Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1869-10-28


ST. ALBANs--Hon. Homer e. Royce
Of Berkshire, has purchased the fine resi.
dence of Mr.. f. r. Perkins on Bank Street
for $1,000, and intends to occupy it
about the first of December.
Thomas II. Harvey has purchased the
vacant lot on Kingman street, west of the
store of Messrs. Stevens & Rublee, where
he proposes to Immediately commence the
erection Of new block Of stores.
IS. s. Skinner has leased the we'll.
known fremont House property, for a
term of three years to Philo Sexton and
Orrin Kidder, who take possession of the
premises to-day. Both gentlemen have
had several years experience in the hotel
business, and are well and favorably
known in that capacity, and will no doubt
be literally patronized.
The Injunction Against thc Batch.
eler Manufacturing Company
Dissolved.
On the 9th of August last an injunc-
ton was granted against the Betcheler
Manufacturing Company of Wsllingford.
A motion to dissolve the injunction was
heard at the October term of the Supreme
Court in Chambers, in the city OF New
York. John G. Batcheler, Lyman
Bachelor, Justin Batcheler, and John
Sabin, plaintiffs VS.. The Batcheler Manu-
featuring Company, defendants. Ira
Shafer for the motion, 7. r. Strong, OPP
posed. We clip from the New York Tri-
bune, of Friday last, the opinion Of Judge
Barnard in this case
JUDGE BARNARD's DECISION.
This is motion to dissolve a temporary
injunction The facts az they appear be-
fore me may be briefly stated Az follows /:
Lyman Batcheler, sr., now deceased, for
many years carried on the business Of
making forks, spades, etc, at Walling-
ford, VI; that as soon az his oldest eon,
IL ,ac g. Bachelor, attained his majority,
the old gentleman took him into copart-
ncr-hip, az the other sons were also, cub
-equcntly flor some Of them, taken into
the concern, when the firm name was
known as ~. Bstohcler 81 Sons" Subse-
quently the firm name was changed TO
"Bltcheler IL Sons and that designation
has been employed by the plaintiffs hith-
erto, although John Scribner, one Of the
plaintiffs, il the son-in-law only Of Ly-
man, senior. In 1877 the firm was dis
solved in consequence Of the destruction
of their buildings by fire, and Isaac c.
went into business on his own account.
The plaintiffs papers in reply 70 the do
PENDANTS moving papers state that Isaac
retired from the firm, receiving a sum in
gross, and that the plaintiffs retained the
good will OF the business; but it is no.
where stated nor pretended that Isaac IN
any way or manner covcnanted or agreed
not to engage in the business. Isaac
continued 10 carry on business on his own
account until 1862, when he entered into
the employ of the plaintiffs and remained
in their employment till April last, when
the project OF the defendants company
was discussed. From the facts before me,
am constrained TO arrive at the conelu-
sion that the plaintiffs not only knew Of
the intention u organize the Batcheler
VI Manufacturing Company, but they en-
eJuraged It, and advised Isaac 10 become
ii member Of the same, and 10 connect his
name herewith, aud 10 charge good
round sum far the use ~ his name in the
company Isaac and his wife both make
aiiidayits IL the most positive character ia
this respect, aud the plaintiffs admit that
they advised him 10 charge $4,000 in
gTcenb ,ck-, and they >ay that il that sum
had been paid Isaac they would have cub
mittrd ~ the injury, which they now
claim they are sustaining, without mur,
nlUf
The Company Mss organized, Isaac
received 5000 - fall Pld stock be IL
ono - ths trustees u1insd IN the articles
~ Incorporation II . stgekhGider and ~.
fifth etst his tot anil Drtung- $3.50 ~
company hs - employed by the defend
ants - their Superintendent, and il TO
have the principal charge ~ tho defend.
ants manufacturing business Tho de-
PENDANTS hIve already expended about
sSO,UDD Ia preparing fgr the manufacture
of tbs implements above mentioned. The
plaintiffs Obtained the temporary iniuuc-
tion, claiming that they have sustained
and Will snst lIn damage by reason Of the
word BItchelcr in the defendants' names
and 4.s that their customers will be like
is h. send orders to the defendants 5nd
their business bs thrown into confusion
Both sides agree that Bttchelcr & Sons
m inuf ioture "a superior fork and imple-
ment, and that they have extensive sales.
not only in thf- country, but in Europe.
Isaac, the member OF the defendants com
pAuy, is over fifty years of age, aud
taught his brothers, in connection with
his father, the art which they now seek to
and uuquestionably he pos
sesses great skill. am am not aware of
any rule of law or equity which entities
thesa plaintiffs to say that Isaac shall new
or engage in the mlnufacture of the tools
aud implements in the manufacture of
which he has spent the greater portion of
bis life; and il he can manufacture them
he may call them the Bitcheler forks, and
if he may manufacture them individually
he can do the same thing as a member OF
a copartnership, or as the member of an
company. He proposes, as a
member of the defendants company, To |
the same kind of goods |
which his skill aud experience fit him to |
furnish the markets of the world, and if
this work Is an injury to the plaintiffs, 1t |
Is an injury for which they have no rem
edy. His name is Bachelor, his skill has |
the plaintiffs forks measurably |
4 superior article; and unless he is under
some obligation to the plaintiffs not to use
his name, and not to exercise his skill, he
mas the right to employ, both to promote
MS interests, and the interests of those
with whom he is associated.
This was expressly held in Faber VS..
Faber in this court, where Sutherland, j.,
said . 1t is unfortunate for the plaintiff
hat he and the defendant, J. II. Faber,
ire both manufacturers of lead pencils at
,r near the same place in Germany. and
hat both have the same name as Faber,
'or it is easy to see that this circumstance
nay have been and may be an injury to
he plaintiff; but the defendant Faber
mas right to put or stamp his own name
n gold, gilt, or other letters Oh his pencils,