The national Republican., 1867-05-02
THE COURTS.
SUPREME Counr OF rnr usrrr

aae SOohehDs
SUPREME CouRr OF THE UsirED STATES
WEDNESDAY,, My /, 1857.
On motion Of Mr., o'0oner, Addison Sanford,
Esq, Of New York city, was Admitted an attor.
nsy and ccunssllor of This court sh
No: lee The Lowell M.nuf.e.uring Company,
Il. argument ef this cause was continued by
Mr.. clifford, of council fof the appslIsss, and by
Mr.. cartis, ofcounssi for ths appellants
Adjourned until Tomorrow al II O'Clock. sIsI
The Patent Lafcs-Inf1ngemeH under the
act Of 1880 RrteHsons - DescIptions-Jns
%. TAs Hartford Ca,psf Cosspany. .-0n The Sist
Of August. 1s47, the appellants, for certain CON
alterations. agreed that the Thompscnvilis and
Tarifsille companies, two corporations created
under the laws Of Connecticut, might own and
use, for wessins two and thres.ply ingram ear.
pst and aoot-clo,hs only, certsin numbet Of
looms, corresponding I'd models 70 b furni.hed
BY the appellants, Of the most approved constfuc.
ton then known to them, for the remainder Of
the term OF fourteen years, from 18th August,
1846, TO that dats, 1850; and for the additional
term Of any extension which might thereafter be
granted Of any patent right then owned by the
Appellants relative 70 such looms and business.
By the terms Of this agreement the Connecti
cut companies were 10 have the right to own and
use during said term (and no longer such limited
number Of looms with all the Improvements
therein patented and to be patented, and the
further right TO make and use In such business
during such term, and the term Of any extension,
on the same limited number Of looms any new
Improvement IN such machines for said manufac.
ture, which might be thereafter patented by the
appellants, or which might otherwise become
their property. The agreement further provided
that II the appellants should thereafter grant tho
right TO use such machinery and improvements
10 others at less rates, the rates should also be
reduced In favor Of the Connecticut companies,
80 thax- ..takk h.w H. IA "a q
lowest rate agreed to'be paid BY others for the
Same privilege during the same period. Is
II was also agreed that the Connecticut COM
panies should within two or three years, build
| and put In operation not less than certain
number Of looms corresponding to the models 50
Of such carpets and foor-oloths, and II was stip-
ulated that II they failed to perform their cove
nants, the appellants should have the right, BY
vote Of their directors, to terminate the agree
ment, and the right Of the Connecticut companies
TO use the machines and improvements patented
and to be patented should cease.
The Hartford Carpet Company became, by n,-
signment, with the assent Of the appellants,
owners Of and entitled to all the rights, and sub.
jeet to all the obligations Of the Connecticut
companies under the above agreements; and
thereafter, having refused to pay tho rent stipu-
lated, upon "tho ground that their obligation so
to do terminated on the 18th Of August, $780,"
contracts, elected to terminate tho same, and
thereafter 6led this bill, to enjoin the respond
ents; claiming, first, that by reason Of the e1ten.
sion Of patent right owned by them, complain
| ants, relative TO such looms and business, dated
April 10, 1s45. the term during which the re.
until April 10, 1866, by reason whereof the use
Of the improvements therein described, and Of
those patented October 23, 1940, was unlawful (;
and, second, that II the term was not thus ex-
tended, the defendants, at the expiration thereof
| ceased to have any right to use the improve
merls described in either patent, and therefore
| became, and continued to be, mere naked in
fringers, liable to be restrained by injunction.
The respondents below admitted their use Of
the improvements patented In October, 1S49,
(two years after the making Of the contracts, }
but alleged that four pattern looms Of that
patent were actually made by the oomplainants
and delivered by them to the Connecticut COM
panies prior to the application for the patent Of
that year. 1t was contended that under the act
Of 1889 the party becoming so possessed Of 4
| machine can never be liable as an infrnger by
the use Of 1t. They alleged that they had ceased
to employ the improvements described In the
patent Of 1s45, and denied that that patent or
It's extension extended their rent term until
1865. The judgment below was for tho Hartford
company, and the Lowell company appeal, con-
tending as above and urge that as the patent
has been extended for tho term OF seven years
from October, 1866, Qhe improvements therein
described being regarded BY the Commissioner
Of Patents rs Of such importance as to control
the manufacture Of carpets by means Of power
looms,) II the respondents thereof prevails, they
are to share with tho appellants this monopoly
for that period, without paying any considsra.
ton whatever therefor.
Tho chief inquiry Is whether tho term during
which the respondents were to pay rent, was pro-
longed by the extension Of the patent Of l845,
the respondents contending that that patent had
no such relation 10 the agreements with the Con.
necticut companies, dated In 1S47, that, accord
ing to tho true intent or import Of those agree
ments, an extension Of that patent could extend
the primary rent.paying term. The reason as
signed Is that the patent Of 1s45 was for elm
provements in power. looms for weaving plaids, u
whilst the contracts were for looms for weay
ing two and thrss.ply ingram carpets and floor
| cloths only"
b. r. Curtis and Z. W. Stoughton for appel
lants; George Clifford and Charles o'Conor fol
appolees.