, Patrick 23 Valencia st. *M Powers, E. J. 2328 Bush st. G Raymond Granite Co.* Berry St. *M Rebstock, J. 408 Central ave. WM Rice, Marshall E., 37 Silva st (See Barre, Vt.) *M Roche, T. B. & Son, 16 Pearl st. MZ Roth, Maximilian, 434 Valencia st. *M Ruiiino & Bianchl, 864 Bryant st. *M Sheerin, Daniel, Broderick st. M Tempest!, Eugenio 1151 Mission st. WM Vermont Marble Co. 244 Brannan st. (See Proctor, Vt.) B Williams, Frank, 17 Eddy st. 13 B 13 H 16 F J 31 E J 19 J 7 D 19 J J 19 J 38 19 J 16 3 18 F 9 D 13 B 19 J F GM-f Jones, Geo. H„ 6 Flood Bldg. GM-f- McCormick, W. H. 1422 Market St. GM-fMacNutt, A, H. 482 Bryant St. GM-f Maestretti, Frank A 206 Central Ave. SW Matthews, William & Co. cor. Turk and Wood Sts. GM-f- Miller, Charles MW Morris, Abraham, 216 5th St. MW Musto, Joseph, 713 Battery St. MW Myers, Leon R, 20 Gold St. GM-f- Nunan, John J. 1734 Market St. GM-f Nutting, John F. GW Ocean View Granite Co. (See Isham & Blanchard.) GM-f Paltenghi, Andrew & Co. 1219 Market St. San Francisco GM-f Pierce, John C. 216 Linden Ave. GM-f Pierce, Patrick 23 Valencia St. GM-f Powers, E. J. 2328 Bush St. G Raymond Granite Co* Berry St. GM-f Rebstock, J., 408 Central Ave. XM Rice, Marshall E. 37 Silva St. (See Barre, Vt.) ' GM-f Roche, T. B. & Son, 16 Pearl St. MW Roth, Maximilian, 434 Valencia St. GM-f- Ruíílni & Bianchl 864 Bryant St. GM-f Sheerin, Daniel, Broderick St. GM Tempestio, Eugenio, 1151 Mission St. XM Vermont Marble Co. 244 Brannan St. (See Proctor, Vt.) S Williams, Frank, 17 Eddy St. n 2 D 2 K 3 4 E 2 4 P 3 C 2 P3 4 P4 t P 8 K 4 N 4 D 2 H 4 PS t
    Note. John D. Allan Is not engaged individually, but is the company of Jones Bros. & Co. He is our correspondent for the Pacific coast, and we insert his name as a matter of compliment. Before June 1, 1895, the following changes had taken place among San Francisco dealers: Barclay Bros. & Co., Frederick Flohr, Charles Miller, John J. Nunan, Marshall E. Rice, and Eugenio Tempest! had discontinued business. B. J. Barrett, H. O. Brown & Co., P. Donohoe, E. Leiss, Metlar Marble & Granite Co., A. E. Nichols, and C. H. Rodd & Co. had started in business. M. T. Carroll & Co. and J. Catto & Co. had also started new. P. Degan had succeeded Began & Brady. J. R. Blanchard had succeeded Isham & Blanchard. George S. Matthews had succeeded William Matthews & Co. E. J. Powers was a clerical error, and should have read E. T. Powers. Lane Bros., of Los Angéles, had opened a branch office at 409 McAllister street. (See Exhibit E.)
    Ban Jose Santa Clara *M Barker, Bulman & Demecheli *M Blanchard Wm. W. F •M Brownell, Lyman A 18 F •M Combs, J. W. & Co. 18 J MZ Dunne, R. H. & Co. 3 GM Western Granite & Marble Co. (Cap. paid in $75m) D San Jose, Santa Clara Oo. GM-f Barker, Bulman & Demecheli GM-f Blanchard Wm W. GM-f Brownell Lyman A. GM-f Combs, J. W. & Co. MW Dunne, R. H. & Co. GM Western Granite & Marble Co. (Cap. paid in $75m.) N 1 t
    
    Note. J. W. Combs & Co. discontinued, business before June 1, 1893.
    
      CREDIT RATINGS. BLUE BOOK.
    CALIFORNIA— Continued. CALIFORNIA — Continued.
    San Luis Obisbo San Luis Obispo *M Clark, A. *M Robertson, Geo. W. 15 F San Rafael Marin *M Corti, J. (sexton) 19 J San Luis Obispo. San Luis Obispo Co. GM-f- Clark, A. GM-f- Robertson, Geo. W. K 2 San Rafael, Marin Co. GM-f- Corti, J. (sexton) P 4
    Note. This party has never been actively engaged in the marble or granite line. His name we insert as a catch or detective.
    Santa Ana Orange Santa Ana, Orange Co. MZ Jessen, John, MW Jesse, John,
    Note. Heil & Talbott started in business at this point before June 1, 1895.
    Santa Barbara Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara Co. *M Frost, Samuel GM-f- Frost, Samuel •"M Moore, S. T. 18 F GM-j- Moore, S. T. N 4 MB Squires & George 18 F MS Squires & George N 4
    Note. W. L. Record had started in business at this point before June 1, 1895.
    Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz Co. MZ Belledeau, J. H. J MS Belledeau, J. H. , 4 *M Thurber & Britt 11 E GM-f- Thurber & Britt * E 2
    Note. J. H. Belledeau was a clerical error in spelling, and should read J. H. Billedau. I. L. Thurber succeeded Thurber & Britt, and Henry A. Clark and William J. Harrington started new at this point before June 1, 1895.
    Santa Rosa Sonoma -*M Fisher & Kinslow (See Healdsburg) ‘Sonora Tuolumne =*M McCready, H. C„ Santa Rosa, Sonoma Co. 13 E GM-f- Fisher & Kinslow (See Healdsburg) Sonora, Tuolumne Co. GM-j- McCready, H. C. H 4
    Note. This party discontinued business before June 1, 1895,
    Stockton San Joaquin *M Brennan & Walsh 18 F Dickson, Woodhull & Cramer 15 F *M -Johnson & Spellman 18 F =*M Stockton Marble Works. (See Dickson, Woodhull & Cramer.) Tulare Tulare *M Bole. J. R. ■*M Lazenby, J. Stockton, San Joaquin Co. GM-f- Brennan & Walsh GM-J- Dickson, Woodhill & Cramer GM-f- Johnson & Spellman GM-f- Stockton Marble Works. See son, Woodhull & Cramer.) Tulare, Tulare Co. GM-f- Bole, J. R. GM-f- Lazenby, J. 20 K N 3 K 2 N 2 Dick-5
    ' Note. J. Lazenby discontinued business before June 1, 1895.
    Ukiah Mendocino *M Fisher & Kinslow (See Santa Rosa) Vallejo Solano MZ Doyle, Thomas M. 17 F MZ Gottschalk, Charles *M Plymire, James A. & Sons IT J MG Vallejo Marble & Granite Works (See Jas. A. Plymire & Sons) Ukiah, Mendocino Co. GM-f-' Fisher & Kinslow (See Santa Rosa) Vallejo, Solona Co. MW Doyle, Thomas M. L 2 MW Gootschalk, Charles GM-J- Plymire, James A. & Sons L 3 MG Vallejo Marble & Granite Works (See Jas. A. Plymire & Sons)
    Note. Before June 1, 1895, James A. Plymire & Sons discontinued business, one of the sons (P. A.) succeeding Bentley & Brown at Redding.
    Visalia Tulare *M Johnson, Robert J. Winters Yolo *M Bartholet, B. Woodlands Yolo *M Hebener Marble & Granite , Co. 19 J *M Mitchell, James R. 18 F Visalia, Tulare Co. GM-f- Johnson, Robert J. Winters, Yolo GM-j- Bartholet, B. Woodlands, Yolo, Co. GM-f- Hebener Marble & Granite Co. P 4 GM-J- Mitchell, James R. N 3
    E. F. Hebener succeeded the Hehener Marble & Granite Oo. Oct. 1, 1894 (see Exhibit If). W. O. Rogers started new at this point before June 1, 1895.
    Yerka Siskiyou " Yerka', Siskiyou Co. *M Hovey, William A. 18 J GM-j- Hovey, William A. N 3 «M Russell, J. B. GM+ Russell. J. B.
    Note. William A. Hovey discontinued business before June 1, 1895.
    
