Transcription of interrogatories for Morris v. Ashbee

Source: "Morris v. Ashbee", 1868, cause number: 1868 M81; The National Archives of the UK (TNA), ref: C 16/514/M81 (http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C7896228).

Transcribed by Tony Proctor, 10 Sep 2015.

================================================================
[page 1]
1868 M. No. 81
Filed 9th May 1868

In Chancery

Between
John Stuart Crosbie Morris -- Plaintiff
and
William Ashbee and Lewis Simonson -- Defendants

Interrogatories for the Examination of
the above named defendants in Answer to
the Bill of Complaint of the above named
Plaintiff.

[ques.1]

Did not the Plaintiff in the Autumn of
the year 1862 or at some and what time --
compose and whether or not cause to be printed
and published a Book intituled "The Business
Directory of London for 1862-1863". Did not --
such Book contain the names addresses and
trades or occupations of the Merchants Traders
and other persons carrying on business or --
residing in London and parts adjacent  Were
not the names of such Merchants Traders and
other persons contained in a classified list of
the various trades or professions which they --
respectively carried on  And were not such trades
or professions arranged in alphabetical order --
was not the principal object and intent of
the said work to afford accurate and useful
information to the public with respect to the
names occupations and places or residence of
the Merchants Tradesmen and other persons
carrying on business or residing in the --
Metropolis and its vicinity or how otherwise

[ques.2]

Did not the production of the Plaintiffs
[page 2]
said Book cost the Plaintiff much study and
labour and whether or not a large sum of money
were not a great number of persons necessarily
employed by him to ascertain and whether or
not by personal enquiry the name and place
of business of every person carrying on any trade
or business or profession in London and its
vicinity or how otherwise

[ques.3]

Has not the Plaintiff in each and every --
year during the period that has elapsed since the
year 1862 down to the present time 1868 --
composed and whether or not caused to be printed
and published a new edition of the said Book
and whether or not under the same name or
title of "The Business Directory of London" or
how otherwise

[ques.4]

Has not in addition to the said classified
lists of trade and their divisions added to the
said Book and did not the last mentioned
division contain the surnames of the said
Merchants and Trades and other persons and
were not such surnames arranged alphabetically
and were not abbreviations from time to time made
in each Edition of the said Book as were
necessary to adapt the information contained in
it to the time of its publication

[ques.5]

did not the preparation of each new Edition
of the said Book cost the Plaintiff much study
and labour on his part and whether or not a
large sum of money were not a great number
of persons necessarily employed by him to ascertain
yearly and whether or not by personal inquiry
what changes had taken place since the
publication of the last preceding edition of
the said Book in respect of the various matters
concerning which information was given in the
[page 3]
said Book or how otherwise

[ques.6]

Has not the Plaintiff also from time to time
since the publication of the first edition of his said
Book in the year 1862 as in the said Bill in
that behalf mentioned made considerable or some
additions thereto  And has he not altered or
varied the arrangement of its contents  And has
he not made diverse or some and what other
improvements therein so as to make and has
he not in fact made it more complete and
useful or how otherwise

[ques.7]

Were not the said additions alterations and
improvements the results of much study and
labour on the part of the Plaintiff And
has not his Book become and is it not in
fact extensively known And has there not --
been yearly a considerable demand for the
same or how otherwise

[ques.8]

Has not the edition of the Plaintiff's said
Book for the year 1867 published in the --
month of December 1866 or at some and what --
time Did it not consist of two principal --
parts Was not the first part of it a Commercial
Directory and did it not contain the names of
persons in trade or business And were they not
described by their respective occupations and
whether or not their respective places of business
And were they not arranged in alphabetical
order and whether or not according to their --
surnames with certain exceptions not material
to be stated for the purposes of this Suit --
Did not the second part consist of a classified
"Trades Directory" and did nit not contain a --
classified services of the various trades and --
occupations carried on in the Metropolis and its
vicinity and whether or not arranged alphabetically
[page 4]
did not each of such Trades form a heading --
under which the names of the various persons
engaged in or professing such trade or occupation
were arranged alphabetically Did not such last
mentioned Editions also contain a Subdivision
called "The Provincial Appendix" and did it
not contain the names of numerous commercial
firms in many of the large provincial towns
of England and were not the names of such
last mentioned firms classified or arranged --
according to the trades or businesses carried on
by them respectively and were not such trades
or businesses arranged alphabetically in like
manner as in the principal division or how otherwise

