New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-09-03
Planning Machines.


the recent proceedings before Judge Nelson. A.
Coopers;own. upon the application OF MesSrs.
Wilson X Gibson, Tor munctons against varl-
Gus planning machines Ii The report had been
accompanied by the explanation that i, eman-
ated from the counsel for the comp,anantS. D,
would perhaps have required no notice, aS %
would he understood Or the public. that no
opinion should be formed without a hearing Of
both parties Blu, appearing as It does with
out this explanation, bret statement Is ne
ccssary IN order 90 prevent mlsapprelenson
The reader would suppose from peruSal OF
the report. that decision with regard q the
Allen machine would De virtually a decision with
regard t. my machine also. THIS would be en-
tlrely erroneous. AS J. was deemed important 20
state that the compliments counsel 81 claimed
Il would have been lut justice 20 add. that they
were corrected a. 10 that act a. the time, amt
that my counsel denied tho truth N the al.ega
ton that the similarity which was claimed tx
i>ted Ia the two machines \ report OF judicial
proceedings should be- accurate and tul. With re-
gard 20 material points. The report entirely
Omlis 10 state that an unsuccessful attempt was
made on the part o' the compliments 20 obtain
from the Court Am order for the nOStpuncmcnt of
the motion for an injunction against ny machine
IL omltS to state that my coun>c, Strenuously re-
sisted the application. andu urged the cOmpiainantS
20 bring on tho motion, m justice TO themselves
aS well Is 20 ne Il omitS 20 state that the Court
declined 10 grant the ortor tor po>tponoment
and suggested 20 che c0mp.amaniS counsel the
pro. rety of bringing 10 on 1t that time. IL onii>
10 state that the, having thc control of The qur~
ton a. the moving party. absolutely declined to
bring on the motion There are oiher omissions
and inaccuracies M the report. which DO not
deem t material 10 advert 20, rs they may not
perhaps bc important | tll not suppose II to
be- usual 10 publish reports of proceedings before
a Judge NJ Chambers, uVon motion which the
moving party declined to bring on IN pursuance
OF his own notice. and beg leave 10 suggest that
a simple statement of the tact that the motion
was not brought ou, and that the order was va
Gated was all which was important 20 the pub
lie Counsel very naturally become enlisted IN
the causes Of their clients, and, without any de.
sire TO DO m ustice, may, by unlutentlonal omlS-
SONS or inaccuracy of statement, give occasion,
as IN this case, Tor complaint 10y the opposite
party
The report OF the proceeding, before Judge
Nelson seems 20 blend my machine with that oi
Mr. Alien The two are utterly dlssluilar ma pie
most every material particular The only lead.
mg feature which the two machines possess ln
oumon, Is the use Inc planes. These are diier-
entity applied. the being stationary, anu OF or
combined with the elastic principle. 80 iaT AS re-
latos the single feature alluded to- and 50 far only
MIR. Allen and myself meet upon common ground /"
opposition 10 the compliments clam.
10 does not seem 10 me that newspaper j. ie
proper medium for the settlement II legal que>-
tons. and do not propose 10 discuss the proprtF 81
the complamants' claim But rs their counsel have
deemed il important to give publicity 10 the propo>i-
tons for which they contended al CoOperstown and
have not thought pr0perto state the opo,iuons con
tended for upon the other SIDE, and ~ the eheet
may De Ia produce misconceptlOn which mghi De
an Il a.
positions few facts which VIII serve 10 prevent an
erroneous impression.
