Weekly Chillicothe crisis. (Chillicothe, Livingston Co., Mo.) 1878-19??, 1879-05-22
WIRE FENCE CONTROVERSY.
The Barb Fence Patent Suits Reviewed at
Length


numerous farmers and stock raisers of II
" e, e. Ill.,. '',''' 49, 49, -
"cSV anu 'outh"eSI "Ic eltilel using
intending to use Barb Fence, the subjet
has Locopn oro ortbo ,,.oot ;,,,ortor,
and ronnot bo loo cIosoI,, o,,on,;nnJ or r.
l;Laraii, @ i;aoo .oo SA'','.', tmt, ~, ~
l'poi"''y "ioouSSI"' Inc SualtiilchC
ilOt cAaSscrattu' fOiy-hrO WOhSQi
MNeS ~ DdfO renee nave been erected l
the last three seasons. If this seems
large figure, il only Suprcsts the mnrn
tuin of thn Enncn ,rostion II l. st9tc
oaic,ollv tLot thn f,rmors Of r,w, .t;n IN
,ar ','''' ''' iUe5 iJ"T' ~ ~,
Jen youl3 l,' l'lt'cculiii loo-' 1laoG lout nun
utcu ,lluSiAlS'IWo lhouSailu nllIeS OF lcnc
lSfe ioird az. Rcp0,7S, lSGj. p. 2dO), s
that actually this large amount of Bar
Fence above stated, would not long az
have proved To be less than wears sur
nlv fnr onr Iowa ru,nnro oionn m,
trr,ar, Loro ,nJ oro,.,',,,Lo,o IL, oa,''
G'i 1,,i iii g." s.''io, "iiIto O''ie
~, "."' ''nH'N i!i n'l'S - Cuiileu ol, III
only interested IN securing the cheapes
ana most elllclent fence, and protection Il
its use. There Is, therefore, Il most i'm
pOrtant bparinp in thr carefully authpnti
nrrsrntnrnt hnrr crivcn or thn claims an,
r;,,ht. of thn o,,,ro,.s ,,,, ,,to,,to,, Cr ST.
lgr.I, p,,,aa
~. ~,
'"',''" u" WV" -J"t,",w,5""V ~, "W'
y,.|,,' 'n,,W,"N" "'" L. "' H'"""" IL tVi ne
,,n,,h d.,."N'
80 S'ii ii.'hN III trP's W i"ui li' II
" 'Is' ~ Vlc'' te''"tiy p"p.iSheu II
ne me- n''Ttyst M, W thoSc openly infringing you
n''uu" hitc i'tcnts' "Hu h"NinB reference u
lour P"tcut illiR"sl",'' we nave 10 say that I'M
'"lru"'iS "'c t''c h'v'''
l,i inI1 an W tnc SUITS 'S-Hc"Iig tweuty-h'e VI
u'Eet'tI -.ilaV t! were c9hilhcncGu some t"'
c'iS "Eo' "ulG" were uciehuTt "t ALL "et'
ii"Ic'utpp WIN thc R'ca'csg ullisehcc posi-
Tle .j y US l"' Tue purpose VI ScttihB ah cary
ucrlaioh ,r, upon your l'tcntS'
ln"su 10y, WI" l%THn' us inc most SttenuouSiy
"''u "l'h tnc "pitSt o""hNcl' "nch ,lclr cases
% MttG ieaHy l"t i"l-"S you alreauy KNOW
ar''ict thc'I S,.''S' "CAnoMlcuEihS lhc 'aIIultS
VI i""' P'''"tH' cohSchtiUS 10 nave uecrecs
anu III some Instances lhJunctlohS) entered
'H".ist 'leii; anu eltner paying you larSCe
IoEnlty' or ulscohthulhB thc manufacture "i
D'r M 'yu VIZ ,-. ut.
. me ihI llScrS sHy that you Palu the ohl"
rtc'i ~, Parp rene renee 20" or inc MISSrS: DllIlhGs,
! !, ne J"IeV Nlre renee Co' OF MI Scutt, ana
'hcUl w some way I" allow the decrccS To DC
entered against mem Notwithstanding they
r' Tau Eoou ana Valiu "elchSe 10 your patents,
ms Is mere assertion on their part and
nose VINO are I'nlIlsr with the proceedings
.hat nave neeh hau III tGcse cases know better
, Not ohIy nave inc l,"tues against Wh"m theSe
iect'eS were entered haue aiihaVitS -which
're on nlc III coutt-that lhcy were ADVISED ny
.hclt couASel l" Sett!e their SUITS upon the Dest
erhl' they c"uIu MAKE altcr the testimony
was all III, put the couhSel themselves nave
lnuc slmI statements III open court, Ms the
"iioWihs VIII SNOW
Judge I. H. Lawrence stated IN ms remarks
llaue l" Judge Drummonu, III open court as
oiloWs' VIZ
was about 10 say 10 your Honor That the
Nhshhurh M"eh Manufacturing Co' the
nmplalhantS' commenced their SUITS under
hese patents wnich are mere before You,
iSa'hSt the cleveland company which was
hahularturihg similar Wirc' US your Honor
'h"wS' t"r that suit mas been often before yon
n some "t itS aspects; great deal OF teSti-
nnny was taken ana hundreds OF witnesses
we're tMaih'hcu III HluerehI parts OF lhe cnuh-
~. ,uu 'gI.''"'.y W etcis person VIM ht''
nS n""'eIto ~ ~ Wiz We m'iRu. mIm' "
l "''T III ''',' "s' "UV "lS io'
NV C''n,,'''t mu'saS uuT iof "'"I, o",,a-
I H., Wv wv, "',o .'p'sa'll'Vu ~ ni. u"oumlu
.t, CI,.oiaJ ~ .'.u III II, ~ ~
;,,,a '''' '''''' o'"P""S anu ''''' i''i-
,,,, ,,,.. a., t,,.;,,.zz r. .,...,,...