[ques.9]

Has not the Plaintiffs said Book also --
made the medium for advertizements by --
Manufacturers and Tradesmen not only in
London and its vicinity but also in the Provinces
Were not those Manufacturers and Tradesmen
who desired that their names should be made
conspicuous entitled upon payment of one --
shilling or some and what sum to the Plaintiff
to have their names printed in capital Letters
Were not the names of persons not making
such payment printed in small Letters and
were not those Manufacturers tradesmen
who desired a fuller description of their trades
or businesses then was given in the general
heading under which they were classed entitled
to have such fuller description and whether or
not called "extra lines" inserted immediately after
their names upon payment of an equivalent
sum to the Plaintiff And were not those
persons who desired to advertize their goods and
wares in an advertizement entitled to have such
[page 5]
advertizement inserted in the said Book either at
the end or in the body of the Work opposite to
the name of the Advertizer upon payment to
the Plaintiff of an equivalent sum for the
principal privilege or how otherwise

[ques.10]

Did not a great number of Manufacturers
and Tradesmen both in London and its vicinity
and wteher or not in the provinces avail --
themselves of these privileges And did not some
of them pay the Plaintiff the sum of One --
shilling for having their names printed in --
capital Letters And did not others pay the --
Plaintiff the sum charged by him for extra
lines or for advertizements inserted either at the
end or in the body of the said Work And
did not the Plaintiff by the means in the --
said Bill in that behalf mentioned receive --
large sums of money in the whole towards
reimbursing himself the expense he was at
in originally composing and from time to time
printing correcting and publishing the said work
or how otherwise

[ques.11]

did not the Plaintiff in the month of --
December 1867 or at some and what time --
cause to be printed and published for sale --
a new Edition of his said Work for the year
1868 And is not the last mentioned Edition
similar to the said Edition of his said Work
for the year 1867 with the alterations rendered
necessary by removals and other changes which
had taken place since the publication of the
previous Edition or how otherwise

[ques.12]

Is not the copyright of and in the said --
original Book so published by the Plaintiff
in the year 1862 as in the said Bill in that
behalf mentioned and whether or not of and in
[page 6]
the said several subsequent editions thereof and
whether or not including the said Editions
thereof so printed and published by the
Plaintiff for the years 1867 and 1868 respectively
as in the said Bill in that behalf mentioned
as well in respect in the matter contained in
the said original Book as of the new matter
introduced by Plaintiff in such several
successive editions thereof as aforesaid under
and by virtue of the Acts of Parliament in
that behalf passed still subsisting and unexpired
and whether or not in full force And is not such
Copyright absolutely vested in Plaintiff And
has not the Plaintiff the sole and exclusive right
of printing and publishing the said original --
Book and whether or not the said several --
successive Editions thereof and whether or not
including the said Editions and whether or not
the copies thereof respectively printed and
published by the Plaintiff for the years 1867
and 1868 respectively as in the said Bill in
that behalf mentioned or how otherwise

[ques.13]

Have not entries pursuant to the Statute
in that case made and provided been duly made
by the Plaintiff of the said several said Editions
of his said Book in the Books of Registry
kept for that purpose by the Stationers Company
and is not the Plaintiff the registered Proprietor
thereof or how otherwise

[ques.14]

Were not the respective persons in the 12th
paragraph of the said Bill in that behalf
respectively named or some or one and which
of them amongst the persons employed by
the Plaintiff as canvassers and clerks in
and about the preparation of the said Edition
of the said Book which was published for
[page 7]
the year 1867 and had not all or some or one
and which of such several persons for some
time previous to the publication of the last --
mentioned Edition been in the Plaintiff's service
And had not they or some or one and which
of them become and were not they or some or
one and which of them well acquainted with --
the Plan of the Plaintiff's said Work and --
whether or not with the Plaintiff's method of
canvassing for subscriptions and advertizements
for the same or how otherwise

[ques.15]

