Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1885-12-25
AN IMPORTANT DECISION



The decision of Judge Wheeler OF the
United States court in The famous Amrri-
can Diamond Rock Boring cases, in favor
of the respondents, which was first given
to the public through tine columns OF the
FREE Press ON Thursday has excited
great interest among marble men, cSpc-
cialiy in the vicinity Of Rutland where the
respondents are principally located. The
history Of the CuSc~ is especially interest
iuL owing to the magnitude Of the inter
C-tS involved. the respondents. OF whom
there were twelve, Including some OF the
largest marble dealers IN The country
The HCrujd of friday has the following
in relation to Inc Cu~c~: Action was be
gun by the American Diamond Rock
Boring company AGAINST the various re
SpUudents for using diamond drilling ma
chimes manufactured by the Sullivan Ma
chine company of ClarcmOut y. H.,
which the compliments claim iufrluLcd
on Il patent owned by them. The dccIe
ion Is an important one, for although the
cOmplaiuauts have appealed to the nitcd
tically ends ten years of expensive lti4a.
ton. The decision was glNcu on IL rear
gumcnt of the case ut the recent term Of
the United state, court at Brattleboru.
where Is. +. IhurstOn of Providence. X
l., Il famous patent lawyer, and f. g.
Thompson OF New York city. appeared
for the plaintiffs, and +. r. Rice Of New
York and Col. \. +. Walker of Rutland
for the defendants. The history of the
case Is an interesting one. The sullivan
Machine company began to manutaCtu rc
diamond rock drills for Chamnelliug and
gadding in $50. The bits have solid
heads IN which rows of black diamonds
are set. The Channcllers cost from five
to six thousand dollars and the gadders
from $1,000 to $1,000. The American Dia-
llI
ed, at once brought suit in the New York
courts against the sullivan company,
claiming tnat the latterS method OF dia-
mond boring infringed on their patent
taken out 10y r. RudOlphc Lc,chot which
was originally for an annu!ar diamond
bearing blt, taking out core in its work,
and adapted for long distance boring.
The patent WAS about this time IeiSSued
Tor the New York company to cover Il
solid drill head as well rs the annular one.
The hcuing on the first case in 1876 re
suited IN decision for the Diamond
Rock Boring company and an order for
an accounting for all the profits made by
the sullivan company in the manufacture
OF the drills. After this, suits were brought
in Vermont against SheldOns * SlaSOn.
ellison * WOodin and the Sutherland
Falls Marble company, and after they had
dragged in the courts awhile, Judge
Wheeler followed the precedent of tho
New York court and decided for the com
claimants, and also ordered an accounting
for the profits the marble companies had
made III using the machines at Their quar-.
Ties. An injunction was put on using
them and j. ". Stewart wa, appointed [,
make the account which the claimants
were entitled to. In the meantime sam
uel 4. Duncan, who was appointed by the
New York court as master in chanCery It
make the account in the decision there
brought in u statement awarding the Dia
mond company about $4,000 and costs,
When the report was presented Judg
Shipman listened TO new arguments ant
reversed the decision and dismissed the
bills. He decided that the reissued Les
chot patent was invalid, because its claim,
were larger than the claims of the origi
nal patent, as they attempted to make II
cover d solid head, while the first patent
could only protect an annular drill. The
complainants appealed to the tnltet
States Supreme Court. Judge Wheeler
then ordered II new hearing on the Yer
mont cases, which were accordingly re
argued at I3rattlebOro last month, witt
the result as first stated. Now the paten
on the Lcschot drill has expired, and onl,
damages can be recovered, and as DoIl
parties have spent ten years in Wlanglnl
and about so, 900 each IN money, the case
are not likely to go much farther. Judg