Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1890-03-18
SPRING TOOTH HARRows.

Judge Brown, of the u. \. Court, nj
Detroit, Mich, rendered on the 9Th Inst,
an important decision on the Reed patent
which pcrpetually restralns the manu-
facture, saie anil use of Messrs. iIemcni
A sons harrow, on the ground that II u
an infringement of th. patent.
This de,ision has Wide Interest with
manufacturer, dealers and users of this
valuable farm Implement, whose har-
rows are claimed 10 h. an infringement
on this patent.
The patent ha. been In litigation sinc.
1881. slnce which time eight different
.tyles Of harrow. have been enjolnci by
th. court. as an infringement. The liti'
CATION has b~cu expensive and the case.
have been fought With grcs, adroiines'
aud ability by the defendants, whom the
court Was finally ccmPelle,i,o hold were
infringcr-.
Judge Brown'. opinion Il ,oluinlnou.,
covering ten pages of manuscript, aud
seem. to cover all the contro,er'~i
grounds.
n. SAYS .'the many adDudlcatlons
which have bcen made In thl. aud other
state. sustaining thl. patent, oby,sie.
IA. necessity of our considering at
length all the former devices claimed ss
antlcipa,ions, aud preclude q possibility y
~ cur holding that there i M patenta-
BILE novelty In the Invention.
While We are bound to hold thl. Ia bc q
valid patent. which Ne do, not only oui
~ defence a. those sdludlcaiions hut
FROM our own examination ~ the
case.
IL make. No particular dlf'crrnce
whether the party seeking Ia avoid the
patent, use. biting edge. AZ a scai on
whlch to rv.t Tho tooth, with hani of
straigh, clip bearing upon the opposite
.urfar. of the tooth bctwrcn the cig,s.
or whether he use. curved srai made
to conform to the shape ~ the too'h,
aud q biting c,lgc clip bcaring upon the
opposite surfAcc to hold " Ia place. such
a reversal or Interchange Of function u
immai.rial. The object In either case !.
"a obtain hnnrr grip upon the tooth
by contracting the pressure upon two or
thy- points than IL po..lble by disiribu.
ting Il uniformly over the cnilrr surfac.
II the clip. Ia thls respect u !. possible
the d.frndani's device l. superior 10 ih.
plalntir-.. hat Ne cannot say that u not
an Infflngrm-n, ot hl. patent. Dli vi.
fc,l la doabt rvgarllng this question of
Infringement Ne .hould feel bound Ia
resolve those doab,s In favor of the
plaintiff"
The owners aud license. 10 this patent
claim that all other spring tooth haffows
now on the market are infringvmcn,s on
thi. patent a. interpreted by the courts.
aud will ultimately d. so dechicd by ihe
courts. Dealers aud users vii do vel
In the future Ia ascertain Tor Tact
whether harrow. offered Tor .ale afv an
Infringement or uo, before pufcha.ing
Heretofore the eight different styles of
harrow. which wefc marketed with
guarantee. that they wcrr not an In
frlngrmeni, werr, al the snd ~ stfcnu.
ou. aud expensive llilgations, held by
IN. court. a. h. infringcmcnis.
Farmers, dealers aud all oihcrs Who
are Interested In "falr play aud half the
rad. will D. Interested Ia know vhrih-
cr Me..r.. llcmeni 4 son will nos
promptly make good their guarantee a.
their customer. Who have their lnffing-
ing harrovs, or whether they viii leave
them exposed % suits, lnjunctions,
damage. aud costs a. some other psriic.
enlolDs,i hsY, done In the past, where
their customer. have h---n compelled To
pay ten. of thousands 10 dollars Tor
damage. aud cost. for Infringement.
without the slightest protection, AMI
wh-n called on to make gooi their guar.
ant... have rr.lstoiiaymenis Ia the end
az IN. Law IssaleT. anal users of this
class ~ Implement. vill ave themsrlSe.
trouhle anil money by refusing Ia handle
infringing goods, or goods which are
falfl, within the scope ~ the patent a.
interpreted by the courts. II dealers
aud user. decide "a purchs.. harross
which are fairly within the patent a.
interpreted In Judge Bosn'. opinion,
they will TAKE good Indemnity, as the
owner. aud lic-nss. of thi. patent viii
no doub, protect their trade ,o the ut
most 20 their ability Again.i the .sle or
u.e II Infringing hirro~..-Mainc Farm