New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-02-06

extended by Commissioner Ewbank the 5Oth day
Of August last, was granted IN 1880.
o. Charles Gregg o. the City Of New YORK beng Guy
1rHsrd 80 ocrpied A. aeinist-tha In The year 1854
was carving on The business oi lnacAlu-s a. - -,
ara tten ard here made machines Tor /" illau 49,
son for nanufacturng Inda Rubber Goods one q .19
Wachires was Tor spreading lrdia h4n.ei " s-
cCusted mainly Of Two iron rollers parallel % ca ohe
Between The rollers. and The rubber oclnG sPp -.
co,h "a II ns,sei through between TIE rollers, aud BENG
resed mon he cloth 90 as 20 adhere by ne pres-Ie
~ the 70 ers thereby covering coins Wih lIou' "a .
machine saw 10 operation IN 1887, and siier"sl, az u
was used openly ana not kept - secret a-q ~ A.
wen ard made excellent goods The rollers OF Ills laA
The oiber machine which made. Is above stated was
for grinding ard washing India rubber ana 0oasssa
mainly Of roller revolving in connection with conctss
surface al segment Of cvinier the rubber beng passed
through between the roller and the concaFe slftV a--
fhus ground ard mashed Tie said cOncaYe sAiiale va
stationary aid the roller revOl7ed -, ~.
also ssr his machine in operation In Lowell Massa,
chUseis in he year 49, sna aeIwS s .1.5iog no
the other machine mentioned and both Of SAD nselhe5
,bpe5e Spe no solver, used CHARLES GREGG.
Sworn. august H. 1880, before ne, ~,
in. BALEsTIER, Commissioner OF DEEDS
Extract from Dr. John J. Howe's testimony
THAT il the year 1879, commenced 70 m~nula;urs
Ineia.RuhHer Goods In The Of NewYorE. snd coz.
I.ructed two machines therein AID that earn OF sa
sehI "a bad fgo role the rollers Of one were made OF
wood with smooth turafes, ana 50 maj one l"io Wa
four times greater in diameter than tho other and geea
toeefT ~ roWLees OF equal ,lze hat 10 The use of
he machine he rollers operated together by rolling and
sippirg acton This machine used for grinding pre-
narso5s and mixing il with 1on9g mat.
Ter by passing the through the rollers Ine foefs oi
he OF her OF said machines made OF iron, win sloOm
surfaces of equal dameers and genred together 5ya
coswhee and piron that roller revovsd aboqr iolr
times while the Their revolved once hefeOy opefsus 10
ge'her by rolling and slipping action. . . 49,,
This machine with the iron rollers " a. USED 10 speaA VIC
India Rubber compound the composition, CONSISTING OF
he nbber and Other p gradients on CLOTH by passing the
cloth and The rubber 10 spread on i between me
abO tvO6 nd a
having the iron rollers about eight or nine lucnes N
diameter One OF The wooden rollers about four inches
snd he Other about sixteen inches in diameter Said ma
chimes used In 1923 openly ana not Aept as seGe
and ere seen by many persons. then soon AFTER mo
other pursuits and said machI es with my brother
Al first contemplated applying for Patent ioI sSd hsel
,ede ot and he drawing hereto annexed. with my
written thereon, is true copy Of one caused 20 ne ade
nv NE in The wear 1899 sui have the original one 10 my
POSSESSION
The following testimony, sworn TO by Horace II.
Dav, of New. York, will show the manner IN which
the Commissioner Of Patents grants an extension
of Patent to favorite party, worth quarter OF
a million OF dollars, without examining any OF the
testimony or papers filed in the Patent once on
the subject
Horace H. DAY. being duly sworn according to law, de-
poses and says that on Thursday iheslh Of August INST
1850 ne went 10 company am af Souse Ssd sp 5e
view with Mr. Ewbank, the Commissioner of Patents, on
the subject OF The application Of NJ Cnsnee ior an ek
tension Of bis paent for his alleged Improvement IN me
manufacture Of India Rubber Fabric DePonent then and
/
the papers which he understood had been ed aer the last
day ofhearng r. the Office behalf OF said Chaaeesappl-
ment Of said Chadees counsel and schedule state
men what purpored to be SUCH Of the receipts aud sx
Ev bank, IN reply said in substance that ne Aae" e or
nothing about said papers or any otaeI: NED IN ne case
ihere-ponting large collection OF papers but mat
he (sad Ewbsnk had not yet read nor examined any
Of them nor looked any Of them for the purpose Of
examining them himself. That, ihereupon deponent re-
cuested nermis,on TO pspect said papers which being
counsel had been delivered and fled a. the Patent Ohced
ter hearing which VI as the 'd Gay % gus sHe
.aiemept Of Receipts and E1pendiiuIes Wmon te law
been received the Patent Office one day previous to the
last day OF hearing viz the 9h day of August That de.