      To this point the hook of Credit Eatings for 1894, and the Blue Book published in November, 1895, have been copied verbatim. From this point items will be taken at random from each of the books mentioned.
    CREDIT RATINGS BLUE BOOK.
    COLORADO. COLORADO.
    Denver Arapahoe Denver, Arapahoe Co. *M Farrington & Co. 16 F GM-J- Farrington & Co. F. (W. R. Farrington alone) (W. R. Farrington alone) 1533 Trcmont st. 1533 Tremont St.
    Note. W. R. Farrington was out of business before November, 1895, and had been appointed chief detective for the city of Denver previous to Dee. 12, 1895. (See Exhibit G.)
    Fort Collins Larimer Fort Collins, Larimer Co. ■'M Starlin, A. J. GM+ Starlin, A. J.
    Note. A. J. Starlin discontinued business here before March 13, 1893. (See Exhibit H.)
    Greeley Weld *M Ritner, W. G. (see North Platte, ‘Neb.)
    Note. This party established a branch office here previous to March 28, 1895. (See Exhibit I.)
    Leadville Lake Leadville, Lake Co. BM Irwin, Jeremiah, SM Irwin, Jeremiah 026 W. 2d st. 526 W. 2nd St.
    Note. W. L. Malpuss started at this point on March 28, 1894. (See Exhibit J.)
    CONNECTICUT. CONNECTICUT.
    Ansonia New Haven Ansonia, New Haven Co. *G- Seeombe Bros. 19 J G-j- Seecombe Bros. P 3 B Wooster, C. B. 15 F B Wooster, C. B. 12
    Note. B is used as the trade classification in both books, signifying in Credit Ratings, stone, and in the Blue Book, building. Davy & Cole had started in business at this point previous to June 1, 1895, and their names appear in the 1895 edition of Credit Ratings. (See Exhibit K.)
    Bi'iagoport Fairfield Bridgeport. Fairfield Co. Carling & Stevenson GM-¡- Carling & Stevenson Fairfield ave. Fairfield Ave.
    Note. The name of this firm was inserted in 1894 Credit Ratings through a clerical error, they having been succeeded by Stevenson & Christie. .
    
      j °-M Sexton, James Sr. GM Sexton, James Sr. Stratíoi'd ave. Stratíord Ave.
    Note. Michael H. Sexton succeeded his father, James Sexton, Sr., June 0, 1894. (See Exhibit L.)
    Hartford Hartford Hartford, Hartford Co. *IVI Adams Granite & Marble Works GM+ Adams Granite & Marble Works 1 Ford st. J 1 Ford St. 4
    Note. Franklin R. Slocum succeeded the Adams Granite & Marble Works before Oct. 22, 1894. (See Exhibit M.)
    GM Keeley Bros. 18 F GM Kelley Bros. N 4 93 Charter Oak st 93 Charter Oak St.
    Note. Karl J. Beij succeeded this concern May 1, 1893. Through clerical errors the address given as 93 Charter Oak street should read 93 OharterOak avenue. (See Exhibit N.)
    Stamford Fairfield Stamford, Fairfield Co. *M Scofield & Sawdey J GM+ Scofield & Sawdey &
    Note. This concern was sold out by sheriff previous to Aug. 1, 1894. (See Exhibit O.)
    
      CREDIT RATINGS. BLUE BOOK.
    CONNECTICUT — Continued. CONNECTICUT — Continued.
    Sterling Windham B Boswell, J. W.
    Note. J. W. Boswell started In business before June 1, 1895. (See Exhibit P.)
    Westville New Haven Westville, New Haven Oo. (Atty. New Haven 3 miles) (Attorney New Haven 3 miles) *M Robertson, F. B. 13 F GM+ Robertson, T. B. K 3
    Note. Through clerical error the clause (see New Haven) was omitted in the 1894 Credit Ratings. (See Exhibit Q.)
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
    Washington Washington Washington, Washington Co.
    Note. The books are identical, but the following changes had taken place before June 1, 1895: Elihu Bradley, the Humelstown Brown Stone Co., George Richardson, and G. S. Walker had discontinued. Watson Bros, had removed to 1107 Q street N. W. The Washington Marble Co., through a clerical error, was inserted in the 1894 Credit Ratings as Washington, Granite Co. Timothy J. Callaghan had removed to 1230 25th street N. W. John Herbert Corning, John Howlings, Claude M. Manning, and Harry E. Rupprecht had started new. On the latter, see Exhibit S. Casper E. Geir had commenced new (see Exhibit R). Richard Rothwell, Jr. & Bro. had changed the style to Rothwell & Bro. J. H. Shelton, through clerical error, was quoted as located at 1513 E street, while his correct address is 1517 E street.
    FLORIDA. FLORIDA.
    Jacksonville Duval Jacksonville, Duval Co. *M Clark, George. W. 16 F GM+ Clark, George W.
    Note. George W. Clark had transferred his business to the George W. Clark Co. (See Exhibit T.)
    Pensacola Escambia Pensacola, Escambia Co. ♦M Davis, B. A. ■ 19 J GM+ Davis, B. A. P 4
    Note. Wills & Broughton started new at this point previous to March 30, 1895. (See Exhibit U.)
    Tallahassee Leon Tallahassee, Leon Co. *M Knowlton, W. A. J GM-|- Knowlton, W. A.
    Note. This name appeared in the 1894 Credit Ratings through a clerical error. The party’s name should appear W. A. Nowlin. (See Exhibit X.)
    GEORGIA. GEORGIA.
    Thomasville Thomas Thomasville, Thomas Co. ^ *M Begger & Thurman 19 J GM+ Begger & Thurman P 4
    Note. Through clerical error the name Begger appeared in the 1894 edition of Credit Ratings, and should read Bigger. (See Exhibit W.)
    INDIANA. INDIANA.
    Salem Washington *M Linscott, W. M. 18 J , MZ Naugle, John, 19 J 1 *M Neal, John B., 14 F BZ Salem Bedford Stone Co. (see Louisville, Ky.) Salem, Washington Co. GM-|- Linscott, W. M. N 4 MW Naugle, John, P 4 GM+ Neal, John B., J 2 SW Salem Bedford Stone Co. (see Louisville, Ky.)
    Note. W. M. Linscott had been entirely out of the marble business for five years previous to July 7, 1895, on which date Naugle & Jackson had succeeded John Naugle. John B. Neal is engaged in the harness business, not in the monumental, and his name appeared in the 1894 Credit Ratings through error. (See Exhibit No. 1.)
    IOWA. IOWA.
    Decorah Winneshiek Decorah, Winneshiek Co. *M Arenson & Hokaasen GM+ Arenson & Hokaasen
    Note. In the 1894 Credit Ratings two clerical errors appeared in this firm name, which should read Arneson & Kokaasen. (See Exhibit No. 2.)
    
