New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1844-12-18
CITY INTELLIGE n c E.
TUESDAY,.
United States Circuit Court
Before Judge Belts.
TIMED LEAD PIPE

Thomas Erbauk VS.. James K. ipafter.-Action
for alleged violation patent for improved mode OF timing
lead pine &C (reerred yes,erdny) This case was con-
tnued The first witness called was
John " Dold who testified rs follows nm mason ana
bnite mn acquainted with the parties y this SUIT NJ Wal
Ter plumber In 1872 he asked me It could not Dc some
ihas IT, gS3 G e fn a @ H. Rey do omSs
.o him with r Ewbank he had the nattcr IN hand lie
iP Ps .pea to ill., E E himself The a he
Exchanse R;os street tie seT% a ,G ba
would not be able do any thing as ne asked too much M
enIed to ae h as tf bS wsS fe Wa a
In speaking OF it he would the word do not know
whether he referred by to the combnnon He said
arguments about It. md told him his plan would not answef
the attsr writing about Mr. Els and other in the pape
f. TINT h Ind fs Sad F saed s%s g.
Es he to ss fa @ Mq e S s
soon All. commenced speaking nbont the infringement
Of ne p Ss M n o Nh Waller replied that s
had been drawn into BY Nh tlsbrg He said he had re-
ed he could get clear He sud te other PgmSe;s had
agreed e tke Of Mr. 50 a, to nss, n ~, Mr. c! %San 0
seiher and was tie greatest sinner Of them sl slf w said
he did like the was brittle nnd he used up -n o|n
Down own. They spoke OF II ms ne na1kse ppe t,,Sn
the Eastward Mr. w said there had been meeting OF ai9m
ber IN regard 10 the pe ana iey sad SnpyS b9 T. es
the writing The alluded IN the newspapers and he
handsd mo newspaper to read have 9een falea upon o
the ownent PM down pipe N eight OF the hn;,es men
have built and Iadrc iErartd6D put doom e iinnef pp
From my nwn reading and experience wo .nss n3i cie
myself justified usns any olner LIZ tne cases nuSr 10,
however, the tuned was chosen by ne owners nave
given the subject very considerable attention., both bycal!n
aud conversation with eminent men, nnd am satsnea Iiat
common lead plte injurious was a. one TIME i5ooy
On the cross xannstior the ac stated that hi attention
Jones Tor whom he WINS building houses at Staten Island
Mr j. experienced difficulty III milking up his mind u TO The
bB Between NJ EwbaH2 G and r Waller at ehans fey
days sk Nh h. accsssd M W OF h'S oed e O
at the tme that should ne called 70 e,, NJ
this ria am more intimately acquainted with Nh water
Dr. Thomas S. Bayret swom1la am practising phyc;!TGa
YSrk Raye knowledge OF the effect ocarbo9ae Of lead
and its eletons operation upon water pa s toas1 s9d
Shire England where the supplied with water through
the means OF lead pipes om riyulet 4 particular and OF
buted the deeerous matter from the lead pipes hive
n,u observed the same symptoms here IN persons VINO nave peG
habit drinking eaJ ~ the nSEgs cee1 anu suGn: fw
The nwner oi the builng 0iiee put lead pipe such
there was other house adjoining but objected TO v
ing tdone, peieng to Use the water from the ydfa' III Tie
Mr. Yan Mge tcerk for short time with defendant } was
sworn but his testiYny did not cOnnn any ins G interest.
Two letters proved, which were sad ~ contain an nler
from Mr. w to purchase right from af EwOanA but they
oss sd % An Rn% "s %.s nGS s s;
for certain in 1883, manufacture IT, The denand was
then mostly for light descriptions, such as ne required ~ Su
water Sc 1.-THE testified To the mode ol nnnul"ctr
ing IT. Am OF Mr. Ewbank hnving opened store 10
Sptuce.st lS3 or tine sae oil Timed pipe but dd MOI Keep
in II aor months. The windows were opened bnt iot
tfttt ,.tt
in It. The witness was asked Il he not aware That The
nrricle In reduce nnd sold iy st.ndnut. with ole ad
not destroyed The business Of Mr. Ewbank Objection vas
made by Mr. OCnnnor the question: Mr Staples sud he
wished show Thar Mr.. i: nitr uynS out capital und eS
pnred by HIM. had been ruined N that portion Of nus gI
Court considered would be tab wider held Than had
been stated in declaration, und therefore was improper les
tlmony.
The plaintiff rested
For The defence Mr. OCnnor stated 10 the Jury that he
would the timed PIPE complained OF 10 hnye been Inn
uiactned by different process from that OF Mr. EwDanK
and was therefore infringement oi the PATENT &C. Inc
case will be resumed this forenoon.