Tarot History Forum

Gazette nationale ou le Moniteur universel - 1862-07-12 - p.1050

1499 — By deed executed before Mr. FOULD, the undersigned, and his colleague, notaries in Paris, on June 1862, registered:

Mrs. Clotilde CHARLEMAGNE, widow of Mr. Pierre-Alphonse ARNOULT, the said lady owner, residing at 8, rue de L'Ancienne Comédie, no. 29, Paris,

And Mr. Gustave ARNOULT, her son, cardboard manufacturer, residing in Paris at 24, rue des Fossés-Saint-Victor,

Have formed a commercial company with the exclusive purpose of operating the cardboard and playing card factory that Mr. Arnoult managed under the lease set forth in said deed, the sale of all its products, and all related transactions.

That this company would be a general partnership.

That the corporate name and signature would be widow ARNOULT ET FILS.

That the signature would belong solely to Mrs. Arnoult, widow.

That Mr. Arnoult Jr. would have no right to use it.

That the company would begin on June 30, 1862, and end on June 30, 1870, except in cases of extension or dissolution provided for in said deed.

That the company's registered office was located in Paris, at 24 Rue des Fossés-Saint-Victor, on the premises where the factory was established.

Signed: FOULD.

https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k ... pHwh9SGZAQ

CIVIL COURT OF THE SEINE (3rd ward).
Presiding: Mr. Vignon.
Hearing of November 22.

LITERARY PROPERTY. — GRAND GAME OF SOCIETY — SECRET PRACTICES OF Ms. LENORMAND. — ASTRO-MYTHO-HERMETIC cards. — COUNTERFEITING.

For a work to be counterfeited, it matters little whether the counterfeited work has no scientific or literary value, whether it contains true or false facts, sensible or unreasonable deductions, or whether it is merely a summary and collection of facts and deductions printed in ancient works. During the year 1845, Ms. Breteau published, using a nom de guerre (Comtesse de ***), a work entitled: Grand Jeu de Société. — Pratiques secretes de M'l Lenormand — Explication et application des Cartes Astro-Mytho-Hermetique. This work consists of five volumes, in which the rules of geomancy, palmistry, craniology, the language of flowers, etc., etc., are set out, using fifty-four colored cards.

Ms. Breteau, who had nothing but praise for the results of this publication, realized in 1858 that the results were no longer the same and that the work was no longer selling as much; she had all the more reason to be surprised, since works of this nature always sell very well, regardless of their literary value. She learned that Mr. Arnould (sic) had already counterfeited her work by copying the fifty-four engravings that comprised it and by writing, in the form of explanations, an abridgment that was only a textual but partial reproduction of this work.
Miss Breteau then arranged for a seizure of goods to be carried out on March 10, 1864, and it was found that there had been a print run of over a thousand copies. The damage was certain, and was all the greater, according to Ms. Breteau, because the manufacture of the Game of Society had cost more than 12,000 francs. She filed a claim for 2,000 francs in damages against Mr. Arnould, widow Arnould, who had succeeded him, and Mr. Franquin, Mr. Arnould's legal counsel.

Widow Arnould claimed that she had been completely unconnected with the manufacture of the counterfeit game; that, in fact, the counterfeit work had been published in 1858 alone and that, given her son's situation, she had only taken over the management of her business in 1862.

Mr. Arnould Jr., for his part, maintained that his good faith was just as evident; that he had one day received a visit from a Mr. Gastelin, a fortune-teller, who brought him a game without an author or publisher's name; that this game was no longer commercially available, this man suggested to him the idea of ​​making a new edition by adding a handwritten explanation that he had taken from the five volumes published under the name Countess of ****. Mr. Arnould could therefore not suppose that there was any literary property there; he further maintained that this commercial operation, far from having happy results, had led to pearls. He therefore requested that Ms. Breteau's claim was declared inadmissible, relying primarily on the fact that Mrs. Arnould had all unsold copies removed from the market.

The Court, after hearing Mr. Truinet, counsel for Ms. Breteau, Mr. Péronne, counsel for the widow Arnould, Mr. Arnould Jr., and Mr. Franquin, on the submissions of Mr. Isambert, the Imperial Advocate, rendered the following judgment:

"The Court:

"Whereas Miss Breteau proves that she had the work with engravings entitled: Grand jeu de société, pratiques secrètes de yile Lenormand, vc., etc., composed, printed, and published in 1845, as well as the set of fifty-four colored cards, and that the formalities for deposit have been completed." were filled out the same year and in accordance with the law; is therefore admissible in her action;

"On the merits:

"Whereas, according to the minutes of March 10, 1861, two copies of the small volume entitled: Book of the Great Oracle, as well as two decks, each consisting of fifty-five colored cards, were seized from the stores of which the widow Arnould now acknowledges herself as the sole owner;

"That it is certain, and is not denied, that these cards are the exact reproduction of those seized, and that the text of the small volume is composed solely of word-for-word borrowings from the multi-volume work by Mademoiselle Breteau;

"That the fact of counterfeiting is therefore established;

"That it matters little whether the counterfeit work has more or less literary or scientific value and whether it contains true or fabricated facts and sensible or unreasonable deductions;

"That it matters little whether it is only the summary and collection of facts and dedications printed in old works, or whether the work it required constitutes a property right that the law has established;