      CREDIT RATINGS. BLUE BOOK.
    IOWA — Continued. IOW A— Continued.
    Dyersville Dubuque *M McHogan, William, Dyersville, Dubuque Co. 16 E GM-j- McHogan, William
    Note. By error in Credit Ratings; it should have read MacIIogan. Exhibit No. 8.) Same error in Blue Book. (See
    Des Moines Polk Des Moines, Polk (Co.) *M Des Moines (The) Marble & Mantle Co. GM-f Des Moines (The) Marble & Mantle Co. 701 Locust st. B 701 Locust St. (Cap. paid in $33m) (Cap paid in $38m)
    Note. Through clerical error the word Mantel was misspelled in our Credit Ratings for 1894, and the Blue B6ok contains the same error.
    Missouri Valley Harrison Missouri Valley, Harrison Co. ;;M Starling & Bullard _ 19 K GM+ Starling & Bullard •>
    Note. Through clerical error this name appeared misspelled in the 1895 Credit Ratings, and the Blue Book contains the same misspelling. (See Exhibit No. 4.)
    Olwein Fayette Olwein, Fayette Co. *3S Fayebrotlier, M. B. Gilf Fayebrother, M. E.
    Note. Two clerical errors appeared in this name in the 189-1 Credit Ratings, and same errors appear in the Blue Book. (See Exhibit No. 10.)
    KANSAS. KANSAS.
    Salina Salina Salina, Salina Co. *M Johnson, James 17 F GMf Johnson, James L 3
    Note. Through clerical error this name appeared misspelled in the 1894 Credit Ratings, and the same error appears in the Blue Book. (See Exhibir No. 5.) '
    KENTUCKY KENTUCKY.
    Augusta Bracken Augusta. Bracken Co. *M Hume, Albert W., GMf Hume, Albert W.
    Note. Through clerical error this name appeared misspelled in the 1894 Credit Ratings, and the same error appears in the Blue Book. (See Exhibit No. 6.)
    MAINE. MAINE.
    Knox Waldo Knox, Waldo C,o. BQ Booth Bros. & Hurricane Isle Granite SG Booth Bros. & Hurricane Islo G-ranila Co. (inc.) (See Now York, N. Y.) Co. (Inc.) (See New York, N. Y.)
    Note. Through clerical error this concern was reported in the 1894 Credit Ratings as BQ, which should read GQ, and the Blue Book contains the same error.
    MARYLAND.
    
      Ballim,ore. — Note. Wilkinson & Neville. Complainants negleeted to insert (street) after Moser, and respondents copy the error.
    MASSACHUSETTS.
    
      Chelsea. — Noto. A. G. Whitcomb, 28 4th street, was inserted through clerical error, and they copy. (See Exhibit No. 7.)
    
      Lawrence.- — Note. Thomas Lahey was, through error, inserted as engaged alone, and should have read Lahey & O’Donnell. (See Exhibit No. 8.)
    
      Quincy. — Note. Respondents insert street addresses only in such instances as they appeared in complainants’ 1894 Credit Ratings.
    MICHIGAN.
    
      Bay City. — Note. Beard & De Merrell should read Board & De Merell. (See Exhibit No. 9.)
    
      MINNESOTA. '
    
      Stillwater. — Note. Through typographical error P. M. Peterson (see St. Paul) appeared in complainants’ 1894 book, and should read P. N. Peterson. (See Exhibit No. 11.)
    
      Wabasha. — Note. Prank Shenach was misspelled, through error, and should spell Shenack.
    
      Winona. — Note. Joseph Thrum should read Joseph Thrun, and respondents copy the error.
    MISSOURI.
    
      Kansas City. — Note. Respondents classify Bandera Plagstone Co. as BQ, neglecting to change the B. to S.
    NEBRASKA.
    
      York. — Note. J. N. Kildaw should read J. N. Kildow.
    NEW HAMPSHIRE.
    
      Concord. — Note. The revision streets and numbers did not reach complainants in season for insertion in the 1894 edition of Credit Ratings. Only two names appear provided with street addresses, and the Blue Book compares exact. John J. Tressider & Son were given as GQ in Credit Ratings, through error, they not operating a quarry, and respondents copy.
    
      Enfield. — Note. Buckley & McCormick sold out to the Enfield Pink Granite Co. before Jan. 1, 1895. Wells & Flanders. Complainants use a catch name for the purpose of proving infringements in case attempts are made. The concern mentioned operate a saw mill and deal in lumber.
    NEW JERSEY.
    
      Newark. — Note. Louis Kengott should read Louis Kenngott. (See Exhibit No. 12.)
    
      Trenton. — Note. George R. Dobbs, through clerical error, was inserted as located at 863 Center street in the 1894 Credit Ratings; his correct address being 824 Center street.. (See Exhibit No. 13.)
    NEW YORK.
    
      Lansingburg. — Note. Under this heading the name of John McQuide (see Troy) should appear, and through the error of complainants’ printer it was transposed in the make-up of the 1894 Credit Ratings, and appears under Troy, with address as Lansingburg, and respondents’ book corresponds exact.
    
      Long Island City, Blissville. — Note. Respondents’ book compares exact as to trade classifications and the use of the credit character L after the name of Roach & O’Donnell. L. with respondents, signifies “$1,500 to $2,500,” and with complainants it signifies “C. O. D.”
    ■ New York City. — Note. Respondents reproduce D after Booth Bros. & Hurricane Granite Co., 60 Bank St. (inc.), cap. paid in $250m. D with complainants signifies “very good.” D with respondents signifies $75,000 to $100,000, which does not compare with the concern’s capital paid in.
    OHIO.
    
      Hanovertown. — Note.- This insertion was an error and' should have read Hanoverton in Credit Ratings, and the same error appears in the Blue Book.
    TENNESSEE.
    
      Humboldt. — Note. A. W. Stehr should read A. H. Stehr.
    VERMONT.
    • Barre. — Note. Respondents’ book will be found an exact copy of the 1894 Credit Ratings. George Straitton was a clerical error, and should spell Straiton. (See Exhibit No. 14.)
    • .Montpelier. — Note. Complainants’ printer, in making up the 1894 Credit Ratings, wrongfully classified the Langdon Granite Co. and Lynch & McMahon under Charles H. More & Co. Respondents’ Blue Book shows the same error.
    
      VIRGINIA.
    
      Oharlottsville —Noto. Tj. W. Bowman should read L. M. Bowman. (See Exhibit No. 1G.)
    WISCONSIN.
    
      Houghton. — Note. Respondents copy BQ Prentice (The) Brown Stone Co. This, in the Blue Book classification, would signify building quarry.
    
