The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1881-01-13
Important Decision Of the Commission
er Of Patents.

The Tom mfesioneTs Vi atcuss mas Iou-
dered his decision in the case OF w. j.
Browne of Rock Island VS., E. FL. Wright
of Davenport, which is OF tremendous i'm
portance to the eultivater manufacturing
interest of the United Ssates, and worth
more to the Eagle manufacturing COM
pauy of this city than all the gold aud
silver mines ever struck by Davenporters,
as yet-much more.
The controversy related to springs APP
piled TO whsel cultivators TO raise or as
sists the operator in raising the beams or
drag bars to::which the shovels are attached
During the daily operation Of the machines
| il ia necessary to raise the beams above
the operative position great many times
TO remove weeds, turn the machine. cite.
As the beams aud showers aie quite heavy
the operation of hangtns them Is very
Ia bofious and tiresome. And it is to reduce
THE IL Dor, by having the springs relieve
the onsr,or Of more or less Of tha weight.
that Mr.. E. A. Wright, agent of the Eagle
manufacturing company, devised the
srripes in controversy wi ich act
ed with minimum lifting effect when the
beaus and shovels were down iu an opera
tive nosi,icp AID with maximum and
greatly increased effect as the beams as
cend. Ia this way. the ploWnlan is en-
| al1ed 10 use strong lifting spring. which
gives material gssisteues in raising the
beams without causing the shov,ls to ride
ca, Of lie esouLd when 10 action,
Mr.. Wright coLcolved The invention in
the winter OF 1876 = II. Before that
eprirgs had been APPLIED 10 carry the
beans and give The o. an easy motion
when he sEoyeIs we're IN The ground, but
gave ht,lesor 70 assistance in raisiDg the N
uboye the ground -srd these were in al
most general use whsn, o May, 1879. Mr.
Wriytt flied his application icr a patent
b. for, the latter date, howe Yer, two years
atttr the invettion had Hen applied, the
id. d OF Mr.. Wright sas caught by other
cultivator makers, md applied by
them TO their machines
Now. then, Mr.. W j. Browne, then
superintendent of Buiord & Co.'S Rock
Island pillow woke, opposed the granting
of patent to Mr. Wright. aud filed his
application for a patent in October.
1879, Ave mouths after Mr..
Wright had placed. his papers
AID proof in the hands of the
commissioner Then one George Shaver.
representing a manusctory ia southern
Illinois, also interfered with protest
against issuing patent TO either Wright
or Browne.
Mr.. Wright contractedsto assign his in
terest to the Eagle manufacturing com
papy. and Buford ard Co.. became part
owners in Brownies inyention-thus the
case really was: Baford & Co VS., the
Eagle Manufacturing Company.
A great amount of testimony in the case
was taken in this city last fell before Nath
French as notary public, the witnesses
being examined by attorneys of all the
| parties in the case. Testimony on the
part of Browne and his witnesses was also
| taken, and this also was the fact with re-
gard to Shayer-and oil was sent to the
Commissioner. with drawings. and all
other necessary documents.
And Yesterday a telegram came from
Dodge & Son. of Washington, attorneys
for Wright, stating that the commissioner
had rendered his decision, which estab-
lished the validity of the Wrisht's patent
that, "as he was The first to concsive,e lex
plain, and make. drawings. the first to re,
duce to a working, successful device. and
the irst to apply for apatent. and having
put the invention on the market at or
about the same time as the other party, is
clearly entitled to the patent"
When we state that cultivstors can
hardly. be sold, to day. which have not q
spring of the nature. if not the exact shape,
of that invented by our townsman, Mr..
| Wright. the reader may have some idea of
the value of that patent. Yet it is little
| more than steel rod. properly curved.
working through ink or pulley. as it is
raised orilowsred with the handle. Sever
al manufactures have paid the Eagle
folks royalty lfor use of the spring for
nearly Is months. and even one of the
establishments engaged.in contesting Mr..
Wright.s claim offered the company $500
for shop right. no matter which way the
case might bes decided.
Whether the contestants will appeal to
the Supreme Court of the United States
or not remains to be seen. There is no
doubt, whatever-there can be none-that
the testimony before the commissioner
establishes the priority of Mr.. Wright's
invenuon-and it is quite likely that the |
COMMISSIONER decision will be allowed to |
settle the matter.
The patent is a bonanza for its owners. |
The name and fame of DR.. Bulls Cough |
Syrup are known throughout the land and |
everywhere il il relied upon as the specific |