American telegraph. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1851-1851, 1851-09-01
LAW COURTS.

saatAt a1 H3-~ Law COURTS.
Superior Court of the City of,New York--D.
i Francis Bacon, plaint,6, against William Jud-
son, defendant t--tSummonst for a money demand
| on contract Sy1E r. EIl0G4 4FCSA&oE N
To THE DErENDANr.--Y are hereby sum
moned and required to answer the complaint
in this action, Of which a copy is herewith
served upon you, and to serve copy Of your
answer to the said complaint on the subscriber,
at my Office, No. 38 William street, (Merehants'
Exchange,) in the city Of New York, within
twenty days after the service thereof exclusive
of the day of such service; and if you fail to an
swer the said complaint within the time afore-
said, the plaintiff in this action will take judg-
ment against you for the sum of one thousand
seyen hundred and fifty dollars, with interest
from the fifth day or April. one thonssnd eight
hundred and fifty-one besides the costs of this
action Dated 25th July, 1851. s77a 55ia. s20i : I
| m @.'r' .a'.i MI ...., II GEO "A. HALSEY,
| Plaintiff q Attorney. 4
Superior Court Of the City Of New York.-D.
Francis Bacon, plaintiff, against Wiiliam Jud-
| son, defendant Complaint
| The complaint of the above-named plaintiff
respectfully shows to this court that said plain
| tiff, on the - day Of June, one thousand eight
hundred and fifty, was specially requested by
the defendant to call at the residence Of said
defendant, in Twenty first street. near Fifth
avenue, in the said city Of New York, on the
| evening Of the said day, for the purpose of
| consultation in regard to the business of the
defendant, and for the purpose Of making an
engagement with the defendant for the com
posing and writing (by the plaintiff) of certain
articles or pieces on the subject Of the contro
| yersy between said defendant and Horace H
Day, in regard to the several claims of Charles
Goodyear and the said Day to the patent rights
| of sundry inventions connected with the use of
| India rubber in various manufactures.
| And plaintiff further says, according to the
said request of the defendant he did call at the
said residence Of defendant on the evening of
the said ~ of June, and was there requested
by the defendant to undertake the work of
writing such articles in defence of the defend
ant and said Charles Goodyear as should be re-
quired for the exhibition of their alleged just
rights, and for the exposure of the alleged false
pretensions of said Horace HI. Day and the
plaintiff consented to undertake the work Of
| such writing under promise from the defend
ant of liberal compensation therefor; and the
defendant requested the plaintiff to call fire
quently at the defendants residence and office,
for the. purpose of consultation in regard to the
subject, form and style of the proposed articles;
and the plaintiff did so call on the defendant
and consult and advise with him on the said
proposed articles, at sundry times in the month
of June and in the beginning of July, one
thousand eight hundred and fifty, the said calls
and consultations not being less than six in
| number. L-- s ,-sr: fs-9 i
And also, plaintiff shows that in the month
| OF July, in said year one thousand eight hun
dred and fifty, the defendent applied to the
plaintiff, soliciting the further services of the
plaintiff in and about the like business of the
defendant
And thereupon the plaintiff called upon the
defendant sundry times at his said residence, and
also at his office or place of business, at No. 98
Broadway, in the said city of New York, and
received from the defendant statements of the
subject and character of the compositions de-
sired from the plaintiff by the defendant
And the defendant then narrated to the
plaintiff in the said statements a long and par
ticular account of the defendants controversies
and litigation with Horace III. Day about GER
tain patents and contracts, which were alleged
to have been infringed and violated by the said
Day, Of which patent right the defendant
claimed to be the proprietor, jointly with Chas.
Goodyear and some other person or persons.
And the defendant often assured the plaintiff
that the said Horace III. Day was a very bad,
dishonest, mendacious and artful man, who, by
Misrepresentation published in the newspa-
pers had succeeded in creating a very general
false impression in the public mind as to the
character and history of the claims OF the said
Charles Goodyear and others, and of the said
Horace III. Day and others, to certain inyen-
tons of modes and processes of manufacturing
various products and fabrics of India rubber.
And the defendant also stated to the plaintiff,
that, in consequence of the erroneous opinions
thus circulated, it was difficult to obtain fair
and unbiased jury for the trial of the patent
case then in litigation between the said Good
year and the said Day, and that il was neces
sary TO disabuse the public mind of the said
false impressions and to set forth the true his
tory of the said inventions and patents, and of
the lawsuits Herewith connected, in q series Of
counter publications in the newspapers, to the
intent that juries might not be influenced by
the one sided statements and perversions indus
triously produced, published and widely dis
seminated by the said Horace H. Day.
And the defendant at the same time admit
ted to the plaintiff that the defendant, and other
persons employed by defendant, or associated
and interested with him, had composed and
published many articles in reply to the before
mentioned articles of Horace Ii. Day, but with
out satisfactory effect, and that the defendant,
and those who were associated or interested
with him, believed it desirable and necessary to
employ some writer Of experience and ability
to study the subject Of these Inventions and
the attendant litigations, and to prepare and
compose statements of the facts in contradc-
ton Of the statements published by the said
Horace ii. Day.
And the defendant then proposed to the
plaintiff (as being, in the defendants opinion,
o writer Of much experience in historical and
controversial matters, and capable Of making
the strongest argument and presentation Of the
facts that the case would admit, that he should
undertake the labor Of conducting the whole
public controversy in the newspapers on behalf
Of the defendant and Of said Goodyear, and Of
other and all persons associated with the de-
fendant, or represented by him, or interested
with him in defending or prosecuting suits at
law against Horace II. Day and others.
And the defendant assured the plaintiff that
the defendant had under his control, or at his
disposal for the purposes Just mentioned. q