      Watertown. — Note. Joseph Walter should read James Waiter.
    Ending with Wyoming, respondents follow complainants’ classification in making up the Canadian provinces, which is not alphabetical, as in other publications, but a stylo original with, and peculiar to, complainants.
    DAVID M. LADD.
    Sworn to February 6, 1806.
    AFFIDAVITS FOR DEFENDANT.
    Affidavit of Edward P. Oxnard.
    • [Filed February 4, 1806.]
    On this third day of February, A. D. 1890, before me personally appeared Edward P. Oxnard, who, being by me duly sworn, deposes and says;
    That ho is one of the respondents in the above-entitled action; that he has been for the past thirteen years engaged in business with the North American Mercantile Agency, having attorneys in most of the principal cities and towns of the United States and Canada; that in connection with said business he has come into contact with persons, firms, and corporations in various mercantile and manufacturing lines, and has liad communication with largo numbers of attorneys, in different parts of the United Slates and Canada; that in connection with said work he also met large numbers of persons engaged in tlie marble and granite business throughout .Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont; that about eighteen months ago he began the preparation of a book of reference entitled “The Bine Book of tlie Marble and Granite Exchange Mercantile Agency,” and continued the same down to about tlie first of November, 1805, when the same was printed and issued; that in the preparation of said work lie began with tlie states of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont; that the sources of information used by him, as moro fully set out below, were state and city directories which classify dealers under various heads showing the lines of business in which they are engaged, among others the marble and granite business; tlie reports of attorneys in several places; the books of the firm of (look & IVatkins of the city of Boston, large wholesale dealers in granite, stone, and marble, having dealings with persons and firms in various parts of the United States, upon whose hooks and correspondence the defendant and his son spent upwards of two weeks; and tlie assistance of said firm, and others in the same line of business, in correcting and adding to the sheets of his work which he submitted to them; and that, if any instances occur whore errors and misprints appear in both complainants’ and respondents’ books, it is duo to the fact that both have bad access to the same directories, trade lists, and other sources of common information.
    Tlie deponent further says that he has made a comparison between the work issued by him and the complainants’ book on file in this court, and says that there is, and from necessity must be, a similarity in tlie names of tlie granite and marble dealers in each city and town, inasmuch as tlie samo dealers are referred to by each; that there is a similarity in the fact that the states are arranged alphabetically in both books, as in all mercantile agency books and directories; that the books, however, upon comparison. vary materially, in the names given, and in the following other particulars: The respondents’ book contains, after tlie name of each town and county, the name of an attorney, and the population of the town or city, and the name of the most prominent bank situated in the place, none of which are contained in complainants’ hook. Then follows a list of the persons, firms, and corporations engaged in tlie granite, stone, or marble business in such town or city. These, from necessity, must be similar in the two works, as in many places there is but a single person or firm in the place engaged in this industry, and in the majority of places only two or three such firms, but, upon comparison of the two works, it will be seen that very many differences do occur; such, for instance, as the omission of towns from-the complainants’ book which are given in respondents’, the omission of towns in respondents’ book which are given in complainants’, and the omission of the names of dealers in one which occur in the other. Reference is hereby made to the tables at the end of this deposition showing differences ih one State, namely, Pennsylvania, taken at random in the book.
    "■ Opposite each name are letters indicating the lines of work in which such persons or firms are engaged. Reference to the complainants’ book shows that their list must have been prepared several years since, when firms were engaged only in a single line, that of marble, granite, stone, or monumental work. The respondents’ book correctly shows that a majority of firms throughout the country are now engaged in two, and even three, of these lines. Opposite the name of each dealer appears in both works a rating. The key employed in one case is that of letters, and the other of figures, and the division into amounts represented by these letters and figures is somewhat different. In obtaining ratings the respondent has employed a variety Of means. Through the attorneys in some of the states upon his list he has obtained ratings throughout the state, which were procured with the assistance-Of some leading marble or granite dealer in the principal city. In thé state of' Massachusetts, and many other states, he has received the assistance of a leading marble and granite house in Boston, which employs five of six traveling salesmen, covering many of the Central, Western, and Southern states. This house had communication with dealers in many parts of the United States, and the respondent and his son, Frederick P. Oxnard, spent upwards of two weeks in going over the accounts of dealers in many parts of the United States, and examining the promptness of their payment, and all of the ratings were submitted to this firm for verification and correction. The firm of granite dealers in Boston previously alluded to are members of the Manufacturers’ & Wholesale Granite Dealers’ Protective Association of New England, which issues monthly a confidential list of dealers throughout the United States whose credit is in any way impaired, or whose payment makes them liable to suspicion; and deponent is informed and believes that those lists, for a period of upward of a year, were used in correcting and verifying the standing of dealers throughout the country.
    Deponent furtlier says that he did not have or use any copy of complainants’ said book in the preparation or compilation of his work. He further says that the lists of dealers throughout the country are not the subject of copyright, and have been printed in numerous town, city, and state directories before the publication of complainants’ book, and are common property for the purpose of making any compilation; and that he has made use of such works in preparing his book.
    Deponent further says that neither he nor any agent of his has ever offered his said book for sums varying from five to twenty-five dollars, but have leased the same for the uniform price of twenty-five dollars per year to persons subscribing therefor, and have offered to any person who had paid said subscription price an extra copy of the work, to be used by his travelers on the road, for an additional sum of from two to five dollars, according- to the number of extra copies taken; but that, so far as he remembers, no second copy has been taken at said last-named prices.
    Deponent further says that he has never sold or offered for sale any copies of his said work, and that he is informed and believes that the complainants have never sold or offered for sale any of his said books, but have uniformly leased the same to subscribers, according to the form of lease which appears on the inside back cover of complainants’ exhibit filed in this case, and that, at the expiration of each year, the book for that year is returned to and taken up by complainants.
    EDWARD P. OXNARD.
    Sworn to February 4, -1896.
    
      LADD & HUNT. OXNARD.
    ALLEGHENY, PA.
    B— •M— BZ— Alston, A & Co. very good 50 to 75M Beggs, Alexander & Son Walker Marble Co. Wissner, Henry not in not rated G M+ Walker Marble & Granite Go. S W Windsor, Henry
    ALLENTOWN, PA.
    
      * M Ilarwick, Monroe B„ X to $2000 Investigate Pay. Schmeyer, A, W. & Co. §500. Investigate Pay.
    ALLENTOWN, PA.
    * M— * MAltoona, Blair Altona, Blair Co. Johnson W. W $500. GlTf Johnson W. W. Investigate pay. Moifatt, Thomas E. & Co. $500 G 11+ Moffatt, Thomas E. & Co. Investigate Pay. Black, John II. Fair. G M+ Black, John H. Investigate Pay Knauss J. A. G M+ Kansas, J. A. not in Bolivar Pa. not ir Haglock, John §600.
    BATH, PA.
    * M— Reinhard DanT J. (Agt) 3 to §5M G M+ Reinhard, DanT J. (Agt) Investigate Pay.
    BEAXVILLE, PA.
    Miller, J. M. G M Millert J. M.
    BEAVER FALLS, PA., Not in G M+ Reed A. E.
    * M— BERL1NSVILLE, PA. Becker, James W. $500. G M+ Becker, James W. Investigate Pay.
    * M— BERNVILLE, PA. Yeager, Henry & Co. $500. G M+ Yeager, Henry & Co. 10 to $20M Not in Bangor Pa. Not in Kerler R. E.
    M.Z-— Hamsher, Henry F. BOWERS’ STATION, PA. M W Ransher, Henry F.
    * M-— Hollenberg C. B. $500. Not in BRADDOCK, PA. G11+ Hollenberg C. B. Investigate Pay G M Shanahan & Valentine.
    MZ Wright Thomas S. BROWNSVILLE, PA.
    
      * M— CAMBR1DGEBORO, PA, Sherman Not in Not in j Root 10 to $20M Prompt Pay. G M+Sherman & Root $5 to 10M Canton, Pa. G M+ Rouan, J. W.
    Erb, George B. CARLISLE, PA. Not in
    * M— Berger, William A. GATASAÜQUA, PA. G Al- ¡ - Borger, William A.
    M Z Not in Ramsley, Wallace Cochranton, Pa. CHESTER, PA. G M Cudlipp, J. H. M w Rawsloy, Wallace. Gochkanton, Pa.
    * M— McClxntock, William DOWNINGTQN, PA. GM-|- McClinlock, William M.
    Not 3n DU BOIS, PA. GM Krell, J. H.
    * M— Lnpfer & Flickinger Not in Not in DUNCANNON, PA. G M+ Dupfer & Flickinger Edinboro Pa. G M Webor, James.
    
      LADD & HUNT. OXNARD.
    * M— Carey, George A. Not in EASTON, PA. G M+ Casey, George A. & Co. GM Price, W. D.
    Not m Not m Not in ERIE, PA. G M Jenks C. W. Germanton, Pa. G M Smith S. D.
    G Q — Lightner Nathaniel $1000. GETTYSBURG, PA. No rating. Miller Mrs. W. H. $2500.
    G Z— Empire Granite Co. not in HARRISBURG, PA. not in. Compton & Mettler.
    * M— Keiper, Philip 5 to $10M not in not in HAZELTON, PA. G M4- Keiper, Philip. Investigate Pay M G Thomas J. B. $2500. MG Thomas, WM. J.
    JERSEY SHORE, PA. * M— Feister, E. K. & Son. 3 to $5M no rating.
    not in LANCASTER, PA. McClure, Estate of W. M. $10 to 20M (See Mrs. Christiana McClure*
    not in LATROBE, pa. M Cr.-f McColly, E. B & Co.
    * M— Daugherty J. B. not in LEBANON, PA. G M-f* Dougherty Geo. M G Kleisir, Felix
    M Z— Nau, John H. §1000. LITTLESTOWN, PA. Investigate pay
    not in LOCK HAVEN, PA. M Cr.-/- Peeling G. C.
    * M— Hollinsbury & Palmer * M— Wright Thomas S. Mauch Chunk Pa. McKeesport, pa. M G Palmer O. M. not in not in
    B Q— McNeil, Benjamin MEADVILLE, PA.e S Q McNeil Benjamin & Co.
    * M-— Coble, Henry U. MIDDLETOWN, PA. not in
    not in * M— Rainey & Mesker MILLERTON, PA. MG McKibbin, Wm. T. G M+ Rainey Meeker
    not in MONONGAHELA, PA. Alexander & Co. NEFF'S, PA.
    * M— Schlosser, Frank 3 to $5000. no rating. NEW ALEXANDRIA, PA.
    BZ Sligh, A. H. not in SW Slight, A. H. NEW BRIGHTON. PA. G M-j- Garver, A. H.
    *M— Hart, John C. $1000, * M— Noll M. M. (Mrs.) NEW CASTLE, PA. G M-f- Hart, John C. Investigate pay G M-f- Hart, Wm. not in
    • — Storb Theodore M. NEW HOLLAND, PA. G M-|- Storb Theodore M & Sons.
    
