, 1880-01-20
SUPREME COURT.

WARRINGTON. D. c., Jun. 19,-Th0 following
Supreme Costrt decisions aro announced.
No. Vt. William G. n. laMker, appellant, va.
Elizabeth sclden. Appeal from the Circuit Court
Of tho United Suites for tho Southern District of
Ohio. This was suit fur nllrxcd Infringement
Of copyright upon "scdcn's Condensed System
OF housekeeping" The prInolphl question IT.
volvch Is, whciher tho copyright of Il book nf-
fords protection to uicthui Ut accomplishing
certnln result In tho nrta ur soicneps, which Ia
explained and aot forth In such book. This
Court h0lda that thcro Ia a claar distinction be-
tween tho book, as such, and tho art or process
which It IL Intended to Illustrate, and
TINT to give tho Author OF tho book
m exclusive right to tho art described thoroIn,
when no examination rs to its novelty haR over
bcsn made, would bo a fraul upon tho public.
To givo such right Is the province Of letters
ratcnt not Of copyright. Tic copyright Of tho
book OH bookkeeping cannot secure the exel,i-
sEyc right to mike, sel, md uso aocount-books
propArcl upon tho plan set forth III auch book.
The decree Ut tho Circuit Court ID reversed with
costs, and tho cnusc rc,nanlcd, with directions
to dismiss co.nplainunts b'll.
LAND CASE.
vs. City anl County Of Snn Fr1neEcU Ut III. III
error to tho Supreme Court OF Caifornlg. THIS
e oy y Ny II Gaseess Ms1 St ad 6y
tne aty decided TO tri ristants. Tre'io,lth snts up
t, mG.nt, ,. ~ T., ,,no.osef.,u thertnf NJ +hn ttm
a. tho aet wtss sa pssca nd hat t'
S,minsp VIII 1,,Ia i,a1rt % M,stns In onnS ~ tho
isjstrint aid sliurni,n Courts hui0w. thut
Trannuths grslntrs, upon his nw,l silnwit,B,were
" a s M IN nstona o th%t 'ti The q rvt Of nre
,,,.ttn,' III ."l A. IN i,nv'. ,m ntM,,iri Hv .rrs
.ps "u, e thot Tx tko inn,ts Wnrs aIni,u }v tn
ss afca a states , 5 % oreEn Mlt te. hit M
ebto, frunl Mexico, which caMInt was pending be-
fore tho tribunals of tho United BsAtos Ut the
ssS 1sS ses.s e t1' pf''0"p''0'' Judgment af'0''
SUIT 70 RECOVER.
No. 49, Henry lIavenateIn Ct a.. plaintiffs In
his woas vs ait % hr9ut y frct,s,' h1irs f I'M m
aiie T resrnt ts oF viTnu 70 rcevcr psupcrty ot
sa; WGn 'ts ae a1tGt II ts,a s,Sas uomgrn,nn
mi ri mMs tt,nat1,G in " tho tv ~ ltirhInmj r.
isSi le1yInx s9nsidsr9Slo ri @ an1esl prspsTty e
fhn Mfn Fro9 9 ais ra @ ~ % G; y" c1, aH ,t
~ if,on tr ~ III .nss liz trt ct1 !'cfJai
TINT tao i9rex hsiTs had no val! sm to s the
iH,,t 1 vns nitlrn"i ~ ti'a snra,ts, Enrt of
M @ whsSsS + M sas s''sa S 81 3s.s
ier o. III ftb N ~ ssninn If Tia trcetv If III"
tImitn, Stntea wifi Switzerlnn,'. ntti!r Noy. ~.
~ tna. Mlen III es I'M HI, asy FIX fS as fran
witi,iu silch t!,no rs lbs iaws Of Tic tntc whcro
te pr:psEty + s!t'%5eq ; In ay permit The I, ~ ~
nns, i3tinn r. nn + IN ,o,5f"r, ctn1 ~ tho
s,,nsa.,,a tnw % az tho In innd' Tho fuct that tho
stat9 o1 sE9lm w m xs so 10 t9 Wnn W. !t.So w1on
50 fnr d. tic riRhts Of forc!sti heIrs aro con-
riuht ri untjnn cnnnnt hn nrr,tl hy tiio lunso Of
ti;nc, md thoy aso ontItioi to RECOVER anl aoll
| tile property to curry Awny tho proceeds, Tho
dacree ii tho lnwer Court IS rove,sod with costs,
:" ~0'''S''' ''>"- AsoT,frm.
Ro l!s. TIE N9tonni sn;w.nEs nank m Of ut1, fmo
@stifIt @ H W. y ~ Mntia ~ W. G =: t ~. ~