c,rch far tbe togtiunm, ht r W".Ir.' oion,. o, ="
"wod anonts t ,.,y ;%an. "u' ,I,
tL y" 5 s queen r"t.H -. .ie
~. ~ Pi VI s.'''F .rl': ''''
'"'' -, ,, ~ p''o' %
a,nn,, r Nr -, ,i'ars lug w. "orr". a'i'., y.
I'i,'' '''''s 81 "
i, ,o""t',. f NV m.''t III It"i".
'"t ~ '''I I . ", .''r s~''''VS ~ ""'oii 'u';
'' @ ,U' ' ,1 ,,, " I '",' ,, ] ,rJ o i" s,otod % % IN
u "D. '',,,,ti ,''. W w !,t. n.,ttsu :"
"l .',,It' ''i"u w y, nio':i NV. w "lI''nh !"
o'he " pei"tc your hoi'or' III my ptner court
NV l,'eSe.s 'ur uel'oSlr'InS WINCH nuu ovon
sN''l ioi 'ny p"t ., sL""il'H 'hc eA'''ouVe
= WV 'r'',e', 2'o"'.Iv W. "'to 1"sla @
,u t."'i' low i, io,,'is''l., tn'v 'np 'v"'nuo
'i"v l'D" D'.i 'rhuI' III auPp"'I1 VI Wy ~
", ,.ci'oe W s.'." Ir,,VcH' was '".',J "l.,'i','
ii's IH,e m"' "ti"'Etu .i Inu w S"lse"sIu % !"
On iooiSo VI ti'e ""Stou'i. ,i n"e'' nn"m"
"c'"ii's va anu pay t"ci'l lltBo l"!"l'9'
NOW we were deceived during part OF the
'e'iou ' G"Yo'I" py t"c N''sH!'"n !" N",vu , l
rpccs and odyiscd nmr clients occordinglv
,ofore il was disclosed to ms what were The
ctuol facts in rcrnrd ia tbesc fences. hut de-
,rsitions which were takcn ON tho other side
md information which came to ms snbscnucnt,
. rcsnitcI in dcyeinning tho facts tbat
nvr olTcndv stated IN tbc conrt !"
Mr 4 A Goodwin tbcn s,id. az nm in
nnd dcai tbe same situation no INV brothcr
,nwrenre and INV client bns scnt in his All.
nvit which shows tho nnsition we were in
md further nm in tbc discussion Jnd,o Drnm.
nond remarked. 81 assume tbnt bnfb Jndge
,owrcncr and Mr.. Gnnd,yin abondoncd the do.
o,,so il, tbns, coeos hcoo,,so tLo,, tb,r,,ht II
onId rnt bo suetoircd "
TI;s sh,,,,s o"nci,,.iroI,, aud ,,,rs+ oor,,;,oo
nv, mi,doJ norenr tLot tho doford,nta in
!, ,.s, ,asos l., ,,bioI Jnoro"s h,,o boor 80
Il ,on'o,tad ~, tSnsa dooro,s "nJ oithor st,,,,
' l ,i,i,,,, parlnJ W. ~. ,'i'r,,,,d,,oJ ,i.
oij;t,' ~ n''r ,ott amd anro"d ", '"o
'r,,' s,,,ai,, Co. ",at,;,,,, naor, H.
III of ;riro Lca,,,", b 5,,,, ea,,,,;nc,J ,5It Le
,T 1 ,,,', ,,,J LEI 49,, =, ',,,,. ,'gt,,t.
,Lt.L ,2,,, ioG,ino,J '''' '''''''
Va, wg oIsgo .g ., abont +ho oorroot,oes of ,,oso
II;staJ ",a,or,as,t, j., rain,;,,, o., ,,.Lat L.
uon,s"eu .,, r S'".'H'e''' III i'''''oN " "''' 10
BROAD CLAIM
We did not unC erstand that Judge Drum
nOnd differed materially from lis in relation
o the construction of the Hunt patent which
ontains the broad claim.
We stated to the court that if Mr.. Hunt was
he first to put n spur or barb on an ordinary
cnce wire, making combination of fence
wire and sharp spur, or barb, for the purpose
cscribed in his patent, that he was entitled
O q liberal construction of his patent, and not
My cover the particular wire and barb which
10 showed, but all mechanical equivalents for
hem which would accomplish the same result
n substantially the same manner; and we un-
erstood the court to assent to the views thus
,-,ras,od