      LADD & HTJNT. OXNARD.
    M Z— Louch E. G. NEW OXFORD. M W Lough E. G.
    NORRISTOWN, PA. * M— Smith George W. 5 to $10,000. G M-f- Smith George W. Investigate pay.
    OXFORD, PA. * M.— Jones, George E. $2 to $3000 G M-b Jones, George E. no rating.
    * M— Arnaiz & Burns * M=* Ashmore, James J. * M— Ashton John S. ;M B— Atkinson & Myhlertz PHILADELPHIA, PA. not in G M-f- Ashmore James G M-f Ashton, John S. & Co. W S Atkinson & Myhlertz (Dissolved)
    * M— Burke, Catherine GM— Connor, James ' M— Gallagher & Feusht WM— Freedly J. K. & Sons * M— Gessler. John M. M Z— Graham Walter ■- M— Kornbau, Daniel GM— Miller, Christian * M— Mount Waldo Granite Works * M— O’Brien J. J. & Co. * M— Pierce, John S. •* M— Schmucker, Lewis G. 4 m— Schroeder, Chas. F. 5 to $10,000 * M— Ulery Conrad not in not in ■* M— Yeager, John M. G— Young. Thomas $20,000. Burke, Catherine & Co. not in X M Freedly Wm. G. G Mf Gessler, John M. (estate) not in not in not in G Mf Pierce, John S & Co. not in Moderate pay. Capital not stated G M Waterhouse, W. G Mf Whitaker, John W. G Mf Weager, John M. G Young, Thomas $5,000. PHILADELAHTA, PA. GMf
    * M— Cooper, J. A. $1000 PHILLIPSBURGH, PA. G Mf Cooper, J. A. no capital.
    not in B Q— Park & Park 50 to $75,000 PITTSBURGH, PA. MG+ Itzel & Co. S Q Park & Park no rating
    not in PITTSTON. PA. Barber, S. J.
    * M — - Reifsnyder & Storb POTTSTOWN, PAG M+ Strob Horaco
    POTTSVILLE, PA. * M— Laubenstein Levi $3 to 5000 G Mf Laubenstein, Levi Investigate Pay (No capital)
    READING, PA. * m— Bressler F. F. $2 to 3000 Fair. G M-f Bressler F. F. Investigate Pay WM— Getz’s, H. S., Sons 150 to $200,000. not rated.
    REYNOLDSVILLE, PA. Seeley & Alexander. High, not in
    not in Sciota Pa. SALTSBURGII, PA. GM+ Bebk, R. J. Scotia Pa.
    not in * M— Daugherty Mary A. STRAUSSTOWN, PA. G M Miller, L. L. or S. R, not in
    not in UNION CITY, PA. Ezra Cooper
    * M“- Forbes, J. N. Nothing. WAYNESBORO, PA. G M-f Forbes, J. N. $2500.
    * ¿i— Spragg, Liza not in WAYNESBURG, PA. G Mf Spragg Eliza West Pittston, Pa. M G Barber, S. J.
    
      LADD & HUNT. OXNARD.
    WILKES BARRE, PA. not in GM+ O’Neil, P. S.
    WORTHINGTON, PÁ. * M— Gaiser, G. J. & Co. 3 to $5000. no rating.
    • M— Doyle, David B. 3 to $5000. M G— Laueks, G. W 5 to $10,000 *M— Miller Henry H. YORK, PA. G M+ Doyle David B. Investigate pay. (No capital) M G Laueks G. W. no rating, not in.
    Affidavit of Reed O. Oxnard.
    [Filed February 8, 1896.]
    United States of America, District of Massachusetts.
    On this seventh day of February, 1896, personally appeared before me Reed O. Oxnard, and, being by me first duly sworn, deposes and says, that he is a resident of Medford, in this district, and a son of respondent Edward P. Oxnard; that at the request of said respondent he made a comparison of the lists of stone dealers in Massachusetts, as given in the respondents’ book complained of and the complainants’ book deposited in the clerk’s office of this court, and he annexes hereto the said comparison in his handwriting, made in parallel columns, showing the wide differences between the two books; that he has further made a comparison between complainants’ book and respondents’ book as to the states of Wisconsin, Virginia, and West Virginia, and finds very substantial differences, being quite as great as those in the list annexed to his affidavit and to that of the said Edward P. Oxnard, but he has not had the time and opportunity to make the same written statement in parallel columns to annex hereto; that his attention has been called to the statement in .the affidavits heretofore filed in this case on behalf of the complainants, to the effect that at least eight thousand changes occur between various editions of the complainants’ work; and in view of their allegation that the complainants’ and respondents’ books are identical, he has made a count of the dealers contained in respondents’ book, and finds the total number of persons, firms, and corporations reported there as dealing in the various kinds of stone as 7,676; that he has not had an opportunity to make an accurate count of the names contained in complainants’ book, but has made a careful estimate thereof, and in his belief said book does not contain over eight thousand names. Deponent further says that he has seen and examined the United States Directory of the Bfarble, Granite and Stone Dealers and Workers, published by J. S. Clark & Company, of Louisville, Ky., which is referred to in the affidavit of Seward W. Jones filed herewith, and he deposits herewith a copy of said book, identified by his initials, for reference in this case. The deponent further says, with reference to the complainants’ statements in their affidavits that their arrangement of the British provinces is peculiar to their book, that the said arrangement in complainants’ book is substantially identical with that in said Clark’s Directory heretofore referred to.
    REED O. OXNARD. Sworn to.
    MASSACHUSETTS.
    LADD & HUNT. OXNARD.
    Annisquam Mass. ' not in Ashley Palls not in Bay View Mass not in
    BOSTON, MASS.
    G Q— Blue Hill Granite Co G Q— Braintree Granite Co (Ino) No. 7 Exchange Place. M— Butler, Phillip H & Co Good 5 to $10M B-j- Cambridge Stone Co G Q M not in Braintree Granite Co. (Inc) No. 28 State St. Butler, Phillip H & Co Investigate Pay. not in
    
      LADD & HUNT. OXNARD.
    BOSTON, MASS. — Continued.
    * m— Camfil E & Son B Z=- Oarew Freestone Co B Cleveland (The) Stone Co No. 166 Devonshire Si. W Cook & Watkins No. 120 Boylston St (See Barre Vt.) B— Cuddihy John J. No. 562 Albany St. G~ Donohoe, M. J. (4 M— Evans, R. A. & Sons 3 to $5000 * M— Grasser, Paul No. 1045 Trmont G Q— Jones, S. O. Meridian St. bridge G B— Joyce, John G— King, George O. No. 18 Swett St. H G Libby, Albert A. & Co No. 116 Swett St. * M— Magner, David $2 to 8000 B Z Meany, Edward F. & Co 75 to $100m * M Mulrey, T. D. 50 to $75M * M-— Mulrey, Patrick (estate) 1208 Harrison Ave. B Z— New Brunswick Freestone Co. No. 4 Pemberton. Sq (Inc) * M Z — Robinson, George H. No. 86 Cambridge. Si. W G— Rockport Granite Co. No. 27 TOlbu St. B Z— Stillwell & Schaeffler B Z— Sullivan Win J. No. 59 Swett St. * M— Tempest J. P. No. 146 ■ Bowdoin St. not in G M— Walker, Avard L & Co No. 149 Portland G M-p Cantil, K & Son S W Joseph Oarew Freestone & Marble S Cleveland (The) Stone Co. No. 81 Sleeper St. X G Cook & Watkins No. 122 Boylston St. (See Barre Vt. & Quincy Mass) S Cuddihy, John J. No. 166 Devonshire St. & 17 Otis SL Donohoe, M. J. no capital Investigate Pay G M-f Grasser, Paul Ao. 38 Burnett SL G Q Jones S. O. No. 479 Meridian St. E. B. not in G. King, George O. Woolson St. B G Libby, Albert A. & Co. Pavers. No. 28 School St. no rating. S Meany, Edward F. & Co no rating G M -- Mulrey, T. I). no rating GMP Mulrey, Patrick (estate) No. 84 Vernon St. S W New Brunswick Freestone Co. No. 27 Pemberton Sqr. (Inc) M W Robinson, George H. No. 86 Cambridge St. Cho/rleHm* X G Rockport Granite Co No. 31 State St S W Sullivan Wm J. No. 123 Swett St. G M-p Tempest J. P. No. 1291 Dorchester Ave. SW Valentine & Stillwell No. 47 Swett St G M Walker, Avard L. & Co Forest Hills.
    not in Brighton Mass not in not in EAST BRAINTREE. . Kelloway, Henry not in W M M Q-f Breakorth, Parsons Jenks, A. B.
    M G— McDonald Alexander $75,000 * M— McNamee, John & Sons 2 to $3000 CAMBRIDGE, MASS. Son 50 to not rated , no rating
    G Z — * Doherty, Hugh 2 to §3,000 MG IT organ, John J. 45 Main st CAMBRIDGEPORT, MASS. M G no rating Horgan, John J. 53 Maim st.
    