"With regard to Arnould:

"Whereas he acknowledges that in 1858, when he was sole owner of the business that his father and mother had transferred to him in 1855, he had the typeset and colored, and that he published and sold the seized work and cards by borrowing them from the accounts of Miss Breteau;

"With regard to the widow Arnould:

"Whereas she acknowledges having taken over this business, having kept and put up for sale the said work and the said cards, as well as the rest that resulted from the seizure carried out on March 10, 1864; that she cannot legally invoke her good faith, given that the work had been registered, that she had continued to keep abreast of her son's operations, and that she had herself taken over the business and the merchandise as early as 1862, and finally that she sold the work herself;

"Whereas there is no reason to authorize an additional seizure of the defendants' warehouses, but that it is sufficient to accept the offer made by the widow Arnould to return to the plaintiff the one hundred and eighty-eight copies that remain to her, and that this return must be taken into consideration in setting the amount of damages, which the Court has the necessary information to assess;

"For these reasons,

"Validates the seizure carried out according to the report of March 10, 1864, and orders the return to the plaintiff of the copies of the book and the seized cards, as well as the lithographic stones used to print these cards;

"Orders the widow Arnould, Gustave Arnould, and Franquin, in their capacity, to return them to the young lady. Breteau the one hundred and eighty-eight copies of the book and cards that the widow Arnould declared remained in storage and which she offered to return, and further orders them jointly and severally, and as additional damages, to pay the plaintiff the sum of 200 francs, and in the event of the defendants failing to deliver the copies within two weeks of the date of service of this judgment, orders them jointly and severally to pay in replacement the sum of 500 francs;

"States that there is no reason to order the insertion of this judgment;

"On the remainder of the pleas, grounds, and conclusions of the parties, dismisses them;

"Orders the defendants and Franquin, in their capacity, to pay costs."


Source:

"Gazette des tribunaux : journal de jurisprudence et des débats judiciaires " - Issue of December 6, 1865 - page 1162

https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k ... eQjzPepu2Q

My thanks to @Heather Diane for bringing this trial report to my attention.

Journal des papetiers en gros et en détail, des imprimeurs et des libraires, des relieurs et des cartonniers
issue of March 1, 1903, page 118 :

KRANTZ CARBOARD WORKS

"We were kind enough to visit their magnificent factory in Aubervilliers, thanks to the well-known cardboard manufacturers, Messrs. Krantz Brothers.

"Certainly, one can, without fear of being accused of exaggeration, classify Messrs. Krantz's factory as one of the leading cardboard factories in France. It is, in fact, superbly equipped; it has a surface area that allows for very intensive production without the various departments interfering with each other, and it has earned a special favor among its customers for the quality of its manufactured products.

"The history of this establishment is most interesting. The founder of the company was Mr. Arnoult, who, in 1748, established a molded cardboard factory in Paris at 54 [sic]* Rue des Fossés-St-Victor, near the Mouffetard district. Until 1850, the company was run by members of the same family, and it was only then that it passed into the hands of Mr. Maurin, who managed it from 1850 to 1869.** From 1869 to 1890, Mr. Lequart and Mr. Thuillier, then Mr. Lequart and Mr. Mignot, ran it, and Mr. Krantz brothers have been at its helm since 1890.

"From 1748 to 1874, the factory remained in its buildings on Rue des Fossés-St-Victor, which later became Rue du Cardinal-Lemoine. In 1874, the buildings having been destroyed by fire, Messrs. Lequart and Thuillier transferred the factory to buildings located at 74 Rue St-Maur. This property was expropriated in 1890 for the construction of Avenue de la République, which led Messrs. Krantz brothers, who had acquired the house, to build the factory at 52 Rue de Flandre to manufacture all types of cardboard.

"On January 24, 1898, everything was destroyed by a fire that lasted 21 days.

"The need for ever-larger spaces for this industry, and the obligation to remain close to Paris, the center of production of raw materials and consumption of the manufactured product, determined Messrs. Krantz to build their new factory a few hundred meters from the fortifications, in Aubervilliers, on Avenue Félix Faure and Rue de la Goutte-d'Or."

For full article, in French, see:
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k ... jJR0DQsNlQ

My thanks to John Choma for reference to this source.

SteveM wrote: 08 Apr 2025, 22:00
One candidate maybe one Nicolas André ARNOULT, although I have been unable to trace a family line to Alphonso, he is in the right profession, place & period. From the minutes of the notary Jean Thierry we that on December 3rd, 1738:

"André Arnoult, a bourgeois of Paris, places Nicolas André Arnoult, his son, aged 16, for 4 years of apprenticeship with Jean Dionis,* a marchand cartier papetier. He is provided with board, lodging, and clothing for 150 lira paid by the churchwarden of Saint-Jean en Grève."

*Dionis was also referred to as a Maitre Cartier, and served at least one term as Guild Juror in 1722.

In 1748 Nicolas André Arnoult would have been 26 years of age and, if he completed his apprenticeship, a qualified cartier & papetier of some 6 years, and perhaps ready to start his own business.

edited to add:

For certain we now know there was one Nicolas André Arnault, Marchand Papetier, with a business on the Rue Coquillier, opposite the rue Veux Augustines, by at least 1760.