New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-05-02
THE COURTS.
HEAVY JUDGMENT IN A PATENT CASE.
-, ,,,,ye pvorIPFD To PAY SG3,OU

HEAVY JUDGMENT IN PATENT CASE.
POSTMASTER JAMES REQUIRED TO PAY @Oo'VOo
FOR USING A PATENT CANCELLING STAMP
Judge Wallace yesterday handed down
decision in the United States Circuit Court disposine
OF the SUIT brought against Postmaster James Ior u
ages for infringement OF patent on cOmDincu stump
for cancelling stamps and marking letters Inc mar
ter to whom the had been referred reported ta W
plaintiffs were entitled to $63OOO, the defendant de'
mprred 10 the report aud the decision was on the de
Judge Wallace in his opinion says
said that the master erred because the defendant
MI have neen IN nfrngcment, and that the saving by
using tie patented invention instead of that would
m9t onDcar however but that such of the other
form would have been an nrlngemrnt ana II tta' n
uered il appears that the form was not known 10 tut
defendant and that the saving reported was IN Iart
made by substituting G R 2tIGeG 1rob@y oaher
wise have been used the saving eTgiorS @P
pears T. be wholly due to sO the dyda tat cn
only be used IN the Postal Service when Is %nony
which could send letters without pestnafkhe theh "a.
all or lessen the frequency OF the nails so mar te
posmarking could be done separate from the cancea
ron OF fhe stamps by the old method without increase
OF clerical fore. ut IT'S pleasure, thuS caIs ts re
rae will of the Office Department., so that the use
Of it III the Postal Service would not DEPRIVE .,9
coud not damnify him, and that. therefore, no uamhgo
can be recovered in this case and that no profits can DC
mr. that can he brought before The Court who has re-
ceived ANY, II It was true that because those VINO can
make usr of a patented invention could also DO withoh
IT, II would show that 10 injury resulted 70 tne owner
the paont from suen use and cur on an In Si iOI S ss
tain claims tor damages at ALL People cond 90 az WIS
done before the discovery and leave tue inventor 10 TIC
enjoyment of his Invention by himself.
But the master has rot reported any manages pc-
0f cam o@e be held abe for damage il he
nros unless 1t may be taking thc profits aud placing
Department required the mails Ia be sent with certain
frequency, aud that the postage be paid 10y STAMPS
on letters, AMI that the letters should be postmrkea
and the stamps cancelled separately, ana required Inv
the defendant should do this ut the New, OrK nIlge'
Cher himself or by the employment OF clerks Ihr dc-
frndau says in his Cs monv that tie clerks aIe pam ny
the Government ms Is d9uoi{sSs Irue III PIHv
effect faras be is concerned sun IL is 10 De %
that the business rs done according 10 lhW anu nc o
ably did not intend To- TESTIFY inat VIZ ~ pnS
done contrary TO the law Inc Jaw Is thht te t
General NAV allow to the Postmaster OF NewfoiK Cy
and to certain others, out OF the surplus revenues vi
their respective Offices that Is 10 Siy; tne 1870 ~ %
rents and commissions over ana above Tue slhrlcS as
cost among other things. OF clerks, to be adjusted ON
satisfactory EXHIBIT OF the faeis -, l..
The defendant H. therefore, TO be taken 10 nave aue
this saving ont Of moneys actually received mo ms
hands from the profits OF his office He saved Il ny
he was required to do and had just much more money
left his hands by reason OF tine infringement WhGn
rho duties were done He did this postmaster but lie
was not Obliged to do 1t. Hecoud have TeiusedtG once
or resigned IT, or have let this invention alone ne Was
could not make substrvent to his own choice. Ills
W6aU made If belonged TO the orator He paid it
TO the Government and 1t passed beyond his reach
and the orators, unless II Is recovered In tbs
suit and reimbursed 10 him under the law.
. The defendant has paid oyer TO the Government
what belonged to the owner Of the patent but that Is
no lust answer the claims OF tho owner now heong-
Ing to the orator Justice can only be done by reqnr'
ing he defendant restore the gains TO those TO wnom
they belong and leave him TO be protected as the law
provides That his official character did not excuse the
an infrnCer as II he were ordinary individual he
must be liable the extent OF the consequences as an
ordinary individual would be without regard 20 his
RECKONING over with the Government His Official char
acter is not any shield against the owners OF the patent
although II may DO source Of indemnify against tue
consequences.
It ordered that the Postmaster pay into court
s83 900 and that II be divided among the plaintiffs rs
follows: Christopher C. Campbell $42,0OOi Samuel
r. Clenton, $685. Horace q, Caswell, $1,000 and
Chares Eddy, 1876.