Did not circumstances come to Plaintiffs
knowledge shortly after the publication of the
said edition of the Plaintiffs said Book for
the year 1867 which led him to suspect that
the defendant Lewis Simonson was making
preparations for and whether or not that he
contemplated bringing out a Directory in --
opposition to the Plaintiffs said Directory
Was not the said defendant Lewis Simonson
charged by the Plaintiff with such intention
of bringing out a Directory in opposition did
he deny such intention did he not prevaricate
and did not the Plaintiff in consequence
forbid him to come to his Office or how --
otherwise

[ques.16]

Did not the Plaintiff then suspect that
the defendant William Ashbee and the several
other persons in the said Bill in that behalf
mentioned or some or one and which of
them intended to join the said Defendant
Lewis Simonson or to assist him in bringing
out the Directory contemplated by him  And
did not the Plaintiff require them or some
or one and which of them to sign an undertaking
not to do so unless he the Plaintiff discharged
[page 8]
them from his service And did not all or some
or one and which of them refuse to do so And
did not the Plaintiff thereupon in the month
of April 1867 or at some and what time
discharge them from his service And did he
not subsequently engage a new Staff of Canvassers
or how otherwise

[ques.17]

Did not the Plaintiff commence his  -- --
preparations for the 1868 edition of his said
Book shortly before the month of June 1867
or at some and what time and did not his
canvassers proceed and whether or not by
personal enquiry to ascertain what alterations
were rendered necessary by removals and
other changes which had taken place since
the publication of the edition for 1867 and
whether or not also to solicit subscriptions --
for inserting names in Capital letters and
whether or not the usual payments for extra
lines and Advertizements Did not the Plaintiffs said
Canvassers find and is it not the fact that
the defendants William Ashbee and Lewis
Simonson or one and which of them had --
extensively circulated or caused to be circulated
a prospectus of a new Trades Directory
Had not the last named defendants or --
one and which of them commenced business
at 190 Grays Inn Road in the capital county of
Middlesex or at some other and what place
under the name or style of 'Ashbee & Coy'
or under some other and what name or style
or how otherwise

[ques.18]

Did not the said defendants or one and --
which of them when they circulated the said
Prospectus intend to publish their said new
Trades Directory for the year 1868 And did
[page 9]
they not profess that it would contain all the
information given by that division of the Plaintiffs
said Directory called the classified Directory and
whether or not at less than half the cost or how
otherwise

[ques.19]

Did not the Plaintiff's said Canvassers find that
most of the persons upon whom they called in
the course of their canvass who had subscribed
or paid to the Plaintiff one shilling for the
insertion of their names in capital Letters  in
the Edition of the Plaintiff's said work for the
year 1867 and whether or not those who had
paid for the insertion of extra lines or
advertizements in the Plaintiffs said work for
the year 1867 had been previously visited by the
said defendants or one of them or their or one <of>
and which of their said canvassers are a --
canvasser and whether or not that the said
defendants or one and which of them or such
canvassers or canvasser had obtained orders --
from a large and what or some  and what
number of such persons for the said then
intended new Directory of the said defendants
and whether or not that they had obtained
payment from such persons or from some and
how many of them of the sum of one shilling
for capital Letters and to what amount in
the whole or whether or not other sums for
extra lines or advertizements and to what
amount in the whole Did not a great many
or some and what number of such persons
upon whom the Plaintiffs said Canvassers --
called in consequence of the proceedings of the
said defendants decline to order the Plaintiff's
Book or to pay for capital Letters or extra
lines or to insert advertizements in the Plaintiffs
[page 10]
said Edition for 1868 or how otherwise

[ques.20]

Did not the said Defendants or one and which
of them and whether or not in the name of
their said firm and whether or not in pursuance
of their said design in the month of January
last or at some and what time and whether
or not without the consent or authority of the
Plaintiff print and whether or not publish
or cause to be printed and whether or not
published and have not they or one and
which them since sold or caused or permitted
to be sold a great or some and what a --
number of copies of a book and whether
or not intituled "The Merchants & Manufacturers
Pocket Directory of London 1868" or what
is the title thereof or how otherwise

[ques.21]

