New-York daily tribune., 1851-07-29

,ec, which said documents the plaintiff perlsei ani
.,u,,,ed with al cue AMI proper diligence - the
neplec, of piaiutIfis other calls OF blsnsss- Ani
the plaintiff tens requested ~ a'ieni daily a. ne
de.enda.iS Oa.Ce 70 d .Liol.Ac1 oi 4ay neT IIc-s
presenting. O, 1.v neV tuF- estohs orcir-lg > N
mind Of the defendant n regare 20 The propose Duh
and is exrec;et INJURIOUS operations on he inter
ssts of reriCrous inventors and r.Zt,fal ientees
auG 2ropretors Of patents. d.d - a'tead AZ feeni-
ants cfice from day - cav. anf hell long tni M
MeroLs .ta,lOls VITA .Ae lelen AK iJr w
rurpCse Cf obtaining such IlioTinEion as wollI
enable TIE plaintiff 20 "mase strong c.Lse Tor
The defendant IA the pi Inti propo>eI conni-
nlcaton 10 the aforesaid distinguished Senator IN
Ccrarees art n The cO-r1unlc .il1n waica ~ ~
requested Uy tie Defendant - "a iAe - slcl oia ar
Senators ard such Representatives IN Congress >
misht BE- influenced by such arEimenis as tae pam
III thus instructed, might make 10 them
AID the plaintiff. after recelung such .n'tructlons
IN the Law points Of The case. : the defendant could
furnish Sas by ne defendant. requested 20 20 SliA
The defendant 10 me Office OF Seth P Staples, Esl,
Counsel learned the law, ESPECIALLY IN ;he .aN
OF patents) and retained "a such n defence OF
Charles Goodyear against horace II Day, ana 10
defence Of various associates and employers OF the
SAID defendan; William Juison, against the sat
Horace II Day-
And the said plaintiff Bacon did, according 70 the
request Of the sald defendant JutsOn 20 With the
SAID defendant the Office OF the saIi Staples All
was then and there by the sad Staples further and
extensively ndocrinated As 20 the alleged merits OF
the case Of Charles Goodyear and other inventors
and pateniees interested with the sad GOodyear
and with the said defendant JudSon against tle sad
Day. and a. TO the alleged cemers OF the o. the
SAID Horace II Day. 4 against the sad GoOtyear
the SAID defendant Judson. and The sad other pa
tenrees and other propdet0rs OF patents associated
With the sand defendant JudSOn.
And the plaintiff did a; the place and .mo last
aforesaid receive from the SAID Staples drait or
form OF letter 10 a DISTINGUISHED Senator IN Con
grcSs concerning the aforesSd Dill for the Iteration
ofthe patent laws Otae United states, VITA specai
request from the said staples and from the sald de-
eIdant IN this that the plaIntIf you'd pc
rIse and revise the said drat or form ani correct and
enlarge y. 20 make II most efectu2i 10 rs plr-
rose OF convincing the ud Senator. lG1i throl lth
hIm he senate Of the United States, OF the alleged
INJUSTICE and lmpollcy of passing the AFORESAID oll
for the alteration OF The Patent Laws OF the United
Stdtos.
And tho plaintiff took the sail draft OF form OF let
ter and d!t revise correct am enlarge = rs request
ed 10y the defendant
And tie plaintiff IN the Aforesaid month OF Febru-
All Mas requested ny inc dtlflddni 10 s8W lhf 'lJ
OF Washington. Wllnln ieW days 10 cQunteIi lit
alleged Vaccinations of the Aforesaid Horace H.
Dav and 10 prevent, u possible. the passage ol the
aforesaid bi for the alteration OF the Patent Laws
OF The United States.
