The Windham County reformer. (Battleboro, Vt.) 1876-1897, 1896-02-28
FAKE
ADVERTISER


publications may have noticed TN
mast week the haring advertisemenl'
IF thc makers of the so'cailed U. >
eenarators. which call for some atten
tion upon our part r, q
A couple of years ago this u >
concern scattered broadcast q clrculal
asking "Who was the son OF Anania'
and Sapphira!" This question IT MAJ
been said was answered when a consPic
nous official of that Company testified
few months ago in the now famous
trial at Newfane, VT, Of an action, tt
compel the prominent creamery irn
of Francis Batcheder IL Co., OF Mont
heller. Vt, to pay for certain Y. ,.
separators which naturally could not
he made to do what had been claimed
for them. and in which suit BatcheldeI
4 Go. were of course successful. large
~ nv reason of the curious testimony
of this conspicuous witness who IS SAID
IN claim such ancient If not cnvlable
ancestry.
One might be uncharitable enough
TO assert that the author OF the adver-
tisements to which reference is made
as having recently appeared was tins
same scion of Ananias and Sapphira.
The Vermont Farm Machine Go. tries
TO belittle the Importance of the De.
cree of Infringement of the De Laval
patents given by the United States
Courts against Samuel Hotchklss, and
publishes what purport to be letters
from Iiotchkiss, SAID to be thelr
agent. from Hubert their agent
and the financial hacker of Hotchklss
in illegal infringemcnt-and from a
user of one Of such infringing md
chimes who the De Laval Company in
the enforcement Of its lawful rights
enioined from the further use of such
machine.
The statement purporting to have
been made by Hotchkiss that his law
yers assured him that the DE Laval in
fringement claims could not be sus-
tanned if contested, is untrue, and We
challenge Hotrhkiss or anyone else
except the person who testified at New
fanelto .nake thus statement under
oath Hotchkiss' attorneys we're the
well known firm of Rlsley, Robinson
Love, Of Utica, \. !. Hotchkiss
abandoned the further and final con
test Of the case against him because ne
was assured 10y his attorneys, after a
thorough investigation by them Of the
state Of the art, that it was waste OF
money to proceed further and that he
was sure to be beaten. These attOr
leys also assured other infringers OF
the same patent who were equally in
terested in tine result with Hotcbkiss
that they could do nothing, and final
y actually refused the protfered tinan
,ial support of an outside infringer, SO
hopeless did they consider any attempt
o answer the De Laval testimony
which had been put upon record.
After Hotchkiss and Hubert. the
J. S. agent and financial hacker of
iotchkiss had begged and pleaded |
With the De Laval Company for its in,
Iirect aid in permitting them to en-
orce the collection of the illegal notes |
hey held from the buyers of the in
ringing machines the further use of |
which had been enioined, and for bet
er prices and greater consideration
han the De Laval Company gives to
he honest and straight forward buy
rs of its machines, they went TO the
'ermont Farm Machine Co. and it is
aid obtained from it a lot of machines
( less than hdI the price it charges to
Their buyers of its machines, and in
his way some few of the previous users
the infringing Hotchkiss machines
ave been induced to try the U. S. at
bout haTprice with the further con-
Iteration presumably of such untrue
nd misleading statements as those
ow published.
We leave the public, including the
~ who have been deluded into buy
lg L. S. machines at full price. TO ;
ldge of these matters for themselves,
al we challenge the denial under
tth by anyone-except the person
no testified at Newfane) of any of I
lcse assertions.
And since the Vermont Farm Ma t
line Co. introduces the subject, we
'all Of the opportunity to an /
'unce for the information and eau i
Oh of whoever it may concern that r
are assured by counsel including g
e most eminent patent attorneys in a
is country, Messrs. Harding & Hard 4
z, OF Philadelphia, and Messrs. Ban o
ng ~ Banning Sheriden, of Chic4- f
b. that the S0-caHed L. =. N 7chjnes (as n
II as ne machines of their agents Hotcb- t
SS ana HHibert, the fuTler uSe Of irhich il
coortS hare dh'eady eRioinedj do IN a
u5tediy infringe the De Lardi patents: Il
d that we have only delayed prose- Il
ting the makers and users Of such o
ichlnes from the fact that other a
Its are now pending which equally s,
ect the so called U. S. machines.
d from the fact that the number of al
en- machines in use is hardly suffi- Of
mt to justify the legal expense, and 81
% from the fact that the present q, 8,
machines have been apparently but ia
nporary and unsatisfactory make s,
fits 10 style of construction, since M
makers have devised and applied &c
patents upon various new and pre- II
nahly improved forms of construc- II
D. which still more broadly and pc
MY infringe certain of the De La re
patents. Their machines most re in