Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-02-06
Interesting Decision with Reference 10
Certain Of BonSaCk'S Machines,
As TO BREECH-IoApING GUNS.
Right of the Government 60 Vsc
the Inventions OF the Citizen
Charleston Cyclone Insurance
Cascs-0thcr Opinions.

n OF NillltnS WIN itaiH'h
down, among those OF most general
interest bcing that Of W. 4 liulse and
r. II. Wright against the BonsackS Ma
chine Company. from the Circuit Court
OF the Western District Of Virginia.
affirmed Opinion by Judge Simonton.
The statement Of the case is as follows:
Wright was large stakeholder IN the
company. and its general manager. with
an interest in its business in foreign
lands. Hulsc was employed as a carpenter
but was afterwards assigned to work
under Wright In China. While there he
saw French machine which pat him
upon the idea OF an Improvement 10 the
Bonsack machine 10y which a crmping
device could be substituted for paste in
making cigarettes. lie notified the com
pany OF his discovery. and was given
opportunity 10 perfect the device. which
nc did. lie disposed Of an interest In his
invention 10 Wright and then they offered
20 sell Il 20 the company for $4,000. But
Il happened that Hulse was under a con-
tract with the Bonsaok Company to pro-
mote the interests Of the company. and
IN case he should make any Improvement
in the machine the same should he for
the exclusive use Of the company. The
company. therefore. called his attention
70 this fact but offered 10 pay literally
for the invention. Hulse and Wright
then offered 10 sell the invention to a
rival cigarette machine company and An
injunction was obtained against them In
state court. The case went into the
United States Circuit Court and the in
junction was pCrpetuated. The case was
then appealed and the questions made in
the assignments Of error are these.
I. What was the contract between the
company and Hulscr Is IL Invisible. con-
sisting OF independent covenants? And
is II any part Of IL without consideration
.. Is IL an unconscionahle or unreason-
able contract
5. is IL void as against public policy?
I. Is the amount reported by the master
just and reasonable compensation?
The Appellate Court overrules all the
objections and orders that the decree
az the Circuit Court he affirmed In all
respects. each party paying its own costs
IN this court.
Counsel for appellants telegraphed
Monday night Withdrawing the case. hat
the court held that tho case was already
I'm the hands OF the court and must be
passed upon.
The Government and Patents.
Another interesting case was that Of
Robert Is. Dashiel rs. James r. VI. eros
49, - ,,..'. I'm '' .,-.' 1,'tea
COZ I'm tho lower COur; 70 was adluigct
thai letters-patent granted samuel Sea
bury for Improvement IN hreech-loading
cannon were valid. and tnat the same
had he-u f.frfvrfl hr Robert % DaShie!i.
also. that tne sad Sesorry ard his as
sisns recover from said defendants GER
tain profits and damages. ana tnat
Perpetual injunction oe ISSUED Ia the
hil % vas caimti that hdsh.eA. an eh-
sian 90 The intel states navy. connect
e wiki the Bureau of ordnance. con-
spircl with CpUmo4ore Iols.r and oiner
persons. and intGrSeI upon the rights OF
the owner O. the patent by using the
Inventions ~ said Scatlry in me manu-
lacturr - hrscCa-l0al.nS cannon.
THE GOVERNMENTS RIGHT.
ri ...t...-.. a.-,. ,i.h .h, .,~r. ~, .ha
,--..l-.-.l..., g. ,,.. a.. ,r,,cr.y ~ tra
49, al t.,, o-,,,..,ls.,ior f,r e,,,n
b., 49,, .r,a CO., 80, or
e.. &c., ~..-..
W ,bt-t .,,. .bo cc,ee,, ~ tho
l,-,,r ~ %. ,-r.,.,A., d.,i.e vrue ~ D.
6(s.-stl. .,.4 .so,,ll b. Ch,s.r..t . !,
90 d.
.....-,.. ..,-''o-.. -
- .,..,-', 80 49,. ,..,.e,,t,-
~ g. 3d.. ,....-e,,a..r, ,ar,tc,,-
49,. .,. .'.. ' -. 81, - -, e. IL
,,.-..' ...-,fl.,.,,, - -
r.., a.. 49,
,''' ~ -.
-
7'-- . -
~ .,,e-.,..,tt. -
..-l'-..- - l-'.,,.ai 80
-. -. go. - ~. ,,..to,. p,
'''' '''''
HOW 4o 'i-I FAl.
on the second point the Court holds
If the Invention claimed 10y COM
piainant~ is being used and infTi"ged by
those representing The ln.ied states. then
'hc owners 90 the same can recover just
compensation for such use and infringe
me.t from the government ny SUIT IN the
Court ot Claims or by means Of an ap-
IIcpr.aicn made by Congress for that
purpose, On application made TO that
body
The Court finds no evidence or fraud OF
conspiracy 20 infringe the iehts OF the
owners OF the invention.
Ensign Dashieu. who appears as
Dlalutin in this case in the higher court
recently rendered his resignation as en-
sign. with the Intention OF going into bust
ness in New York, but he was soon pro-