Is not the Defendants said Directory
a classified Trades Directory and is it not
on precisely the same plan as the classified
Trades division of the Plaintiff's said Directory
or in what respect does it differ therefrom
Is not the said Defendants said Directory
very or to some and what extent imperfect --
does it not contain a classified series of some
only of the various trades and occupations --
carried on in Metropolis and its vicinity
and whether or not arranged alphabetically Do not
each or some or one and which of such Trades or
occupations form a heading under which the
names of the various persons engaged in or
professing such trade or occupation are
arranged alphabetically and does it not
also contain a subdivision or appendix and
whether or not contain the names of many
commercial or manufacturing firms in many or
some and which of the large provincial towns of
[page 11]
England and are they not classified or arranged
according to the trade or business carried on by
them respectively and is not each Trade or business
arranged alphabetically and whether or not in
like manner as in the principal division or how
otherwise

[ques.22]

Were not the names of those person who
paid the said defendants one shilling for the
privilege printed in the Defendants said Directory
in capital Letters and were not the trades or
businesses of persons who paid the defendants for the
privilege more fully described in the defendants
said Directory in extra lines and are not advertizements
inserted at the end and whether or not in the
body of the defendants said Directory and whether
or not opposite the names of such persons as
paid the defendants for the privilege and
whether or not in like manner as in the --
Plaintiffs said work or how otherwise

[ques.23]

Is not the plan of the Defendants' said --
Directory in fact a copy and whether or not
piracy of the Plan of the Plaintiff's edition of
his said Work for the year 1867 or of some and
what part thereof does it not contain much --
fewer names or trades and is it not therefore a
smaller work or how otherwise

[ques.24]

Have not the said defendants and whether
or not without the consent or privity of the
Plaintiff copied or caused to be copied and
whether or not pirated from the Plaintiff's
edition of his said Book for the year 1867
the general plan or design or the classified
Trades division of the Plaintiffs'  said Book and
whether or not the arrangement of the matter --
contained in it except in some trifling and whether
or not unimportant particulars And have they not
[page 12]
also and whether or not also without the Plaintiffs
consent or permission copied or caused to be
copied and whether or not pirated a great or some
and what portion of the Plaintiffs' edition of his
said Book for the year 1867 making only such
alterations therein as were necessary to shew
some of the changes that had taken place since
the publication of the said Edition of the
Plaintiffs' said Book for the year 1867 in
the occupation of houses and other matters
concerning which information was given or how
otherwise

[ques.25]

Did not the said Defendants or one and which
of them to enable them to prepare their said
Book instead of acquiring the information
necessary for the preparation of such a work
by original inquiries cause a copy of the
Classified Trades Directory of the said Edition
of the Plaintiffs' said Work for the year 1867
or for some other and what year to be cut up
into slips And did not they or one and which
of them furnish or cause to be furnished
to each or to some or one and which of the
persons employed by them or one of them as
Canvassers or Clerks or as a Canvasser or
Clerk a number of some or one of such --
slips And did not the said defendants or
one and which of them instruct or cause to be
instructed such canvassers and clerks or some
or one and which of them to call upon persons
in those trades which contained most names of
the persons who had paid the Plaintiff for
the insertion of their names in capital Letters
or in extra lines or for advertizements and
whether or not solicit them to subscribe to the
defendants said Directory and whether or not
[page 13]
to pay for the insertion therein of their names in
capital Letters and whether or not for the insertion
therein of extra lines and whether or not for the
insertion therein of Advertizements were not such
canvassers and clerks or some or one and which
of them also instructed and by whom to make
as many alterations as possible in the names
and other matters contained in such slips from
the Plaintiffs' said work such as abbreviating --
Christian names which were printed in full in
the Plaintiffs'  said work and whether or not by
writing Christian names in full where they
were abbreviated or initials only given in the --
Plaintiffs' said work and whether or not  -- -- 
otherwise and how and whether or not so as
if possible to prevent the Plaintiff from --
ascertaining that the said Book had been
made use of in the preparation of the defendants
said directory or were not instructions or some
and what information and by whom given to
such canvassers or clients or to some or one and
which of them or to some other and what --
person or persons of or to the like or some
other and what effect or how otherwise

[ques.26]

Were not those Trades chiefly selected
from the Plaintiffs said Directory which --
contained most names of the persons who had
previously paid the Plaintiff for the --
insertion of their names in capital Letters or
in extra lines or for advertizements or how otherwise