    
      * M GZ-Harrington John & Son Gore’s Wharf, 3d St, Sweat! Gould A Parker EAST CAMBRIDGE, MASS. Conn. Steam Stone Co. (Freestone) No. 64 First St. G M-J- Harrington John & Son Ayers Wharf, No. 320 8d St. * GW Sweatt & Gould
    B Z CANTON, MASS. Lawrence, John 2 to $3,000 Cataumet Mass no rating not in
    G Q-CHELSEA, MASS. Davis, D. C & Son 3 to $5000 good no rating
    not in * M— Rogers D. A. 180 High st. East Lee Mass East Long Meadow Mass East Mansfield Mass CLINTON, MASS. M G Gibson Geo. S, not in not in not in not in
    
      LADD & HUNT. OXNARD.
    ESSEX. not in G M Stover & Co
    EVERETT, MASS. M Z~ Whitcomb A. G. not in
    FALL RIVER, MASS. B Q— Beattie, William 50 to 75M not rated * M— Durkin & Co $1000* G M-j- Durkin, P. X no ratina not in MG Fish, F. S. not in G M Lawson F. M
    not in Graniteville Mass GARDNER, MASS. M G Keenan & Gerry not in
    not in GREAT BARRINGTON, MASS. G M-f Lux M.
    • M Brown F E HOUSATONIC, MASS. not in
    HARWICH, MASS. * M— Crosby, Henry T. 3 to $5,000 not rated M G— Cummings, F. G. & Co MG Weeks, Cummirfgs & Co.
    not in not in not in not in HOLYOKE, MASS. S Delaney Bros First class pay $100,00$ to $300,000 S Mead, I. S Polvin & Shearer S McComm Walter
    not in not in not in not in HYANNIS, MASS. GM Nickerson, Thos.' W. Hyde Park Mass M G King, Geo. O Hyde Park Marble and Granite* Works
    not in LAWRENCE, MASS. Bostre & Co
    * M— Gross Bros 100 to $150,000 Long Meadow Mass LEE, MASS. not rated not in
    not in not in not in LOWELL, MASS. G W Anderson John G W Dillingham Fred G M-f G.umb Bros
    B Z— Blethen, Curry & Co. not in not in LYNN, MASS. / S W Blercthen, Curry & Co G W Blenton S. P. G W Sampson John
    MALDEN, MASS. Malden Marble & Granite Works not in Scott & Hildebrand • not in
    MILFORD, MASS. not in G M Fair C. L.
    not in EAST MILTON, MASS. G-f Sullivan, John E.
    not In NEW BEDFORD, MASS. G M Dawson. Amo»
    NORTH ADAMS, MASS. *'M Crowley D. J. G M-f Crowley, D. J. Sold out
    PITTSFIELD, MASS. M G— Andrus, F, O. not in
    
      LADD & HUNT, OXNARD.
    Clark, Robert PLYMOUTH, MASS. not in
    GQ-not in not in Carr, E. F. & Co. QUINCY, MASS. GW Adrian H. W. G W Abram, James, W. not in
    GZ. U 7r— GZ— G — * G GZ— G— GZ— SO. QUINCY, MASS. Burke & 0 Keefe Cook M. E & Co 2 to $3,000 not m Lillicrap Bros McDonnell Bros 10 to $20,000 McDonnell & Kelley 3 to $5000 Norfolk Granite Co. (see Burke O’Keefe) Restelli & Kelley Turner R. E. not in G W Cook M. E. & Co. 10 to $20,000 Cook & Watkins (see Boston) not in no rating not rated not in' not in not in
    * G GZ™ G Z - G- * G— GZ-WEST QUINCY, MASS. Ayers, A. W. & Son 50 to $75M Fuller, F. Wesley 3 to $5M. Henss, John Moderate Pay Heve?han, James & Son G-JMonahan & Breen Quinn, Robert, K not in not in not rated no capital o to $10,000 Hevehan, James & Son not in not in Royalston Mass Roya.lst.on Granite Co (see Edward D. Reed)
    not in not in ROCKPORT, MASS. G Q Rockport Granite Co (cap. paid in $200M) G Q Wait, T. N & Son
    not in not in SALEM, MASS. G O’Rouke Bros. G M+ North Bridge Granito Works No. 73 • North St cor Bridge
    B Z— B Q James, William Lawler, Edward A* not in SPRING FT ELD, MASS. S W James, William (Estate) not in S Q Marra, John
    * M— Jackson, Win. H. TAUNTON, MASS. G ML Jackson, Wm. H. Mrs.
    * M WARE, MASS. Kinney & Godfrey (See Northampton) G ML Godfrey, W. F.
    WESTFIELD, MASS. M G Westfteld M. & G. Co.
    * M— Brown, F. E. WEST STOCKBRIDGE, MASS. not
    * M— Briggs Richard not in WOBURN, MASS. M G Horn, John J.
    * M— not in not in Nugent & O'Toole not in not in not in WORCESTER, MASS. G M Adamson Tohnson Davis Bros not in Austin O’Toole G M L Nugent, John F. G M Wilson Martin
    
      Among other proofs filed by defendant avus an affidavit by one Seward W. Jones to the effect that one of . the complainants had called upon him to solicit a subscription to tbeir book, and tbat, in the ensuing conversation, said complainant had stated that the book of complainants was compiled from a directory of marble and granite dealers in the United States, published by J. S. Clark & Co., of Louisville, Ky., which book defendants made part of their evidence. This statement was denied by an affidavit in reply, and, in order further to show that complainants’ hook was not compiled from Clark & Co.’s directory, as well as to shoAV that defendant’s book was taken from that of complainants, complainants’ attorney in .his brief, exhibited the three compilations the following table of comparisons between
    CLARK’S DIRECTORY. CREDIT RATINGS 1894. BLUE BOOK.
    H. H. Blakely, Birmingham, T. H. Holt, " S. J. Evans, Calera, X Hummel, Decatur, Geo. Kenney, Opelika, J. N. Montgomery, Selma, :L. Taylor, Talladega, ALABAMA. Birmingham Jefferson. Alabama Marble & Stone Co. (cap. Paid in $12,300) Birmingham Marble Works. (see Thos. H. Holtt Holt, Thos. H. Calera, Shelby Evans, Samuel J„ Decatur Morgan Hummel, J. Stewart, W. P. Opelika Lee Kinney, Goo. Selma Dallas Montgomery, J. N. & Son, Talladega. Talladega Taylor, Lafayette, Birmingham, Jefferson Co. Alabama Marble Stone & Co. (Cap. paid in $12,300) Birmingham Marble Works. (see Thos. H. Holt) Holt, Thos. H. Calera, Shelby Co. Evans, Samuel J. Decatur, Morgan Co. Hummel, J. Stewart, W. P. Opelika, Lee Co. Kinney, Geo. Selma, Dallas Co. Montgomery, J. N. & Son. Talladega, Talladega Co. Taylor, Lafayette,
    NOTE. No towns or names. ARIZONA. Flagtaff Yrvapai Arizona Sandstone Co. (see Los Angeles, Cal.) English & Padgham Phoenix Maricopa Bliss & Ligier Cohise Marble & Onyx Co. Gregory, J. M. Phoenix Marble & Stone Co. (cap. $50in) Prescott Yavapai Mair, Jacob, Tombstone Cocnise Ritter & Taylor Flagstaff, Yavapai Co. Arizona Sandstone Co. (see Los Angeles, Cal.) English & Padgham. Phoenix, Maricopa Co. Bliss & Ligier. Cohise Marble & Onyx Co. Gregory, J. M. Phoenix Marble & Stone Co. (cap. $50m) Prescott, Yavapai Co. Mair, Jocob, Tombstone, Cochise Co. Ritter & Taylor.
    John Naugle, Salem, W. M. Linscott & Co. INDIANA. Salem Washington Linscott, W. M. Naugle, John, Salem, Washington Co. Linscott, W. M. Naugle, John,
    John A. Starlln, Missouri IOWA. Missouri Valley Harrison Starling & Bullard Missouri Valley, Harrison Co. Starling & Bullard
    Valley, James Johnston, Salina, KANSAS. Salina Salina Johnson, James, Salina, Salina Co. Johnson, James,
    P. N. Peterson, Stillwater, Thurn & Co., Winona, MINNESOTA. Stillwater Washington Peterson, P. M. (see St. Paul) Winona Winona Thrum, Joseph, Stillwater, Washington Co. Peterson, P. M. (see St. Paul) Winona, Winona Co. Thrum, Joseph,
    
      ^LARK’S DIRECTORY. CREDIT RATINGS 1894, BLUE BOOK.
    David & Kildow, York, NEBRASKA. York York Kildaw, J. N. York, York Co, Kildaw, J. N.
    
      G. F. Andrews, Enfield, D. L. Tilton, NEW HAMPSHIRE, Enfield Grafton Buckley & AlcOonnick Wells & Flanders Enfield, Grafton Co. Buckley & McCormick Wells & Flanders
    Sam’i Jackson, Ilanoverton, OHIO. Hanovertown Columbiana Jackson, Samuel, Hanovertown, Columbiana Co. Jackson, Samuel.
    The affidavit of Reed O. Oxnard (page 49 of the record) states that^the arrangement in the Credit Ratings of the British provinces is substantially identical with that of said Clark’s Directory. A comparison of the exhibits in this case show the following as the arrangement of four of the same in the three books:
    OLAJRK’S DIRECTORY. British Golumbia. Manitoba. Now Foundland. Prince Edward Inland. CREDIT RATINGS. Newfoundland. Prince Edward Inland. Manitoba. British Columbia. BLUE BOOK. N ev/í o undland. Prince Edward Island. Manitoba. British Columbia,
    Albert P. Worthen, for complainants.
    Elder, Wait & Whitman, for defendant.
   PUTNAM, Circuit Judge.

The complainants have published annually for several years a book of credit ratings of the marble, granite, and stone dealers of the United States and Canada. The volume on which this hill was brought is that of 1894, which the case shows was delivered to 179 subscribers, the complainants receiving therefor $5,430. The stipulations between the complainants and subscribers on which the books were issued were that the book delivered to each subscriber was a loan, and was not sold; and that, if any copy was found in any other hands than those entitled to use it by permission of the complainants, the publishers might take possession of it, and thus all rights to its use by the subscriber would be annulled. The bill complains of infringement, and the present issue comes on an application for an interlocutory injunction.

The respondent claims that on its face the hill is demurrable, and that, on this hearing, be is entitled to the advantage of all the questions which could be raised on demurrer. We are disposed to yield that proposition, because, certainly, the court will not grant an interlocutory injunction on the face of a bill which it sees clearly could not he sustained on demurrer. The respondent, however, makes hut one proposition which can properly he called a "proposition of law.” He claims that, by reason of the special restriction on the use of the book to which we have referred, there never has been a publication, and that, therefore, the rights of the complainants are at common law. and not under the statutes, so that this court has no jurisdiction of this suit, both parties being citizens of Massachusetts. It should he said iu this connection that, while the nature of the use of the complainants’ hook was sought to be limited in the manner which we have explained, there was no limit placed by the complainants on the extent or number of persons to whom the book might be distributed under the conditions which they had provided. Though adapted specially for persons engaged in the trades of which we have spoken, yet even these are indefinite in number, and there is no evidence that the circulation was intended to be limited to them. In any view, it might be difficult to sustain this proposition, because, as the statute now stands, an author is compelled to complete his title to his copyright before publication, so there is at least one point of time, although it may be a very minute one, when the author, who has entitled himself to a copyright, is also entitled to look to the statutes of the United States for protection, notwithstanding he has not published. Indeed, it may well be questioned whether the mere fact that one has not published, and the consequential fact that he has a remedy at common law, deprive him of a concurrent remedy under the statute in the event that he has complied with all its requirements for obtaining a federal copyright. However, we do not rest the case on this point, because we are satisfied that there has been a publication.

The respondent cites on this point Scrut. Gopyr. § 106, and relies on the well-known cases in each of which there was a private circulation of manuscripts, or of printed books, and yet it was held that the common-law right of the several authors was preserved. Scrutton on'Copyright is far from precise on this topic, and it cannot be ascertained from what the author says that he intended to lay down a rule which meets the present case. The,instances where the private circulation of manuscripts and printed books has been held not to amount to publication are so essentially different from the case in hand that we need not delay to point out the distinctions. Neither party has referred us to any decision covering this proposition which we regard as of authority in this court. Coppinger on Copyright (3d Ed.) lays down rules at least partially, if not wholly, defining publication within the meaning of the copyright statutes, which we think are more accurate than the expressions cited by the respondent from Scrutton. On page 117, in distinguishing the effect of a private and gratuitous circulation among friends, he says: “The distinction is in the limit, of the circulation. If limited to friends and acquaintances, it would not be a publication; but if general, and not so limited, it would be.” Again, on page 119, he says: “To constitute publication, it is necessary that the work shall be exposed for sale or offered gratuitously to the general public, so that any person may have an opportunity of enjoying that for which the copyright is intended to be secured.” It is to be noticed that in this last citation the learned author expressly refrains from limiting the method of disposing of the publication to that of sale, and enumerates no elements necessary to constitute publication beyond those which exist in the case at bar. In Callaghan v. Myers, 128 U. S. 617, 646, 656, 9 Sup. Ct. 177, it appeared that, under the statutes of the state, the reporter of decisions, who claimed the copyright in that case, was required to supply to the secretary of state a certain number' of copies for purposes expressly provided by law. The supreme court held such delivery to constitute publication, under the copyright statutes, although it did not appear that any copies had been distributed from the secretary’s office. This case, at least, goes so far as to hold that the mere fact that the delivery of copies of a book was under special limitations would not prevent the delivery from constituting a publication, provided tbe delivery insured that the public, or an indefinite portion of it, should, without further action on the part of the author, have access to it.

We know of no recognized practice; under the copyright law which would enable I he respondent to base; upon it any general rule such as is claimed by him in this case. The determinations of various courts that, under some circumstances, the eielivery of lectures, or the representaÍion of plays, to such of the; public as may attend, do not constitute publication, must be regarded as rather of an ineúdon tal character, arising undoubtedly to some exlent from tenderness for authors, and not establishing any general rule. So far as concerns the interests of the public and the general policy of the copyright statutes, this case stands in all respects practically the same as though the complainants’ publication had been sold by unrestricted titles; and there is no substantial reason why, if the complainants had not obtained copyrights, they should now he protected against infringers.

The respondent raises three issues of fact: First, whether the case shows that the advance copies were seasonably deposited in the mail for the purposes of the copyright statute; second, whether the complainants’ work was of an original character, and otherwise of such character as might be copyrighted; and, third, whether there was infringement.

The first issue of fact involves a question not of substantial merit; and as it is beyond doubt that the complainants did forward advance copies so early that the respondent could not possibly be prejudiced by any alleged delay, the court ought not to require on this point any very direct nroof. it is satisfied that the balance of probabilities, as shown by the evidence, is in favor of the complainants.

