The Portland daily press., 1880-05-22
An Important Patent Litigation

A recent paragraph in the PRESS mentioned
disagreement between the owners of certain
machines for cutting green corn from the cob.
Later information affords the following par.
ticulars which are partly in correction of those
already published. The principal parties to
the controversy are j. Winslow Jones' of this
city, and Volney Barker (not Parker, as be-
fore stated), lately of Bridgton.
In 1869, T. S. Lewis patented machine for
corn-cutting, which soon afterwards passed in
to the control of Jones. Jones had been doing
large business in canning corn, cut from the
cobs with gagged hand-knives. The machine
was to take the place of the hand-knives; and,
it was claimed, would result in great saving
oil labor. Jones tried it for two seasons or
more; but his rivals assert that he then abau-
doned it, and returned to cutting corn with
the old hand-knives, continuing to use the
latter for about four years afterward. Jones
however claims that the main objection to the
Lewis machine was its cost.
In the meantime, Barker rot I'D a machine.
and patented it in 1875; the principle of which
Jones claims, was borrowed from the machine
invented by Lewis. The Barker machine
proved success; and has since been intro
duced into most of the corn factories in this
1t was used by contract in Jones factory at
Brldgton Jones then claiming that it was an
Infringement of the Lewis patent and of two
patents which he held on the hand knives. and
being unable to agree with Barker on terms
for its future use, had forty-five machines-in
various parts, closely resembling Barker's-
built in Portland, and furnished to his facto-
RES In different sections Of the State Soon
AFTER he brought a suit against Barker and
ms partner, Jonathan ingalls, of Otisfeld, for
m - nsrn1 larnf n hICn fo,A I
and Ingalls, retaliated by suit against Jones.
for infringement of the Barker patent; and
thus serious legal conflict was inaugurated
Since then the complainants in the latter case
nave purchased reissue of an old patent
antedatlng the Lewis,--which was granted to
members OF the Oneida Community in the
State OF New York; and have brought second
SUIT against Jones, for infringement of this
patent. Well-knoWn counsel have been en-
ployed,- Jones .being represented by C. P.
Mattocks, Esq, of this city, and Barker and
ingalls, by Charles G. Morgan, ESQ.,, of Bos
ton. The taking of testimony in three cases
has already been in progress for several weeks,
and yet is far from a conclusion. Both parties
are said to be backed by swealthy firms, who
nave an interest in the result; and it is not un-
nkely therefore that it will prove one of the
most obstinate litigations which has occurred
IN the State. Jones, it is presumed, rests his
nope OF success chiefly upon the Lewis patent:
since in recent suit in Baltimore, a decision
was rendered against the validity of the pat
ents on the hand-knives, although an appeal
has been taken from this decision to the Su-
preme Court of the United States.
Inc Importance OF .the result in the three
cases may be appreciated when it is under
STOOD that the success of either party will
eventuate in the establishment of a valuable
monopoly. Already there are over twenty
corn factories in Maine, employing not less
than thousand hands during the busy season.
and putting up about five millions cans of
corn year. There are also numerous corn
factories in other parts of the United States.
the business of all of which will be affected
however, the corn-canning business Of Maine
Is llkely to prove a growing industry; since
the sweet corn raised here is said to be superb
or in flavor and nutritive qnality to that pro-
duced in almost any other part of America.