BOBENBACH V. DBEYFUSS. 221 �copyright, which is the iimit indicated by the terms of the Btatute itself, if read in connection with the other sections. Ail doubt, however, that this is the proper construction is dis- pelled by an examination of the act of 1870, c. 230, §§ 97, 98, (16 St. 214,) of which Eev. St. §§ 4962, 4963 are a re-enact- ment. Section 98, which imposes this penalty, uses the ex- pression, "any book, map, etc., or other articles herein named, for which he has not obtained a copyright." In the Eev. St. § 4963, this is abbreviated into "or other article for which he has not obtained a patent." The words "herein named" were undoubtedly dropped as unnecessary, the context clearly re- Btricting the words "or other artiele," as the words "herein named" had before done. A similar construction of a statute, imposing a penalty for using the word "patented" on an un- patented article, was made in U. S. v. Morris, 2 Bond, 23. �Assuming, then, that the penalty applies only to articles Bubject to copyright, the question is whether the articles described in the complaint are subject to copyright. They are described as "prints of small balloons, with printing for embroidery and cutting Unes;" as "prints of large balloons, with printing on them for embroidery and cutting Unes;" and as "prints of hanging baskets, with printing for embroid- ery and cutting Unes." �The word "print," in section 4952, is used in connection with "engraving, eut and photograph." It means, apparently, a picture, something complete in itself, similar in kind to an engraving, eut or photograph. �It clearly does not mean something printed on paper, that is not intended for use as a picture, but is itself to be eut up and embroidered, and thus made into an entirely different article, as a baUoon or a hanging basket. There is, perhaps, Bome little doubt what is meant by a "print of a balloon, with printing for embroidery and cutting Unes;" but I do not think the words import a mere picture of something, or a print, the use of which is the pictorial representation of some- thing. �As I understood the counsel, upon the argument, it was not contested that the meaning was that the form of the ����
