The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-09-08
IANSTON co. SUES FOR LIBEL.
BEGINS ACTION FOR Sa5O,0o0
AGAINST MERGENTHALER co.

s,at Based on Letter which Latter Com
pany's President. who's Also q De.
PENDANT, Wrote R0osevclt-C Complaint
says That All Charges Are Disproved.
On account OF letter to President Roose-
relt, written and sent by the Mergenthaler
Linotype Company, through the COM
oapys president, Philip T. Dodge, and con-
tanning sundry statements defamatory
Of the Lanston Monotype Machine Com
many the Lanston company has sued the
Mergenthaler company and It's president
for libel and demands damages In the sum
Of $4,000.
The Lanston company. II win be re-
numbered, sold to the Government by
contract with the Public Printer, the Hon.
Frank W. Palmer, seventy-two Of the Ianston
typecasting and composing machines,
After several months test Of the Lanston
machines In competition with machines
Of the Mergenthaler manufacture at the
Government Printing Office in Washington.
The seventy-two machines wore to cost
upward of 1921 900.
In an effort to cause the revocation OF
this contract, the Mergenthaler company
addressed to President Roosevelt the letter
which forms the basis Of this suit, and which
the complaint characterizes as a malicious,
ecandalous and defamatory libel, intended
to injure the Lanston company in it's good
name fame and reputation and its esteem
and credit in it's business. The letter bore
date June "a, 1905, and aside from request
ing the President to cause the withdrawal
Of the contract. asked him to direct an
Investigation Of the facts attending the
giving Of the contract for the machines
and as to its propriety and legality"
In support Of its petition the Mergen-
thaler company asserted In its letter that
the order or contract for the Lanston ma
chimes was made corruptly, clandestinely
and in violation Of the law, and that several
Of the Public Printers immediate assistants
held stock interest in the Lanston COM
pany, contrary to law. Various other &C
cusations we're made In the letter, which
also said.
Your petitioner further alleges that he
believes the order for the purchase OF said
seyenty-two Lanston machines to be bad
administration. extravagant and scan
dalous.
Your petitioner also represents that it
Is unwise that an expenditure OF so large
sum should now be made under an order
privately and secretly given, at a time
when the Public Printer was disclaiming
any intention to purchase additional type
setting or typecasting machines without
notice to or without the knowledge of
those owning and daily marketing a ma
chine more efficient in operation and capa-
bic OF performing a greater variety and
better style of work at saving to the Gov
eminent of not less than twenty-five per
cent (25 per cent? as compared with the
lanston machine"
In the complaint in its action for libel
the Lanston company denies categorically
the various charges made against it and
sgailst the Lanston machines in the letter
to Pres ident Roosevelt. pronouncing them
unqua edly false. False Is the assertion
that the contract was made corruptly
and in violation OF law, say the plaintiffs;
untrue and without any foundation in
fact the statement that assistants OF the
Public Printer held stock interest in the
Lanston company.
The complaint sets forth:
.,Thlt the statement contained in said libel
that composition by the Lanston monotype
machine is far more expensive than the
machine" is absolutely and unquaIifedly
false, on the contrary, composition is las has
Printing sot once n0 but Wherever used greatly
cheapened by the use Of the Lanston mono
type machines in the place Of the Mergen-
-, That the, allegation contained In said
libel that the order for the purchase Of said
seventy.two ~, Lanston machines" is bad
lous is itself scandalousiy false
-, That the represen tation contained in said
Ss a machine fs mSfe SSas nd a
!ysIiety, and better style Of work at saving
Ave per cent. as compared with the Lanston
machine" is wholly false and untrue: the
fact being that said Lanston machine per:
work at far less expense than any other
featured.
The, complaint recites the facts OF the
Presidents reference Of the Mergenthaler
charges to the Keep commission, which
found them unsubstantiated, and speaking
OF Mr.. P. I. Dodge's testimony before the
commission says:
The said Philip T. Dodge failed, omitted
ana meg neglected in any manner by his testimony
Syhs fSnpany and himsef to the Presidsns
81 and a. t of of2er %
i nesses called by said defendant established
dompste fasy q each hRd every al
The suit is brought in the United States
Circuit Court for the Southern District
q New York, through Joline, Iarkin 4
hathbone, attorneys for the Lanston COM
pany. which demands S125 900 from the
Aergenthaler company and $125, 900 from
Its president Mr.. Dodge.
In the recital of second cause OF action,
the complaint sets forth that said Lam
2on typecasting and composing machines
we're well known and used throughout the
civilized world having achieved their
worldwide reputation by reason Of their
simplicity Of operation, adaptability to
every class OF work, affording now print
ing surface Of type for each Job, for their
facility and speed in correction Of their
product, for the easy handling Of work
and its low cost, and were and are manu-
faetured by the plaintiff under patents
exclusively owned by 1t and granted by
me Government OF the United States Of
THE trade name Of Monotype, indicat-
ing the ability Of the machine O cast single
type. was duly registered pursuant to the
copyright laws Of the United States OF
America, the right to the use thereof be-
ing exclusively the property Of the plaintiff,
ana the plaintiff was and Ia entitled to
al the benefits, protection and advantage
., such copyright laws Of the United States
y In June, 1904, it IL shown the Public
rrlnter entered into contracts for the pur-
chase OF both Lanston and Mergenthaler
machines, and machines OF both makes
nAt l. Al( -tv.At v.SP