The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1866-05-15
A Curfous Coffee Casc-iow the Article II
Nanufa urcd.
SUPERIOR cougr-GESfgAL TERM.


Before Judges Robertson Mcneil and Garvin
wiuirm Ne,r ~ ~ E-ra Wheeler and others This
an appeal from rulings by Judge McCunn the
trial OF the case at the Trial Term with jury
The action Is peculiar the fact that It Involves dis
pute relative the manufacture Of coffee one of the
features of the process consisting in running through
black lead which Enyc The coffee peculiar appearance
shiny and metallic different from coffee in general
The argued before, and decided against the
plantiT but reargurnent was applied Tor by the
planin counsel certain law points. The facts OF
e case according 10 defendants statement, arr as FOL
iows:--
The action was tried before Hon Justice McCann and
Jury the March Trial Term OF this court In $780,
and verdict rendered by tire jury for the plaintiff upon
the only question submitted 10 them by The Conrt and
the Court assessed tho damages M SIS 034 81 and
dcred the defendants exceptions 10 be heard IN ihe rs
Instance the General Term, With stay OF proceedings
The action was brought damages tor breach
of the contract forth in the complaint The plnnir
alleges that he the owner ind pacn'ee Of patent
for cleaning and polishing coffee That On the 18th DAY
March 1868 the plaintiff sold To the defendants the
exclusive right such patent within the state OF
New York, and other territory. FOR the sum OF 81, OoO
and the further OF cents for every bag of skim
mngs and ten fsr every bag Of understandable coee
passed by tho defendants through tho of the plain
tif and that the def ndans should keep an accurate
account OF every bag OF coffee that passed under said
process and tn render monthly returns Of the same
verified under OATH and W pay over IN sash ON
the nfst OF each month the plaintiffs share o.
such earnings rtpulated for, the defendants hay
ing also the privilege OF committing the tolls afore
SAID by the pay mcnt OF the further Of 900 with
in three vears aud that the defendants took the in
terest Aforesaid paid 10 the plarhn the 5000 and
used the patent and the plaintiff alleges a. breaches OF
the aid -frstrhat the defendants neglected
to furnish the plaintiff monthly returns u the number
OF bags OF coffee they had passed through aid process
and pay the tolls due for the Secondhand that
the defendants have neglected 10 keep paintl In
teres In said agreement nviosfc by Keeping IN active
operation the machinery In SAID agreement contcm.
plated md used by the defendants and have neglected
20 make the same available and productive, &C., add
demands Judgment for damages for such neglect The
defendants admit the CONTRACT a. act forth IN the COM
pialnf- nIeQo plalufn. lnduce them 10
into the same represented 70 them thai by s use
large sums 81 money codd be made that great improve
value would BE- materially Increased and t- merchant
able quality improved and its price cnhsnced and that
u would be made much more ssisblc; which rcprescn-
tafons the defendants aiexc untrue, and that the
process them vsluelc and claim TO recover The
I'VE thousand dollars paid and "a have the contract
nued that running tbs coffee through black lend gave
deny that they neglected 70 furnish the plaintiff with
monthly rcturns OF The number OF bass, and they deny
statement Of all coffee passed by them through plaintiffs
proccss, and aiege that the have been fully paid
p.S interest," inv .s ' sy t.pns tho msehs. or
process In scs~e operation neglected TO make The
same available and productive neglected their duty
ed all their part q the contract that they have used
diligence and good faith esdeavoring procure
u IL eject upon the conee~the loss in weight, shs
peculiar appearance impaired 10 tho csee the expense
Of operating and cost Of renovation, and the deprcca
ton value arising thercfrom-t became impossible
any considerable employment for H. and none was
obtained for which true has been rendered
aenvnr snv untrue reprcacntaiona ON The tsi N The
action. when the plaintiff had rested the defendants
counsel moved TO dsmlss the complaints the Court de-
MED notion and the defendants counsel excepted
Testimony was therefore taken and the Judge charged
the jury in manner that caused deendan,s counsel 70
except The argued yesterday by MI v Gerry
for plant and Mrl VIM. ID Both Tor defendants De-
cision reserved