The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1878-12-05

dsaes. besides several promiseaa citi.
seas, wAa hsd Aeea the organ at The
rnfiaas iAirs asd h The hoase 81 its
owasE asd vere Rcqssintsd With a.
Il wAs admitted ~ The counsel on
both sides tbAi the Dayton reed boards
aad organs, 4 their integri,y was e.
tablished. were oomplese aud hbal
Answcr % the entife case.
Az The end u this article we have
appended IL fsll the decisions q The
judges. q which we here nske brief
abstract.
Messrs. Blatchiord aud Wheeler
have decided
Fhst-Thai the palen, Of 1866. held
by Estey q Co, is part isl, but not
complete answer 10 plaintiffs pateut Of
1863.
Second That the integrity OF The
entire Dayton exhibits Of organs aud
reed boards is fully established, there
by exonerating al the defendants aud
their witnesses from every charge
made by the plaintiff in reference TO
this matter.
Third That there was not the
slighiest evidence TO show that the
third claim OF plaintiffs pateut had
been iniringed upon by the defendants.
Fourth That the fourth claim OF
plaintiffs patent was old, and that be
must furnish satisfactory proof TO the
court Of bis having entered proper
disclaimer for all that he had claimed
III il before be would be entitled to
decree on his first two claims
Fifth That the admission OF both
sides, that the Dayton exhibits, fully
answered the case. was incorrect.
Sixth--In sustaining the first aud
second claims Of plaintiffs patent, they
narrowed these claims, down so as TO
practically make them but Of little
value to plaintiff
Seventh--That ia consequence Of
plaintiff. having claimed in his patent
(3d aud 18th elaine what was old. be
was not entitled to recover costs.
The practical results OF the decision
are that the plaintiff has failed TO es.
tabish his case us he set out to do, that
he has to pay all the heavy costs oil his
suit, that he has TO file disclaimer OF
the fouth claim Of his patent, before he
is entitled TO decree on his first two
claims. and that finally, should he,
when the case is appealed to the su-
preme court OF the United States at
Washington even establish the two
claims, now decided in bis favor, these
claims have been so narrowed down,
that the damages he can possibly re-
cover from the Defend ants will be en-.
tirely nominal. This is emphatically
and practically complete vindication
and triumph for j Estey IL Co, who
are fully shown in the opinion of the
ablest judges in the land, to have been
honorable and upright in the whole
transaction, and to have been exposed
to large amount Of unreasonable per.
secutions and vilification.
Upon looking over tha testimony we
find that Estey a Go have brought a
suit for $4,000 damages against Riley
Burdett for libel in matters growing
out Of this case. We also find that q
second suit for $4,000 damages has
been brought by Messrs. Estey 4 Co
against Mr.. Burdett aud some of bis
attorneys and witnesses. for mutlation
of various exhibits while in the posses,
sion Of the plaintiffs counsel which
they (Estey x Co. had put into tbit
case. In the latter suit, anyhow, il
would seem plain that Messrs. Estey
will prevail, as the authenticity Of the
Dayton exhibits has been established
by the judges.