New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-04-27
THE COURTS.
TELEGRAPH RIGHTS.

DISPUTED TELEGRAPH RIGHTS.
ARGUMLNTS IL THE CASE OF PAGE ASD THE WEST
ERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY AGAINST TIE
HOLMES BURGLAR ALARM TELEGRAPH COMPANY.
The suit Of Priscilla W. Page and the West
ern Union Telegraph Company against tie Holmes
Burglar Alarm Telegraph Company In when the de-
fendnn ask that the former judgment OF the Court be
set aside and new hearing granted, continued be-
fore Judge Blaichf0rd In tho United states circuit
Court Yesterday. The argument was based on tho DC
mnrrcr 10 the petition and AFFIDAVIT entered by the
Amrrcan Union Telegraph Company, the "abnsh' ST.
Louis and Pacific aud Union Pacific Railway Com
panIes asking for qualification or n Judgment and
Grrsion in the ease The final arguments being PIE
seu,d " st,rdIy, with the exception ~ special hcr-
in to he glvau Judge Dillon IN Friday 'nnch ihcI
est WAS Iakrn in tie proceedings. aud several prom
incnt lawyers OF tIs city, ~ well - officers y! the
various companies interested, present. The case
was opened a. by E. N DicaerSon for the plain
TN.
The question before rs To-Day, hr ra'd Is OF vastly
more importance To pdtcuccS AMI inventors ut large IN
the Iitrd STATS than to the parties IN this sn u
lrcs,on IS given for the defcudant.. 81" paeniees vi"
he tut III the position " defendants against all III
Ringers to pntcnis Of every kud. fr. Dick"r5on
a Idcd that tho statement Of defendants, asserting
;lrn i.y la anl av.,s fnunled fraudulent cOllu
sion case, was only "ntcrnS wedge for the purpose
u Introducing thr m iron. mot Important fact lie
alic.. f. The letter punished III The JOtFHM ~ Irc'
gydIkJ ~ lSbG. lnC ht%tPlU JhIiU NbnifIJ lH'fN
na ell tuai nop'd I" r.lri iFnh th orEI Guh"1iy
mat ms claim was good. Professor Morse wa- this
ai inI T. ils nrito IS srln!rd anil brcomcs
q ur,cr,icn tHe -Urrc3s Of patent IN suit against
nIber infiig.r VIII pavr the rgnt initrpose aud
prevent the Judgment against nc iT'' mlrirger.
defendants lie -tttcd tlat al That was asked by his
clients was that h the the "r, n,6n dTG o be
dc med to TcaI. TO my "Pg' nrst oGTies sno OF
medical purpose, ana containing
nm automatic CirCu5rcpkrr. H. rlaiiprd hat a re-
cicnr"S ~ ihr drrlsinn TO n circutbreakcr not
tninattc H. asked iDr mndtcai ion or mo Judgment
btrii,r TIA Court tad NOT br.h OI tbe opinion thlt tha
The case Or. P,-rs statement under oath was OPP
20 I'd 10 tie urPtfinn, 81 tbr@ plilnt!hs. irautu"Aty
uUdr IL" cree. putting MONOPOLY over MI inc t'Ie-
T' ,gicr added: Tnr proof whrl exists auh can
t,rdnl In tnat uGilvn Interested Topography. Way
n nid p '"g Nav rot tie p.trnt AID IT, n
cr.sly u! n Jutgmrnt nav boon the Fyas"ni /
81 ,rsy am, oll o." starHrul tELt sc-rw las b'ru
MI ,sitnc,i or mnt Wr Tr,vc i!at Page never aimed
taL -" i1tlI ~ , ~ n, s,,rtf lint in,r r,,I.
not involved ~ tns case may not "e Aaec' - lhe de-
Alter a recess. at l:3l p IN. DaYii Du Hey Fc'd Ton,
tug nd tLc a.huucri ir -. di hG"his liz riamrd
a.. rri,un s,,uuld be- tial the right rEOnli not Dc
iferlr ~ any company urr-pH 10 ne 10 clcsraphy
r e,rriyng mngCi.' Mr. FIrlds s"cord point was tnat
tLr ,r,nIrrr ,IlIticI tn" tluih Ol tie petition anu
mi IA, aIiay & Ittlch,d 10 Il were 20 De treated
| rs rat Ui H. ~" act OF Co"Fr,ss t"
! pIgs dll not CUEtem pl ite patent iUr any
ir,, .r,r;ir dryico, Pages instrument bsiug s.m.
NV IurpnllU 81. rirtY bc applied ~ nI'.,!s OF
srEnpcratiEW crcutbrarr' Tic fact That the "lstri
ijui Company Dy lis PRESIDENT denounced tue claim Ui
br rIgr uIcnt sufficient of its"it 10 1lsOiy tho
uttpr of tie puitiDu. Mr.. Field closed ha ARGUMENT
hy stating that ,ln HCt OF Cpngrc Wns private act
und shoua be- g.ric..y construed there DtlnE no cY-
hence rj,tt the Commissioners OF Patents aGudsrd Page
| Ia no thr first inventor ~ ho wH5 required 10 do
| Ihr argument tho plaintiffs closed ny Judge
PoltOr who claimed That trO petition lad been hcd ny
nervous who had right To Interfere ID the suit They
prro slng for reLelrng OF THAI which for them had
NOT vet been heard. Tue right NJ interfering was con-
| fused vita tho right Of inerlopug. The attitude In
which the petitioners lad presented themselves was 10
defeat the ends OF Justice aud not to b. punished for
hev would be bound by the decree II Waa changed
10 suit tho IN. My opponents say, lie added, that
they prove that the western Union Company was
tire inventor the thing, ana were great fools for buy
iug IL OF Page; and Morse at ina. llInJ was u
Injector and MOVING spri. in the company! Can they
claim that the thing Invented has no mr'it except for
the particular work Tor which II was AsSlgncdi Pago
WIS imliy entitled to that which he Invented"
Inc case was adjourned until 1870 +. M. Friday,