The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-11-12
TO RELEASE LIGHTNING.
SUPREME COURT AGAINST
THE sAWFER-HlNN PATEST.
The Validity of the Berliner Transmitter
Patent Must be Tried Before
the Highest Court.

WASHINGTON. Nov. 1.-the supreme
Court OF the United States to-day. in an
opinion read by Justice Brown. sustained
the Edison incandescent-light patent
against the claim OF the Consolidated
Electric-Light Company using the Saw
yer-Mann system OF which 1t was claim
ed that the Edison system was an in
fringement The Court said that the
claims made for the Sawyer-dann pat
ent were too broad to sustain the patent.
The case came from the United states
Court for the Western District of Penn
sylvania. which gave Judgment in favor
OF the Edison Company, That judgment
being affirmed
In an opinion rendered by chief JUS
tice Fuller. the Supreme Court OF the
United States to-day decided that 1t has
Jurisdiction over the case OF the United
States vs.. the Bell Telephone Company.
TO cancel the Berliner patent, which the
Court OF Appeals for the First Circuit
decided against the Government. The
telephone company moved TO dismiss the
appeal for the reason that under the
Court OF Appeals act. the supreme Court
OF the United States had no jurisdiction,
because the case was one arising under
the patent laws OF the United States,
and judgment of the Court OF Appeals
In such cases were made final. The
United States opposed this. on the ground
that the act gave the right of appeal to
the United States in cases where 1t was
a party. The result of the decision Is
that the case must come before the
court for final decision.
TIMBER AND GOVERNMENT LASrs.
The United States Court for the South
ern District of Alabama found James ID.
= Sal .f. ,fn, ,e ont ft,ag
and selling two hundred trees from
homestead entry ne made just before
cutting the timber. The Court instruct
ed the jury that Shlver had the right TO
cut the timber for making Improvements
or for exchange for lumber TO make the
improvements but not for sale. The case
was appealed TO the Court of Appeals.
and that court asked the Supreme Court
of the United States to answer these
questions:
First Whether lands duly and prop
erly entered for a homestead are. from
time of entry until final disposition by
the Land Department, no longer lands
OF the United States. within the mean
ing Of Section 246l, Revised Statutes.
Second Can a citizen who has made
a homestead entry upon public lands
be held criminaiy liable for cutting and
removing after such entry standing trees
and timber on the land?''
After discussing the scope and effect
OF the land laws. the Supreme Court an
swered the questions in an opinion read
by Justice Brown. the first in the Mega
tive and the second in the affirmative.
The application OF counsel for an aG-
vancement OF the appeal of Elverton r.
Chapman. the recaicitr2nt Sugar Trust
witness before tho Senate Investigating
Committee. was denied BY the supreme
Court to-day. Chapman applied 10 the
District Court Of Appeals for a writ Of
prohibition to prevent the Criminal Court
from proceeding 20 try him upon the
Indictment found against him for refusing
10 testify before the committee regard
ing the stock transactions of senator's.
The writ was denied, and Chapman APP
pealed 70 the Supreme Court. In view
Of the near approach Of the day fixed for
trial in the Criminal Court. the Supreme
Court was asked TO advance the appeal
for hearing. There Is nothing now.
apparently. to prevent the trial from
proceeding on the 18th OF December, as
fixed by Judge Cole, Saturday.