The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-10-14
United States Circuit Court.
Before Chief Justice Nelson


IretisS, I'm A. Antes, Henry Mouloa, and Lansing II.
HoLfns-Ths was motion for injunction to restrain
patent granted to H. A. Wells for making hat bodies
and assigned to the compliments. The bill in this case
has teen filed by the compliments asignees Of H. A.
Wells the paeptee for an improvement in machinery for
making hat bodies against the defendants to restrain
them from alleged Infringement of the pvtent The
patent granted on the 18th of April 1916 The com
painants have heretofore filed bill the Third Circuit
Court Of the United States against persons charged with
infringing the patent and the Court after hearing tbe
motion for Injunction granted it, and afterwards di
rected issue try the validity Of the patent and the
question Of Infringement on the Law side Of the Court
which issues for trial in May 1850; and after
full and strongly contested trial. the jury found verdict
for the eomplanants, upon whcA the injunction pre-
yiously issued made perpetual The improved
machinery of the patentee consists ia feed ns the
fur after u is picked to rotating brush, between two
endless belts Of cloth, aUove the other, the lower
horizontal the other inclined "a compress the fur
and enable the brush the better to take hold Of it, and
which, moving with great velocity 'hr VS. into cham
Der, tunnel which is gradually changed in form towards
the cutie, the other end for the purpo Of
ing the flying fur and directing it to cone, winch is
placed us in front of the delivery perture of the chamber
to receive the fur The cone perforated made Of wires
and the air beneath exhausted by Continuance fitted for
that purpose There is also opening in the chamber to
let IN the air which, with that produced by the action of
Ihe resoHlng brush, m're readily direct the floating
bres of the ur in the chamber to the exhausted cone in
connection with the draft produced through the wires by
the exhaustion OF the air below. The is Also conti
at the end of the chamber or tunnel where the
fur discharged on the cone to regulate and adjust tho
thickness OF the bat corresponding to the parts requiring
or less in the formation of the hat body After
bat is is thus formed the is this
H. Of course, somewhat delicate operation the fbres
have not sufficient adhesion to admit the removal until
subjected to hardening process And therefore, the
bat covered with moist feted Or ued CLOTH
ing removed, and over which is placed perforated
metallic to produce pressure upon the brss of
bat, and at the time admit of the circulation of
water in which it is immersed, to harden the bat
preparatory to the telling: and another metallic
within the which the bat is formed that Is thin
and weak to enable the whole to resist the pressure
of the surrounding water in the process of immersion
The specification contains minute and full description
of the several parts of the machinery used
with drawings so that person of ordinary skill in this
branch of business readily understand it. The pa
tentee claims, among other thingsI The chamber into
which the hbres Of the fur thrown the brush
combination with the perforated cone placed front of
the aperture Of delivery for the purpose and il the
substantially described, the said chamber being
provided with aperture below back of the brush
for the admission OF current of air to aid in throwing
and directing the fbres to the described And
2 In the process the patenee claims hardening the
while the perforated and preparatory to its
val thererom by immersing in hot described
The defendants deny the originality Of the invention
and also the infringement, insisting that the machinery
used by them is subs antiay different from that described
in the patent of Wells and further, that their process
OF hardening the bat is materially different and superior
in its effect and operation Upon the question of orgi
nalty as the compliments have obtained the verdict Of
jury in their favor after full we'll contested trial
in another circuit shall not deem it necessary exam
inc very much at large for although that verdict
does net conclude them, The litigation having been
motion for Injunction it is entitled very great
sideratios have exAmnsa carefully the evidence pro
ar. y, upo n IN i. M parties, whcn constitutes
in the argument by the learned counsel both
~ i il vith TIC yard;ct ro,sa1a ''' nj "sgn'
ground relied on in tho trial at Phisd. nbi for ~.
purpose OF dsproving the originality Of this improve
in Enol.nd for m,nnfactn,ina hat hnds NJ y; y i
to which great deal Of evidence given This is,
aso the main ground again relied upon here to resist
this motion Williams took out two patents in England
one in 1888 the other in 1887 ii. took out patent
also in this country in 1910 for the Improvement am
hrsoo in nf ipE no lapl
or a description of the machinery and improvements
npo, which th.v wars s,ued and eydenc. If tbe act;
cal operation Of the we're bcfere the conrt
i.ry in the trial At law And tho onv one in which
there ear be any D, stension the novelty of Wells i'm
nj NAV be found is the patent of 1881 or the one
taken out in this country in ls40 and the weight Of the
proofs before me is that this machine of Williams never
into successful operation. The evidence on the
trial at law shows that was laid aside afn an an nc
sessful attempt to make hat bodies; and there Is
proof before furnished this notion leading to any
different conclusion And besides according to the eyi-
dsnce Of of the present defendants lansing f. Hos
kins the discovery and improvement Of the present pa
tsntss (Wels Is of earlier date than that of Will
aMs He uggested and described it to Hopkins in 1888
but after went to England, and hs in 1872
the first machine built and put in operation Wells
also described and explained the machine to Mr. Sullivan
in London in December 1885 It appears therefor that
the present patentee only the first person. far
which he has obtained patent also tho first to con.
struct machine that has gone into successful operation
for it appears to be admitted all Sides that this i'm
of Wells the first that went into
fu practical in making h bod ss by machinery The
have also relied upon patent Thomas Ban
chard June a. 1887 evidence the want Of originality
in the improvement of Wells This machine was invented
by Mr. Blanchard 1.-THE well known ingenious inventor of
the machine for turning gunsocks and other irregular
fgures and successfully used early 1882 il
prior to that time and there doubt but that he
entitled to the credit of the thought and conrvance
without which all these machines for making hat bodies
would be useless, or rather would have been
thought Of He first suggested the ingenious idea
producing sheet of wire cloth, by the
operations Of (which the brss of the fu when thrown
into the air, i'll be drawn down t. the wire sheet and
there formed intoa bat web for mapping hat bodies
or making bodies for hats, instead Of bowling, ac-
cording 10 the old method. Mr.. BIS machine
constructed to form webs of plain fur batting The
improvement Of Wells is the suggestion Of perforated
wire cone forming thereby the body of the hat the
shape desirable, and adapting the machinery as to
produce the required result and the same time con-
irving the of taking fur from the cone
without injury to It's shape texture. All this h. has
most successfully accomplished; and although the ngs-
nuiy displayed is to be pared to the idea struck
cut BY Blanchard and which lies al the foundation Of
the it must be admitted that it Is enc Of
very great merit and deserving all reasonable
BY from two hundred and City 70 three hun
A. l~sb