Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1860-08-23

The SEWING MACHINE CoNrRovERsY.-A Feto
Facts for h,quiring MFnds-The card of George b.
Sloat, in yesterdays Spy, afirms that Judge Mel
sons decision is that of inferior and pettycourt"
which "has been virtually annulled or reversed by
the recent decision of the Hon. Chief Judge Dun
Top of the Circuit Court of the United States,n and
Mr.. Sloat afrms in previous card that there is no
appeal from Judge Dunlops decision, that it ends
the controversy, etc.
Fact, No. l. Mr. Samuel Nelson is one of tn
judges of the Supreme Court of the United States,
and was sitting at Cooperstown, in his circuit juris
diction and from his decision there is only the right
OF appeal to the full bench of the U. S. Supreme
Court.
Fact No. 2. Mr.. james Dunlop is Chief Justice
OF the Circuit Court of the District Of Columbia hav-
ing authority, by act of congress- chap IS, sect ll
TO hear and decide cases OF appeal from the Com
missioner of the aent Office, to the granting of
new patents, or the reissue of previous ones And
the same statute provides THAT decision of the
judge in any such case shall preclude any person
interested, from the right to contest the same, i'll
any judicial court, in any action in which its validi-
ty may come in question:
Fact No 8. The decision of Judge Dunlop was
18th.
query No. l. Which is the 'petty and inferior
court, Judge Nelson, OF the Supreme Court of the
United States sitting in of his circuits, or Judge
Dunlop, of the Circuit Court of the District of Co
lumbia.
Query No q How can a decision of July 31st re-
verse or annul a subsequent one, given some weeks
after, on Aug. 18th?
Query No. 3. Is not the assertion of emo appeal"
and lend of the controversy intended to talsiiy
the real facts of the case?
Fact No. 4. 1t appears that the matter in issue
before Judge Dunlop was merely whether reissue
of patent should be granted to James q. Wilson, as
assignee of Aiken Eelthousen, the original pat
entees for the wheel feed" device the commits
sioner having decided that l. NJ Singer was the prior
inventor and II does not appear that any other than
Mr.. Singer contested the point, that the merits
of the 'bar feed" entered into the hearing at all
The reissue granted by Judge Dunlop, and
whatever Mr. Wilson may claim, Or Mr. Sloat under
HIM, the courts may sustain or overthrow their
claim, as the matter may appear the trial of any
contested that may arise ON the merits of the
e.issued patent.
Fact No. 5, In the hearing before Judge Nelson
the entire merits of the bar ICED" were gone into,
and all that could be brought to bear against the A.
b. Wilson patent was offered in evidence Mr.. Sloat
bringing out his j. q. Wilson's patent and putting
Mr.. Atkins This "oTigina inventory himself upon
the stand. And yet Judge Nelson says in his decis-
lon after reviewing Atkins evidence, that latter a
very careful analysis and examination of the proofs
ofpriority, the weight is all way, and that is
against NE pTetelSOn set up IN behalf Of AttinSn And
his decision fully susains the A. b. Wilson patent,
as against the j 6. Wilson, the Sloat claim, or
any other yet set up This decision can be carried by
| appeal TO the full bench of the Supreme Court at
| Washington, of which Judge Nelson is member
ana Judge Dunlop Is not, and then may be over
thrown, or sustained, as its merits may be made to
appear If is sustained, Mr.. Sloat's loud trumpet
ca decision OF Judge Dunlop is worth more to
MN than so much blank paper, nor is it worth more
IN the intervening time from the decision of Judge
| Nelson. %
Conclusion. 1t is very easy for INSCRIPTIONS per-
sons TO make very high sounding but incorrect
statement out OF very scanty materials
| NoTIcE-Managers of the Worcester Chdrens Friend
Society arc notified that the Monthly Meeting
Board will be held at Mrs. William Browns on Pearl
street. ON Saturday, 25th August, at the usual hour.