The Redwood gazette., 1896-04-02
"KI6KING" CRATER.
Wants an Injunction to Restrain
the Sale of His Own Sun
Cherry Trees.
HybridiZer knudson Wants Dam
ages from G.. W. H.
Heidemdnn.

oehoa'iohdl peLlClOn OF EX-COunty At
torney Madigan at New Ulm last Sat-
urday there was another equally as
sensational case before Judge Webber.
The case was without precedent and
the attorneys on either side we're
obliged to draw on their imagination,
rather than cite cases backing up their
various conclusions, as is their Gus
tomary practice.
The case in question was the ap-
plication for an injunction asked for
by farmer named Knudson, residing
near Springfield, through his attorney,
Jos. A. Eckstein of New Ulm, restrain
ing G. W. H. Heideman, who owns a
farm adjoining that of Knudson, but
who is now station agent for the Chi
cago ~ Northwestern Railroad Co. at
New Ulm, from disposing of cherry
trees, the original of which was the re-
suit OF careful study and great
deal of grating on the part of Knud-
son.
According to the prayer of the peti-
toner, who asks for a temporary in
junction, pending the trial of the ac-
ton at the next term of the Brown
county district court. Knudson has
been a horticulturist for many years,
having made it a careful study. Heide-
man has also given more or less atten-
tion to the raising of small fruit. Knud-
son, for several years past, has been
grating and hybridizing different
fruits, cherries, etc., and as result he
was the sole hybridizer and owner of
a new, prolific and wonderful cherry
tree, producing what he termed sun
cherry He says that the cherry was
the result of many years of hard work.
After perfecting the hybridization
and witnessing the tree bring forth
the alleged superb fruit he started to
bring forth new trees trees of the same
kind of fruit. After he had number
of the latter under way the petitioner
alleges that Heideman requested of
Knudson the right to cultivate some
of the plants, Heideman, the petitioner
alleging, agreeing at the time not to
dispose of any of them, and that the
title to and possession of the plants
should be vested in Knudson. There
upon Knudson, as he claims in his
petition, allowed Heideman to ctlti-
vate few of the superb fruit trees.
Heideman carried on a great sun
cherry tree manufacturing or growing
enterprise and up to last fall had sold
several thousand choice sprouts at
fabulous prices, if the prayer of the
petitioner is to believed. Knudson
obtained knowledge of this fact short
time ago, at which time he discovered
that Heideman had another lot of the
variety already to throw upon the
market. He Immediately applied for
an injunction restraining Heideman
from making the sale and has COM
menced an action for damages by rea-
son of trees already disposed of, the
right to sell which was alone invested
in Knudson.
The question in this case is peculiar,
inasmuch as there is no protection at
law to any person inventing and pro-
ducing new tree for fruit or other
purposes. It does not come within
the patent laws of the United States,
and it appears that Knudson's only
remedy is in equity, which will prob
ably lie, providing the facts alleged in
the petition are true. No Supreme
Court cases were cited at the argu-
ment on the petition, tending to show
that the action, if correct, would lie,
and as before stated, the only argu-
ments we're upon the facts alone, and
devoid of any law, except as covers
from conclusions of facts.
Clarence Wedge of Albert Lea, an
eminent horticulturist, a member of
the staff of the Farmers Institutes,
and who was present at the institute
held in Redwood Falls several weeks
ago, figures quite prominently in the
case as an expert witness for both
sides of the case. Mr.. Wedge has
some queer notions regarding the con-
nection between religion and the