Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-12-01

f1catfons of this case and substituted 9TH
ers In their stead. but to do all acts that
! were necessary to prevent the discovery
! OF the fraud TO procure the allowance OF
the patent to Heany.
1T is also specifically charged and we
| expect to show. that the defendants de-
strdyed the file wrapper and the specifi-
cations. and the letter of March 2S. 1905
| and the amendment A and the drawing.
and that they substituted in the place Of
these records other documents.
Patent was allowed in this case No
| vember :. 1907. and was actually issued
December 3. 1907
Friendship of Conspirators.
Now We propose to show in proof o.
this case in addition to the evidence al
| ready outlined showing the close friend
ship and intimacy between the three de-
PENDANTS. that while this case was in tine
condition described the defendants enter
ed into this conspiracy and carried it out.
We expect to show that in September,
1906, just before this case would he
abandoned. Barton wrote letter i'm the
office for the purpose of preventing the
abandonment.
we further expect to show that just
A few days before this patent was issued
the three defendants met i'm York: Heany
resided there. Barton obtained leave from
his office and arrived at York Friday.
November !. where he was joined the
following morning by Everdins.
THAT afternoon. night and the next
day-Sunday-the three defendants were
engaged in Heany's laboratory in the
preparation OF the new specifications. and
of the new amendment to take the place
of. amendment A. and of another
amendment which was to he filed as Of
a date in September. 1907. the application
having been allowed by Heany and Ever
ding for some reason to become aban-
doned
amendments were prepared they We're
brought to Washington and were substi-
tuted in the files o fthe case by Barton,
the old ones being removed.
No Report of Fraud.
THAT Everding went to Philadelphia
and there had prepared new drawing on
the 4tl and 5th of November 1907. and
that he and Heany came to Washington
on the 9Th of November, and that on
the morning of the 9TH of November the
patent was taken up in the patent office,
with the new dra wing before the patent
examiner, and the patent was granted,
Barton neglectng to inform the examiner.
as was his duty. of the frauds which had
been nperpetrated in the case.
I'VE will further show that the parties
apparently dceming ii necessary to re-
move from the files the letter which was
written in March. 1905. prepared a new
letter. that the signatures of the acting
examiner and the person who wrote the
letter were forged to the new one, and
we will show that this letter, which
purports to have been written in March,
1908. is upon paper of different kind
from the paper i'll use in the department
in March, 1905.
+ "Of course, it was necessary to get rid
Of the press copy of the letter in the
letter book. and We will show that a
press copy of the forged letter was made
and substituted for the original letter
The defendants also found that it was
necessary to change the file wrapper
itself and they destroyed the old one
and prepared an entirely new file wrapper
which appears now to have been written
entirely by Barton himself. not by any
of the clerks who should have made the
entries thereon.
There were also, wherever it was nee
essary. written in the examiners register
In Division 81 the entries correspond
ing with those put by Barton upon the
file wrappereitself.'