The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1895-06-14

John p. Nisids had HE inninga In the
now famous Curry W. W arner Company
caae In Superior Court yestsrday after
noon. Walter Hayes concluded bis .argu-
mont during the session. His closing
contentious were that tho entire ssuO0
shares OF mortar company atook we're
issued for the patent The value Of this
stock was fixed at $40 share: He there.
fore. asked for his Gent s22oVV' WIN
Iii. HAYES then spoke OF the contract
between Curry aud the Charles Warner
Company by which It 10 claim ed that
Curry was to receive one.tenth OF the
profits OF the mortar machine. II 1t had
b,en Intended that Curry was. to sreceive
one.tenth Of the profits on the mortar
sales the agreement would have 30 epeci-
lied.
he claimed that by ths use Of the new
process over $4,000 was saved 10 lime. The
value OF the labor saved was "a. 5SO.oO; IN
stacking lime, 81 800; In handling sand.
s53e. AS, and over el4. 600 In all by the use
of this patent II would have coat the
company that much more money TO have
made the quantity OF mortar turned out
by this machinery.
Mr.. Hayes alluded 70 the books OF the
Charles Warner Company and said 10 was
different when they measured out profits
for themselves. 1t was different when Cur.
ry was concerned. Some OF the charges
on the books were made three days befor
dence that a bad debt was made In the sale
of this mortar. 1t is absurd to think that
this com pany 10 making mortar at loss
under this process. Tho plaintin claims
one. tenth OF Sl4. 600. the amount saved py
the use OF the process.
John z. Nields then began his artlu ment :.
He used the blackboard for the first time
and after providing each OF Inc Jurors
with q tablet and pencil they toge,ner
marked on the defendants figure to dis
81 In mortar
But there were more from the t1g ures
used and which were brought out oy the
counsel for the defendant CONF any. The
total receipts were S4s $50. ~ and expenses
So 332. 40. making loss OF $500 ~:
He then alluded to the sale OF license
| to ure the patent to the Quaker CITY Nor.
tar Company. The amount said TO nave
been paid for the use Of the patent wne
| $500. III 1t was received then Curry IS en-
| titled to one.tenth OF IL. 1t 10 In evidence
| that nothing was paid for 1t. ME- curry
says he signed license. but no such IL.
| cense exists.
tits in evidence that Mr.. Curry was In
formed on the day the agreement was
signed that 1t was proposed to place the
patent In the bands OF persons to be sold.
Curry sRreed and it was then that the
agreement was mado. The plalntiil meas
ures his damage by the value of the shares
to which he was entitled. There was no
sale OF the patent. II a sale had been et-
| lscteu tnen Curry Woulu udNo pooh o.,
titled to one.tenth OF such proceeds. III
was purely transfer to corporation
which was 10 effect sale. The purpose
the corporation was TO sell the patents
aud to grant licenses. 1t has not effected
a single sale The stock therefore can
have no value. The jury must determine
It's value now
No one would take the patent because
IL cost too much to build tile plant
Those who hold stock say that 1t merely
has q speculative vnlue.
MIR. Curry was kept informed of thu
business. Tho moment they learned o.
Mr. Curry's claim they willingly gave his
counsel every opportunity to investigate
tho books. II the jury fluids that any
thing of value was received for the sail
OF this patent TO the Quaker city Mortal
Company, then give one.tenth OF 1t tt
Curry. The claim for $1,000 royalty OF
this case has been withdrawn.