And the plaintiff consented to go. and prepared
hin self 10 60 TO the city of Washington Aforesaid
for the purpose last above named. any day an1 at
any hour. when the defendant might name AM ap-
point for The plaintiff s departure
And the plaintiff beng requested by me deieniant
10 communicate any information IN Ms possession Is
to The prospect or probability OF the passage OF the
SAID bill or any such bill, N Congress, stated TO the
defendant that Il would be impossible TO take mp the
bill IN the Senate and pass IT through congress al 50
late porO0 OF the session (Which must terminate IN
less than three weeks # the opponents OF the bill
would exercise due vigilance And the defendant
having named 10 him certain prominent >enitors
~ 10 were opposed to the bill. and certain VINO we're
n favor OF H. and cetaln Who were undeierinilcI IN
regard 20 IT, the paInrlh advised the defendant as TO
the course TO be pursued with such senators ana
recommended that Senator Dickinson ana senator
FOoie should be induced - act an1 speak az tinS
the tIl and that Senator Seward tbeing opposed ID
the bib should not say word on the SUBJECT, or per
mt II to be known that he was opposed 70 tne Dill
except by giving his vote against H. ana thtt .haiof
Baldwin beng also opposed 20 the bib should piH-
sue the same course was recommended by PLAN
id IN the case of Senator Seward
And the defendant informed the plaintiff that ne
had engaged a correspondent al the CITY OF Wash
ingtOn to communicate with him by telegraph on the
instant OF the taking up OF the sad bill IN the Senate
and that the defendant expected the plaintiff to 60 10
Washington bv the next tram after the receipt OF
such communication by telegraph from Washington
And the defendant requested the plaintiff to atteht
daily at the defendants SAID Office untthe receipt of
sand teegraphc communication or until the close of
the session OF the third of March.
And the plaintiff did so attend daily at the office OF
the defendant until the third day of March IN said
year, thousand eight hundred and hlty-one, 10
the neglect of plaintiff s other business.
And the plaintiff, al the request of the defendant
on or about the - day OF sad February, undertook
the revision and correction OF certain writing or
composition OF the defendant, designed for publica
ton. and aerwdrd published by the defendant IN the
public newspapers.
And the plaintiff carefully perlsed the SAID cOmpO
iIon OF the defendant, and revised and corrected IT'S
errors OF grammar, rhetoric and punctuation and re-
duced II 10 lntelllgble form, suitable ioT publ
cation
And the defendant assured the plaintiff that he
paying and would pay hm literally for such services
As are herClnbotOre mentioned, and that he hai pad
one of the correspondents of ncwsp lpers Al Wash
ngiun whose name ne mentioned to plantiil one
thousand five hundred dollars for fdvOrablg mcntlon-
Ing the claims Of Goodyear, and others aSSDcldtei
with hun IN ms letters and for advocating the cause
Of the opponents OF the aforesaid bill al aShngton
And ne defendant also stated IN the presence and
hearing of the plaintiff, iwhlic the plalnl was VII
ting piece or article for tie defendant tha The de-
fendaut had expended the sum OF FIVE thousand dol
lars at the City OF Washington, during the session
ending the third Of March now last past IN and
about the business of maintaining the alleged claim
of Goodyear and other inventors, and III resisting the
operations of Horace II. Day and other advocates
and friends Of the aforesaid bill
And plaintiff AYERS that the SAID services so rem
dered by him 10 defendant and at his request as
aforesaid, were reasonably worth the sum OF one
thousand seven hundred aud hfy dollars and that
sand defendant on or about the - day OF April one
thousand eight hundred and fftyone, specially M
deftook and promised 10 pay the sad sum OF money
m full
Wherefore plaintiff demands judgment against the
defendant FOR SAID sum OF one thousand seven huA-
dred and nifty dollars with interest thereon from the
Liih DAY Of Apnl one thousand eight hundred and
hily-ono and the costs OF this action
GEO. \. llALsEi.
Plaintiff : Attorney
CHy and county ef Nec- York. IS D. FRANci,
Bacon. Of sand City plaintiff IN the above entitled
complaint IS true o; his own knowledge. except A.
10 the matters which therein stated on ms lnlor-
nation or belief anu as 10 those matters that he De-
heyes II 10 he true.
Sworn to before me Tins - day Of -, ISL
4.