The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-07-22
To the Committee ON Patents in the Senate o
the United states

10 the committee ON Patents Ia the Senate OF
the United states
GENTLEMEN; My attention has been called 10 bill which
10 now Oeiofe 10 cure defects the extension
OF certain patents and passage would directly
iee with ran judicial proceedings in which some of
my clients are parties beg leave 10 present for your
consideration the facts relating the extension of Coils
patent for hre which made 10 revolye in The sc
Of cooking them.
1885, February IS, patent issued 10 Samuel Colt
1885, January, he applied to the Commissioned OF Pat
ents under the 18th section OF the act oil 18th July 1885,
for extension OF this patent. This than two
years before his patent would have expired The board
oil commissioners consisted OF Mr. Buchanan, then Sec
rotary OF State Mr. Gllet. Solicitor OF the Treasury;
and Mr. Burke Commissioner OF Patents Notice was
duly gwen under The act OF 1885, and the time for hear
ing was liked for February 2lst, ls4s, also more than
two years before the expiration OF the patent This COM
mission met on the day appointed and adjourned to the
23d. Met on that day directed Mr. Colt TO submit his
petition TO the Secretary OF War for his opinion and
port TO them by the LIST of March, lS4S which day
they adjourned They met again the LIST March but
there is nothing to show whether Mr. Colt had or not
taken the opinion OF the Secretary of War; and the board
without any further action adjourned the Gaze 10 the
first Monday IN January 1850. lS4s May 81, ne abol
ishing the board OF commissioners and giving their pow
ers 10 the Commissioner Of Patents passed. BY this
act provision made for the extension OF patents under
certain circumstances and after certain prescribed pro-
eeedings.
1913. October 24lh Mr. Colt surrendered his patent of
1896, and obtained one essentially changing his
claims under his former patent, and covering and
different matters BY this act il s contended he Ahsn-
doned all pretenson to an extension Of the osiea1
ent. There was either patent which such a. -
could be founded, or required application and
sixty days notice. under the act Of the 27th May 1885,
and full compliance with the other terms OF that act
lS4o, March 10th. the patent which had thus been
obtained in the place of the patent of 1886 extended
by Mr. Burke just before he left the Office. without any
notice other compliance with The provisions Of the
OF 1885, and this extension was made by an endorse
ment on the back Of the patent
Subsequent to these proceedings. Messrs. Young and
Leayit, OF New York, became purchasers Of the in
venon and patent therefor granted to James Warner
and they also purchased from divers other persons their
patent rights tor improvements in fre-arms; and
binng these various rights. have gone great expense.
and invested large amount OF capital 10 the establish
ment OF a mandatory Of which il s alleged are
an infringement Of this patent Of Mr.. Colts Is sup
posed the weapon produced by Young and Leav s better
than Mr. Colts, and intereres with his monopoly; and
he has sued them the circuit court Of this district and
in that of the southern district of New York.
There are in this district suits at common law and in
equity. They were brought in November. 1850. No
declaration has been filed in the law suits to
this day. Warner was made party defendant to the
bill in equity, and process served on him but no
process was served on Young and Leavit or either OF
Them In October 1851, Warmers answer was fled and
nothing further has been DONE
In that answer the material facts which have stated
above are imbodied and sworn to rs true. | cannot
state Of my own knowledge the condition Of the case
New York; but am informed il is now pending, and
part of the defence relied there the same as here
Only one suit, as am informed, ever brought by
Mr. Colt for infringement of his patent prior 10 the
pretended extension, and that dismissed at his
Since the extension he has sued the Massachusetts Arms
Company, and has succeeded his extended patent.
and that has been brought by error or appeal 10 the
Supreme Court OF the United States.
The defendants in that case, also in the case of
Young and Leayitt, rely on the want OF originality in
the original patent and also on the defects in the extern
| sion.
Ii is therefore evident that the effort now is to help
out defective by special legislation, and TO
change the existing rights OF parties while suit is
pending II is also evident that the defendants in these
have been led into investment OF their capital by
the act Of Mr. Colt himself and by other Irregularities
These questions which be properly adjusted in
Judicial oram alone and there they are in due pro-
OF investigations yet instructed TO say, if
committee OF the Senate shall he invested with power
to send for persons aud papers, and have time given
them 10 go into the inquiries which it is respectfully sub
med absolutely necessary TO enable Congress in
diligently to legisa,e this subject my clients Young
and Leavit. will most cheerfuy meet Mr. Colt and pro-
duce their evidence
Unless this DONE they rely confidently on the justice
OF Congress, and satisfied that bill will be passed.
that the facts OF this brought to their no
tice, which will in any change affect the rela-
tive rights of the parties.
II ii shall be desired by the committee, will at any
time II may suit their convenience exhibit to them the
records in the cases in this District,
And am, very respectfully,
JOS II. BRADLEY,
Attorney for Young and Ieayitt