The evening times., 1900-06-05
A new AND NOVEL POINT
An Examiner May Testify in Dero-
CATION Of lis Official Act.
Patent O6'ce and Navy Department
Men Interested I'm Decision by
Iustice Cole I'm the Suit of Sir
william Armstrong for Infringe
ment Of Gun-BenrinE Patent.

Omcials at the Navy Department and at
the Pension Office are greatly interested
In a novel point that has developed in the
suit Of Sir William Armstrong against Ad-
miral O'Neil and other officers OF The Blu
reau of Ordnance of the Navy. now on
trial in the Supreme Court CT the District
of Columbia This suit was brought on
United States patent granted to Brankston,
an Englishman. in 1888. now owned by the
Armstrong;, which is alleged to cover the
system now used by the Navy Department
in manufacturing the gun mounts for 13-
inch and other heavy guns, undS, the pat
ent granted to Lieut.. Joseph strauss In
1895
Justice Cole had already ruled that the
grant Of the later patent was decision
of the Patent Office to the effect that there
were substantial differences between the
two inventions. The assistant examiner in
the Patent once whose duty 1t is to make
an exhaustive search for interference be-
fore a patent is granted was put on the
stand By the plaintiffs to prove that in
granting the later patent he overlooked
the earlier patent, in spite Of the objec-
tions Of counsel for the Government
TO the effect that the examiner, in
having once passed out his patent as
quasi-iudicial officer. should not be al
lowed to stultify himself by testifying that
he failed to do his duty.
This point made by the Governments s
attorneys was Overruled by Justice Cole.
who allowed Assistant Examiner Cameron
to testify to the effect that in making the
search through prior patents the United
States patent issued to Brankston. which
should have been cited, was hidden behind
the tin slab used to separate the classes
of patents. and that his search upon the
Strauss application had failed 70 find either
the English patent, which was granted Tor
the same invention. or the italian patent,
although both were known to exist. and
should have been found in the files Of the
Patent Once. 1t was also brought out on
cross examination that this particular ex-
aminer had been dismissed from the United
States Patent Office on charges Of official
misconduct after an investigation which
resulted from the sworn charges OF Mr..
Wilkinson. the special counsel for the Gov
ernment in defending the case.
Examiner SeatOn. in charge Of the Ord
nance Division in the Patent Office. who
had officially acted on the BranEst0n pat
ent originally, and who had also officially
acted on the Strauss patent. testified that
in granting the latter patent he had for
gotten his action in the former case, and
his attention not being called TO the
Brankston patent by Assistant Examiner
Cameron in connection with the Strauss
application, he believed that the latter was
overlooked
The representatives of the Government
do not believe that this testimony will
have much bearing on the outcome of the
case. but the decision of Justice Cole "a
the effect that a quasi-judieial officer car
be allowed TO testify in deTogation OF his
own oEicial act is REGARDED as novel