The claim A. published IN Tte Journal Is not taken
from the Woodwork patent and Specifications II is
now advanced by the counsel tor the comp hnalts'
but has never received the sanction Of any court III
has not been put forth before these suits were COM
menced and whether night or wrong. IS not inatcord-
auce with previous constructions Of The patent oy The
various Judges Of the supreme Court of the United
states
The counsel admitted rs novelty on the argument
OF the Allen ease, and repeatedly spoke OF u a. tbs
ptu anil 6r0ad clam IN he construction Of the pa
tent
Whether ttis clam Is well founded, and whether
4 Is consistent with the language of the patent are
questions which Il viii not be difficult to answer,
after comparing 10 with the clam 0t the patent, and
the declarations OF Messrs. Woodwork, Wilson &
Keller
The clam mate j. thus stated IN the report al
luded 10
The ground taken b. the plaintiffs counsel was thatths
WOODWORK Patent Tor comb nation II two elements
Or principles Est Any mode Of controlling the board
~ an hy pressure applied to the surface 20 be- planed IN
. rrtnr,r a, t0 hod thc other surface IT the blank
constantly and firmly against the stationary unyIedng bed
90 the macue that the plank shall Dr presented 90 the
cutting instrument ia such manner nat AT NE surplus
wood beyond gwen line parallel With she line II the bed
shall be certainly removed and thus The plank De fenced
o. uniform thickness a. the same time that iis sudacs -
blamed "a A, cutting instrument that Nl remove the
sufQlus cd from he plank Controlled lad resented
tor Tie plaintiffs calned mat all he various kods u
these elements and that they were therefore infringe
msn,s on the Woodwork Patent
The following is the claim, a stated IN the origI
nal Hooduorth Patent Of ISIS and Il viii be OBJ
served tina, there not word direct or indirect,
on the subject If pressure. THIS branch Of the
claim was never made BY the original patentee IN
ne specifications III which he describes ms own IN
yention
SAID william woodwork does NOT clam the insenuon
oil CIRCULAR saws clttef-AAsel-, knowing thfy nave
long been ~ 1,. buf be- CLAIMS 4s hls Invention me IA
p1oseneut and pcaon ~ cutter " pianns wheels :"
blaming boards plank timber gr other material il" -
improved method II cgtefs fuf growing tni t1hf ing
and cutting moidrgs VOID, stone. uon, uiriaA "
other maternal aud ass of facing and dressing hA a.
a.! the wheels ma be ased s-s.' tl1 N -, ~
moulding. any other purpose before hdifitrn ~.
also CLAIMS BIS improved method ine .ppe am ot
circular for reducing roor plank and 5tnef mate
mas to "ldin Dated w P,5.h x,so6soRru.
B i Gl go Witnesses.
The following is the preamble TO the specifications
Of ,ie amended patent obtained seventeen years
alterward BY The s0n and adnmlsirafor " ne pat
safss.
The schedule referred 70 these Letters patent, md
making part " the sane .,
IL a whom Z may concern B. . KNOWN thai the iol-
, nc i, f1f dear agd -rlcf ctsc0pfon q Tie netlnd
of blaming ionguns sad groosinE PLANK = 'cIas in7s,td
ID. sm 0od worth oect tscd. AID iyf "hlfh letters
eateul u The United Sales were granted ~ l ~ me
2-th da 4 December The ear QUE iho.a eight M
al ed AID tNengg-elght the sad letters patent haFrg
t.en surrendered fJr tls g 81 ~ describing TIE .-ne
arenrlsu an0 pointing or n nhat y cOaa-is IA n re
Gear f4 and e1a1, terms than was done IN fs original
specific 4tOn
Tie specifications tAen describe the mode Of con
s:rucuon and operation. and describes no new mode
Of cut except the rgta.ng c1ii, and mode OF con
trolling the board BY pressure except for the purpose
Of cOCneract,ng The tendency Of The rotating cutter
- draw the board toward the center Of the cutter
wheels. The claims are then stated as follows
Having thus fully described the parts and comb saion
II ars and operation 4 tie machine foT 2anng tag
lnz and H0OIng 1oares ylank and shown modes
n which ine same nay De constructed and made % crate
without cna1Zng The pnaps mole u ypsr-ttA VI the
machine. laf claimed therein re Invention VI WI
Lam ool1OTtn. deceased TIE employ l.sni 4 rD-iiiH9
NH-s - I'm faIf an.