Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1860-08-31

the SEWING MACHINE CONTROVERSIAL Fsp Facts
for Itguring Ands.-George B. Sloat, in card to the
public arms that Judge Nelson's decision Is that Of
inferior and petty court" which has been virtually
annued reversed by the recent decision OF the Hon.
Chief Judge Dunlop OF the Circuit Court of the United
States" and Mr.. Soat afirms Ia a previous card that
there is appeal from Judge Dunlops decision that
ends the controversy, etc.
Fact No. Mr.. Samuel Nelson Is Of the judges
Of the Supreme Court Of the United States aud Sit
ting at Cooperstown in his circuit Jurisdiction and from
his decision there is only the right Of appeal TO the full
bench of the u. S. Supreme Court
Fact No. Mr. James Dunlop Is Chief Justice of the
Circuit Court ofthe District of Columbia having author
ity by act Of Congress chap 49, sect H. to hear and
decide Of appeal from the Commissioner Of the
Patent Office, to the granting Of patents the
reissue Of previous And the atute provides
"That no decision OF the Judge In any such shall
preclude any person interested from the right to contest
the same 10 any judicial court in any action in which
its validity may come In question"
Fact No. 3.-The decision Of Judge Dunlop was given
July 81, and that Of Judge Nelson Aug II.
Query No. (which Is the "petty aud inferior
court Judge Nelson Of the Supreme Court Of the United
States sitting 10 of his circuits Judge Dunlop, OF
the Circuit Court of the District Of Columbia?
Query No. 2-How can a decision Of July 81 reverse
annul subsequent one, given some weeks after, on
Aug. III
Query No. SIS not the assertion Of "no appeal "
aud lend Of the controversy" intended to fasiy the
real facts of the case?
Fact No At appears that the matter in issue before
Judge Dunlop merely whether reissue of patent
should be granted to James G. Wilson, assignee Of
Aiken & Felthousen, the original patentees, for the
wheel feed" Device the commissioner having decided
that I'm Singer the prior inventor, and it does not
appear that any other than Mr. Singer contested the
point or that the question OF the date Of A. ID. Wilson's
invention of the friction feed entered into tho hearing
at ALL The reissue was ordered by Judge Dunlop and
whatever Mr.. j. G. Wilson may claim, or Mr.. Sloat
under him. the courts may sustain or overthrow their
claim the matter may appear on the trial OF any con-
tested that may arise on tho merits oil the resued
patent.
Fact No 5-In the hearing before Judge Nelson, the
entire merits of the friction feed 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. G. Wilson's patent aud putting Mr. Aikens This
original inventory himself upon the stand And yet
Judge Nelson says in his decision after reviewing Akens
evidence that after very careful analysis and erimi-
nation of the proofs Of priority, the weight is all one
way and that is against the preensions set up IN behalf
of Aikens" And his decision fully sustains the A b.
Wilson patent as against the J. G. Wilson, the Soat
claim any other yet set up The decision be car
ried BY appeal the full bench Of the Supreme Court at
Washington, of which Judge Nelson is member and
Judge Dunlop not and then may be overthrow
taned its merits may be made TO appear II it is sus.
taned Mr. Soats loud umpeed decision OF Judge Dun
Top is worth no 9ge TO him than so much blank paper,
is It worth oe in the intervening time from the de-
cison of Judge Nelson.
Fact No. 6.-Since the order Of Judge Dunlop, the
Patent Office has declined an interference between the
Aikens Felthousens patent and A. b. Wilson's. JAS
g. Wilson now has an opportunity to prove before the
Patent Office the priority Of Akens Fehousen's inven
lion to A. b. Wilson's if he can, and that Judge Nelson
is wrong
Concsion-Iti is very easy for INSCRIPTIONS persons
to make very high sounding but incorrect statement
out of very scanty materials