The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-11-04
THE AMERICAN CO. n1NS.
THOMAS sTREAT LOSES THE SUIT
OYER HIS PATENT.
Several Important Decisions Rendered in
the Quilted states Circuit Court Of APP
peaIs--The Interstate Commerce Act.


The United states Circuit Court Of APP
peals met here yesterday with Judges
GoR. simon,on and Brawley presiding.
One OF the most interesting cases decided
was thar OF the American Tobacco Com
pany VS.. Thomas Streat. on appeal from
the decree OF the Circuit Court from the
Eastern District Of Virginia. at Rich
mond.
The record OF this case is voluminous.
consisting Of some three hundred and fifty
printed pages, but the questions decided
while Of great interest TO the parties to
the litigation are not Of special import
ance TO the public.
In December, 1883. Mr.. Streat obtained
letters patent for AN alleged new and
useful Improvement in cigar makers i'm
plements."
Some ten years thereafter. in 1893. Mr..
L. Whitock secured a patent for an al
legged new and useful Improvement in
binder clamps for cigar punching ma
chimes. which patent was subsequently
assigned 70 the American Tobacco Com
Dany
EMPLOYED BY WHITLOCK.
In the interval between the issuance Of
these two patents. Mr.. streat was en-
plOyed first by Mr.. Whitlock and then by
the American Tobacco Company and his
machine with his consent was used. for
time in its entirety as patented and az
forwards without the apron. one OF its
essential elements.
Mr.. Strcat ultimately demanding roy
atty on his machine or wages greater
than the American Tobacco Company
was willing TO pay him. left its employ
mcnt and sued the last named company
Tor an infringement OF his patent
Judge Hughes held that the American
Tobacco Company had infringed on Mr.
Streats patent and directed an account
to be taken 20 settle the amounts Of his
damages. From this decree the Ameri-
can Tobacco Company appealed and the
United States Circuit Court decided that
said Company had not infringed on Mr..
Streats patent. and reversing the decree
OF the court below. directed that his bin
should be dismissed
Very many technical and interesting
legal questions were argued IN the elab-
crate briefs and oral arguments Of coun-
sci on both sides. but the foregoing. gives
the substance OF the case and decision
thereon.
Judge Con rendered the opinion in the
case.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE. LAW.
The Interstate Commerce Commission
vs.. the Northwestern Railroad Company
Of South Carolina and others was the
title Of a case in which Judge Cor rem
dercd the opinion affirming the decision
OF the lower court II was an appeal
from the Circuit Court OF the United
States for South Carolina. Judge Simon
ton rendered the decision Of the lower
court and Judge Gon was so much
pleased with II that he embodied II IN
the one he wrote This was a case IN
which the Truck Farmers Association OF
Charleston complained Of rates charged
by common carriers in transporting pro-
duce 10 New York The Interstate Com
merce Commission was appealed 10 and
named maximum charges. when the case
came before Judge Simonton he decided
that the court had no authority 20 en-
force the orders fixing the rates for truck
between Charleston and New York
In other words. his decision was. that
the commission had no authority Of law
10 fix rates. and the higher court took
the same view Of the matter.
LONG AND SHORT HAUL.
The case Of Henry W. Behlmer vs. the
Louisville and Nashville Railroad Com
parry appeal from the Circuit Court Of
the United States for the District OF
South Carolina. IS one involving the
right Of the Interstate Commerce Com
mission 10 regulate the rates charged
for long and short hauis. In the case at
issue the defendant company and its con-
Meeting lines charged more for hauline
a carload Of hay from Memphis Tenn.
10 Summervire S. c.. than from Mem
phis 10 Charleston. though summeryille
was p miles inland from Charleston. The
matter was brought 20 the attention Of
the Interstate Commerce Commission and
an order was issued prohibiting the
charges complained OF. This order was
not obeyed. The plaintiff in this case APP
piled 20 the United States Circuit Court
for an injunction looking 70 enforcing
the order OF the commission. IL was To-
fused and the bill dismissed. From this
decree an appeal was taken and the lower
court was reversed. Judge GOn in his
opinion says:
.The decree OF the court below dis
missing the bill is reversed. and this
cause is remanded 20 said court with in
structiCns 10 enter q decree herein. re-
curing the appollees and each Of them
10 desist from charging. demanding. col
| Letting. or receiving any greater compen-
sation in the aggregate for the trans
portation OF hay or other commodities
carried by them. under circumstances
and conditions similar 10 those set out IN
the petition filed I'm this cause, from
Memphis. In the state Of Tennessee "a
summcrville. in the State Of South caro-
lima. than that confemporaneousiy
charged and received for the transpOrta.
ton OF hay and other commodities. re-
spectively. for the longer distance from
Memphis aforesaid. % Charleston. IN the
State Of South Carolina. Said court vii
also sec that the requirements Of said de-
cree are Immediately carried into effect
and enforced. rs provided for I'm said act
TO regulate commerce. and will further
direct that the appeilees pay all costs
OF this proceeding. and In addition there
10 such reasonable fee % the appellant !
counsel as that court may under the cir
cumstances Of this case. think proper
and just.
Judge Morris issented from the opinion
OTHER CASES.
other cases decided were these;
Fila : Tunstal administrator of Lew
Is Tunstau. decd. plaintiff In error. vs.
Richmond and Danviue Railroad Com
parv. and Asheville and Spartanburg
| Railroad COMPANY. defendants. m error.
Error TO Circuit Court. western District
OF North Carolina. az AsneNule. Opinion
hv Judge Brawley reversed ana remandec
o. 49, .~f.f Tfeunrf nv IUfga Cor