pOnent also discovered aforesaid, another statement
which had been originally fled al thu sans time The appI-
cation first made; but this latter statement Id NOT con
tain any statement Of the said Chafes Receipts and Ex
pendipresr I'm respect HE said Patent That The Com
missioner had utterly refused to allow the parles opposed
10 tie extension of Chaees Patent inspect receive
copy any papers filed By Chafee 10 answer he same,
although repeatedly applied 10 for that purpose as VIII ap-
near bv the Correspondence (see ener the Comm ssio
err whereby the ghts Of the deponen and many others
trsmpeo upon, and the extension Of said Patent grant
ed by the Commissioner The following day. Deponeni mas
heard that there were hunded pages of testimony
and papers filed in the said and none oi The i'mony
had been examined by the Commissioner when he de
cded the case Deponent further saith that the parties
who procured extension Of Chaees Patent only gave
notice to those opposed to the extension Of heir intention
TO take testimony 10 sustain the application me 4h OF
August minutes before I'VE O'Clock IN mo after
noon excepting Of imnateral witness thereby a.
lowing but We DAYS for aiOnand OF the
days Sunday. That both notices were served Ia New
York, while one set Of examinations were conducted IN
Boston and another day noticed to DO taken IN
New York; and In the testimony had Oeen
written and prepared ready for tie oath 81 he witness m
the Of those opposed and sufficient oppoun
TWAS afford 10 cross examine The Witnesses VINO Were
very and their statements very long couu
there be- from the nature Of tbs case any sufficient arg
men pre- pared under the Circumstance Dor any Jppofl
Deponent further saith that when he called on The Com,
missioner on the -9h then for The hr me ne consented
10 allow depoDent and temporary colnse 20 eAane .Le
papers ard eUmenis. Under these circumstance Whch
orly garce the deep wrongs Of this unprecedented pro-
ceding the Commissioner OF Patents has extended Tor
wears Patent hch has been in free aud unresircI
ed by the public with the consent Of Inc Paenlee ana
owners from The day was uTs Issued fourteen ye ago
and this patent covers the entire Rn96ei OF me
country. HORACE DAY.
Sworn and subscribed before me, this ost day Of august
1885, at the City and County Of Washington In NE District
orc columbia j. II. GODDARD, Justice Peace.
The foregoing deposition show how wrongfully
the power to extend Patent, involving vast
interest, has been vested solely IN the Commits
sioner Of Patents, or how wrongfully the Com
missioner has acted in the matter-or both
The following letter from the present Commits
sioners immediate predecessor Hon. EDMUND
BURKE, will throw some light on the subject
spectirg the custom at the Patent Office in times
past.
WliLARD's HOTEL. Washington. Aug so, 1850.
HosAcE II. DAY, Esq-Deay Sir Your letter Of yes
terdsy propoundrg certain Inquiries 70 me with regard to
The law rules and Of the Patent Office, In relation
10 he extension OF Patents and the hearing OF other mat
before tie Office when Commissioner, has been
received As the Information which you desire Of
era and public character Improperly in my
spending 10 your inquiries
" prehend your trst inquiry you desire 10 know
what re law, custom Of The Office, touching
The Hing papers applications for extension OF Patents
when was Commissioner.
ny this inquiry Is. that amer the day Of hear
ing rad been appointed and notice given a. the Jaw re-
qures OF The pending Of the application the petitioner
permitted he any testimony. statement argument ~
% ne dry hearing which desired and which perained
The Al that time the considered Closed
unless application made for the extension Of the ume
Of hearty for fling papers and that privilege
grsnted or refused as iusIice required.
II any person applied 70 oppose he extension be was
allowed 10 PUT 10 lis objections testimony or Arguments,
before be day OF hearing Afterwards on Application, and
the showing good why be h0lt have flrherame
In cases ofexieuson the party Opposing Il was allowed
the privilege Of seeing tie application and testimony Of he
petitioner be1yc the he In order 30 enable him 20
ID By Other Iesimouy Bai lfie Cd DAY VI hsarng. he