New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-06-15
COURT FREES THE AIR
WRIGHT Iniunctions Against Cur
tiss and PauIhan Dissolved.
BIG MEET WILL Benefit
No Bars Against Foreign Avi-
ators Who May Take Part In
International Contests.

ANYBODY can build flying machine
now and but Charles X. Hamilton who
had blown from New York to Philadelphia
and back the day before. stopped right
there He was beginning TO comment last
night at the Hotel Aston the decision
of the United States Circuit Court of APP
peals in the afternoon reversing the lower
court which had granted temporary in
junction to the Wright Company against
the Herring -Curtiss Company and Louis
Paulhan In upper room Glenn II. Cur
tiss. who had flown from Albany TO New
York gave out a statement. and Mr.. Ham
ilton did not want to say anything TO con-
fict with it.
The courts decision. which embraced as
well the temporary injunction obtained
against Louis Paulhan, the French avia-
tor. sent a thrill of Joy through the whole
Curtiss camp. 1t meant the cancellation of
the $4,000 bond given by Mr.. Curtiss when
the fight was begun. and freed the aviation
field il was said, for at least year, from
restrictive litig alton, for the case. based on
alleged infringement OF the Wright patents.
must still be decided on it's merits.
1t was said last evening that the removal
of the injunction would free the Aero Club
from It's contracts with the Wrights pro-
viding for a license fee for all aero meets
and would make the international meet in
October one free from all restrictions. and
hence broader In its scope.
The decision of the court is not subject
to appeal 1t was late in the afternoon
when it was rumored about the Federal
Building that the case had been decided.
The clerks of the court. however, did not
give it out for publication. They kept it
secret, locking the papers up when they
left for the day. The court said. after CALI
ing attention 10 the fact that the injunc-
ton in the Curtiss case was granted at
Buffalo:
There is no dispute as to the proposition
that the question whether or not there has
been infringement of this patent. however
broadly ID may be construed. depends upon
the question whether not in defendant s
machine a tendency TO spin or swerve IS
of the vertical rudder. That. of coUrse-on
its theoretical and its practical stde-is a
question of fact. The record before us con-
tains numerous affidavits which were not
presented until after original decision and
which. as both sides state, were admitted
upon motion for rehearing without discus
sion of their contepts by the court. but for
the purpose of bringing the case more
fully before the Court of Appeals.
Sharp Conflict of Evidence.
u
above stated, there is a sharp conflict OF
evidence numerous atlantis testifying. All
their statements are ex parte affidavits
made without any opportunity to test their
probative force by cross-examination.
Under such circumstances Ii seems to US,
irrespective of any of the other questions
in the case. that infringement was not so
clearly established as to justify a preltmi-
nary Injunction.
Mr.. Curt1ss was found in his room in the
Hotel Astor with his counsel, Emerson r.
Newell On bed was map of the greater
city and its environs. which was used by
Hamilton in patient study before he left
Governors Island for Philadelphia. Curtiss
had his statement all ready. 1t follows:
While the motion for an injunction has
been undecided by the courts, / have re-
Trained from discussing its various phases
as much as possible, but at no time have
| had any doubts to what the final de-
csion would be. In fact, the original de-
on my part TO large extent, as well as TO
the fact that the motion was brought while
| was flying al Rheims. and my side of the
case had TO rest on my unsupported testi-
mony regarding the operation of my ma
chine In the evidence admitted by Judge
Hazel on the motion for a rehearing my
previous affidavits were fully subStantiated
by others who had successfully flown my
machine.
tiss machine declares that there is never
any swerving occasioned by the movement
of the ailerons. which was the principal
contention made by the Wrlgnts; VINO
oDerator CT my machine to use the steer
ing rtICder in order to overcome this alleged
turning tendency.
the movement of the wing tips of their
aeropIane for balancing causes the machine
inc 70 their statements. which are true as
to their machine, it becomes necessary to
turn the rudder TO the side offering the