On the second issue;, the work of the complainants was, of course;, mainly in the nature of compilation, which they claim to have ef fected partly by interviews with gentlemen in the trade, but more largely by correspondence with attorneys and gentlemen of the trade at various pemils throughout the United States and Ganada. It is well settled that compilations of this character are protected by the copyright statutes, even when they involve only industry, and no such degree of originality as is expected from authors of repute. Indeed, the quality and grade of original work required by the courts under the copyright statutes are very moderate. This is explained in Callaghan v. Myers, already referred to, 128 U. S. 617, 659, 660, 9 Sup. Ct. 177; and other late decisions-of an interesting character in the same direction are Lamb v. Evans [1893] 1 Ch. 218, which was a case of a mere trade directory with a classification of advertisements, and Leslie v. Young [1894] App. Cas. 335, which was a case of a pamphlet containing information concerning railroad train service in a particular locality. We are satisfied That, on this point, the complainants make out a clear case, so far a a the evidence now stands.

As to the third issue, on the matter of infringement, we are also satisfied that the complainants have made out a very striking and strong case on the proofs as they now stand, notwithstanding the sworn denial of the respondent. The evidence bearing on that proposition is very much of the character described by the supreme court in Callaghan v. Myers, ubi supra, at pages 660, 661, 662, 128 U. S., and page 177, 9 Sup. Ct., with some additional peculiarities affording inferences which are quite irresistible. We deem it proper, on these propositions of fact, not to state our views, at length, because the same questions may come before us hereafter on final hearing, with additional proofs which may require a revision of our present findings. It is sufficient to say that, as the case now stands, on all these issues of fact, the proofs are quite as strong and convincing as are ordinarily required by the most careful judges in order to establish a right to an interlocutory injunction. Where so large a proportion of a copyrighted book is plagiarized as in the case at bar, no discussion is needed, in response to the proposition of the respondent that there was work done by him which was additional, as well as in the line of corrections. If any was necessary, it would be sufficient to refer again to Callaghan v. Myers, ubi supra, at pages 660, 661, 662, 128 U. S., and page 177, 9 Sup. Ct., and Leslie v. Young [1894] App. Cas. 335, 342, already cited. The facts thus relied on by the respondent, even if established, are too disproportionate to directly affect the case in any substantial matter, or to have weight as matter of evidence to affect it indirectly.

A partial, if not a complete, definition of the instances in which a court of equity will interfere because the threatened injury by a wrongful act will be irreparable, found in Parker v. Woollen Co., 2 Black, 545, 551, covers cases “where the loss of health, the loss of trade, the destruction of the means of subsistence, or the ruin of the property must ensue.” The reasons for equitable interference in patent, trade-mark, and copyright cases are brought within this definition by the words, “the loss of trade.” This, for reasons easily understood, involves injuries which it is impossible to compute by any rule of the law, or any practical rule whatever, or even to ascertain. Unless there is this special ground for equitable relief by injunction, a bill for that purpose will not lie even in patent cases. Belknap v. Schild, 161 U. S. 10, 26, 16 Sup. Ct. 443. Wherever equity has jurisdiction to grant an injunction by final decree, it has, of course, jurisdiction to grant interlocutory injunctions, though there are additional conditions of a peculiar character under which injunctions of an interlocutory nature may be granted, even though final relief is not asked for. The real basis of interlocutory injunctions is the maintenance, of the status quo, as was pointed out by Judge Goff, speaking for the circuit court of appeals for the Fourth circuit, in Buskirk v. King, 18 C. C. A. 418, 72 Fed. 22, 25. When the result is simply to preserve the status quo, it may well be said, as was stated in the case cited, that, on an application therefor, the complainant “is not required to make out such a case as will entitle him to a decree in his favor on final hearing, and it sometimes happens that he ultimately fails to secure the relief asked for, while, nevertheless, the granting of the preliminary injunction was eminently proper.'’ To the same effect is Jensen v. Norton (decided by the circuit court of appeals for the Ninth circuit) 12 C. O. A. 608, 64 Fed. 662, 664. The difficulty in applying this rule, however, to patent, trade-mark, and copyright cases is that, with them, interlocutory injunctions do not ordinarily preserve the status quo. On the other hand, as it might happen in the case at bar, they sometimes operate to suspend temporarily the entire establishment or business of the respondent, and sometimes to so break them up as to result in permanent destruction. Therefore, in cases of this character, it has not ordinarily been sufficient merely to bring a complainant within the rules stated by Judge Goff, but, "in addition thereto, the court ordinarily looks, for support of the complainant's case, either in long acquiescence by the public, or in some prior adjudication, or in some other special matter. Philadelphia Trust, Safe-Deposit & Ins. Co. v. Edison Electric Light Co. (decided by the circuit court of appeals for the Third circuit) 13 C. C. A. 40, 65 Fed. 551, 553. When, however, the case is so clear and strong as presented here, the complainant is usually entitled to the help of the court pending litigation, and usually he obtains that assistance by the way of an injunction.

But the law vests in no other individual holding an official position, whether executive, legislative, or judicial, a power more extensive, and more capable of evil, an well as of good, without defined rules either as to the law or the fads, than that which a single judge is so often asked to exercise in the manner asked in the case at bar. In view of this fact, and, further, in view of the varying and inconsistent expressions in relation to the proper occasions for exercising this power, the only true safety is in saying that a temporary injunction ought never to be granted in a case of new impression like this at bar, if it be possible to effectuate justice in any other way. The fact that the act establishing the circuit courts of appeals has somewhat relieved the anxiety of the courts of the first instance, asked to grant interlocutory injunctions, by giving a summary appeal, does not change our duty in these particulars. The care which judges and courts should exercise in using this summary power was suggested in the concluding expressions of the supreme court in Barnard v. Gibson, 7 How. 650, 658, express,ions revived by the circuit court of appeals for the First circuit in Harden v. Manufacturing Co., 15 C. C. A. 26, 67 Fed. 809, 813. This was further illustrated in this court in an opinion passed down February 2, 1895, in Machine Co. v. Abbott, in the following language:

‘The injunction pendente lito will l>e allowed; but rule 22 oí this court must be accepted as an indication that the judges in this circuit have agreed to support, in all respects, the policy of the seventh section of the act establishing tile circuit court of appeals, so far as practicable to do so, and to avoid closing the business of any defendant in a bill in equity by an interlocutory injunction, whenever an appeal is taken and a supersedeas bond may be allowed, except in peculiar cases where justice clearly requires otherwise. But for this, a single judge, sitting in the circuit court, might, under some circumstances, do as much mischief as though no appeal had been provided for by the seventh section referred to.”

The case fails to impress the court with the necessity of granting the complainants, for their protection, an unconditional interlocutory order. The respondent is not charged with attempting in any way to pass off his publication for that of the complainants. Indeed, not only the title-page and the short name given the respondent’s book, but also its size and style of binding, prevent any probability of one being mistaken for the other. There is, therefore, no threatened injury to come from a counterfeiting of that character; so that we can apply the fact, which is matter of common knowledge, that publications of this peculiar character rely for their acceptance on the reputation of the compilers and publishers, and the circulation of them must ordinarily be the same whether protected by copyright or not. The court must therefore presume that, while the respondent’s publication might obtain some circulation for which he may be liable to account to the complainants in the way of profits, yet such circulation would probably be in addition to any which the complainants would secure, even if they maintained a monopoly, and, consequently, not of such character as to cause them a substantial loss of trade. Therefore, in view of the lack of positive evidence of any pending irreparable injury, and, further, in view that, with reference to any claim of threatened injury, the complainants rely on the presumptions ordinarily arising in cases of this character, which presumptions are quite overcome by the peculiar circumstances of the case, we think a conditional order will accomplish all the ends of justice and sufficiently protect the complainants.

Ordered, there will be an interlocutory decree for an injunction as prayed for, unless respondent on or before the 23d day of April, 1896, files a bond to the complainants, with sureties approved by the clerk, in the penal sum of $2,000, conditioned for the payment oí any sum, except costs, which may be finally decreed against the respondent in tins court or on appeal.  