[ques.27]

Were not the slips so cut out of the Plaintiffs'
said work as in the said Bill in that behalf
mentioned and furnished b y the said defendants
or by one and which of them or by some other and
what person or persons and whether or not on behalf
of or with the privity and approbation of the said
[page 14]
defendants or of one and which of them to
their said canvassers And clerks as in the said
Bill in that behalf mentioned I fact used
and whether or not altered by such canvassers
and clerks or by some or one and which of them
according to the instructions of the said --
defendants or of one and which of them And
was not the defendants' said Directory in fact
printed from such slips or how otherwise

[ques.28]

Have not the said defendants or one and
which of them also copied and pirated or
caused to be copied and pirated the new
Classification of diverse trade from the Plaintiffs'
said work were not many or some and which
of such trades new and were not they or
some or one and which of them used in the
said Edition of the Plaintiffs' said work for
the year 1867 for the first time are not the
various trades in the 21st paragraph of the
said Bill in that behalf mentioned  or referred
to or some and which of them examples of
such new classification of trades in the said
last mentioned Edition of the Plaintiffs' said
work And have not the said Defendants or
one and which of them copied and pirated
caused to be copied and pirated all or some and which
part of such new classification of Trades or how otherwise

[ques.29]

Have not the said defendants or one
and which of them copied and introduced
or caused to be copied and whether or not
introduced into their said Book from
the Plaintiffs' said edition of his said
Book for the year One thousand eight
hundred and sixty seven the following
errors and inaccuracies (that is to say)
[page 15]

[ques.30]
Under the heading of "Philosophical Instrument
Makers" is not Thomas F. Downs described as
of 530 Bethnal Green Road N.E. should not
the number have been 30 Did not this error originate
in the manner of the 22nd paragraph of the said
Bill in that behalf mentioned or how did it
originate Is not this error copied in the
Defendants ^said Directory or how do the Defendants^ make out the contrary.

[ques.31]

Under the heading "Box Makers Fancy" in the
1867 edition of the Plaintiffs said work is not
William F Gough described as of 23 Somerset
Place Hoxton N instead of 23 Bevenden Street
Hoxton N as it ought to have been Did not this
error originate in the manner in the said
Bill in that behalf also mentioned or how
did it originate And is not the last mentioned
error copied in the Defendants' said Directory under
the corresponding heading of "Millboard and Paper
Box Makers" or how otherwise.

[ques.32]

Under the heading "Shirt & Collar Manufacturers"
in the said 1867 edition of the plaintiffs' said work
are not  Laury & Bryant described as of 18, 20 Silver
Street E.C. instead of 19 & 20 Silver Street E.C. was
not the latter their proper address. Is not the
last mentioned error also copied in the --
Defendants' said Directory or how otherwise.

[ques.33]

Under the heading "Umbrella Manufacturers"
in the said 1867 edition of the Plaintiffs' said
work is not the name of W. Mallet of Mallet
& Oliver spelt with ^two^ "ts" instead of one as it
ought to have been And is not this error
also copied in the Defendants' said Directory
or how otherwise

[ques.34]

Under the heading "Brush Makers" in the
said 1867 e4dition of the Plaintiffs' said work is
not the name of Messieurs Wainwright spelt without
[page 16]
the "w" is not the proper method of spelling the word
"Wainwright" And is not the last mentioned error
also copied in the Defendants' said Directory or
how otherwise.

[ques.35]

Under the heading "Bookbinders Tool Cutters" is
not the address of William Dyer spelt "Fitchborne
Court|" ought it not to have been "Fichborne Court"
and is not this error also copied in the
Defendants' said Directory or how otherwise

[ques.36]

Under the heading "Timber Merchants" is not
the address of Mr Godfrey spelt "Beavoir Terrace"
ought it not to have been "Beauvoir Terrace" and
is not this error also copied in the Defendants'
said Directory or how otherwise

[ques.37]

In the plaintiff's said 1867 edition of his said
work under the several headings in the said Bill
in that behalf mentioned or referred or under
some or one and which of such headings are
not Messieurs Johnson John and Sons correctly
described as of no 18a Basinghall Street E.C. and
are they not so described under like heading
or some and which of them in the Defendants'
said Directory but are they not under the
heading "Chemists Manufacturing" by mistake
described in the said 1867 edition of the Plaintiffs'
said Book as living at no. 8a Basinghall Street
E.C. and is not under the same heading in
the Defendants' said Directory this error copied
or how do the Defendants account for the same

[ques.38]

In the said 1867 edition of the Plaintiffs' said
work are not Messieurs Frederick and George
Shoobert and Thomas Grove Wind Coopers --
described in the Commercial division as of
"No.1 Two Swan Yard Bishopsgate E.C." but are
they not under the heading "Wine Coopers" in
the classified Trades division of the same Book
[page 17]
described as of "No.1 Two Swans Yard" and does
not the same discrepancy occur in the Defendants'
said Directory under the heading "Bottle Merchants"
and whether or not under the heading "Wine Cooper"
or how otherwise

[ques.39]

In the said 1867 edition of the Plaintiff's said
work under the following headings (viz) "Mount
Manufacturers" "Passe Partout Makers" and
"Photographic Mounters" is not W. Alexander
Le Blanc described thus "LeBlanc Alexander" And
is he not described in the same manner under
the like headings or some or one and which of
them in the said Defendants' said Directory but in the
1867 edition of the Plaintiffs' said work under the
heading "Picture Frame Makers" is not the same
person described thus "LeBlanc Alex" And is he
not under the like heading in the Defendants' said
Directory described in like manner or how otherwise

[ques.40]

In the ^said^ 1867 edition of the Plaintiffs' said work
under the following ^headings" (viz) "Picture Frame Makers" and
"Veneer Mounding Maker" is not the Christian name
of W. Felig Lipschitz given in full and is not the
street in which he resides spelt "Ramsey" And in
the Defendants' said Directory under the like
headings or one and which of them is not the
Christian name of the said W. Lipschitz also
given in full and is not the street in which
he resides spelt "Ramsey" but in the said 1867
editions of the Plaintiff's said work under the
heading "Sawing Mills" is not the initial letter
only of the Christian name of the said W.
Lipschitz given and is not the street spelt "Rumsey"
and in the Defendants' said Directory under the
same heading is not the initial letter only of
the Christian name of the said W. Lipschitz
given And is not the Street spelt "Rumsey"
[page 18]
as in the Plaintiff's said work or how otherwise
and how do the said Defendants account for the
same

[ques.41]

In the said 1867 edition of the Plaintiff's said
work under the following headings (viz) "Cabinet
Makers" "Plate Glass Merchants" "Timer Merchants"
and "Upholsterers" are not Messieurs William
and John R, Hunter erroneously described as
living at number 190 Church Street but under the
heading "Mahogany Merchants" are they not and
whether or not correctly described as living at
189 ½ Church Street are not the last mentioned
errors copied in the Defendants' said Directory
under the like headings or some or one and
which of them and is not the correct address
copied in the Defendants' said Directory under
the heading "Mahogany Merchants" or how otherwise
and how do the said Defendants account for the same

[ques.42]

In the said 1867 edition of the Plaintiff's
said work under the following headings --
(viz) "Color Manufacturers" "Paint manufacturers"
"Varnish Manufacturers" and "White Lead --
Merchants" are not Messieurs Foulgar and
Sons described as of "St. George Street E" and
are they not described in the same --
manner under the like heading or
some or one and which of such
headings in the Defendants' said --
Directory but under the heading "Oil
Merchants" in the said 1867 edition of the
Plaintiff's said work are not the last
mentioned firm described as of "St. George's
Street E" and are they not described in
the like manner under the like heading
in the Defendants' said Directory or
how otherwise
[page 19]

[ques.43]

In the Plaintiff's said work under the
heading "Color Manufacturers" "Paint Manufacturers"
and "Varnish Makers" are not the two --
addresses of the said Messieurs Foulgar
and Sons connected by the words "and"
and is not such word printed at length
but under the heading "Oil Merchants" is
not the abbreviation "&" used to connect
the two addresses and under the heading
"White Lead manufacturers" is it not the
fact that no conjunction is used but are

[TO BE CONTINUED]