Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1905-1919, 1913-05-27
PRICE MONOPOLY
CASE Reversed
FAMOUS "MIMEOGRAPH" CASEIs
UPSET IN CLOSE OPINION
by COURT.
PRICES MAY Be CHANGED
Retailer of Patented Articles Cannot
BE Restricted as 90 Price by the
Manufacturers.

WAsHlNGTON, May 90 The So
callod "patont monopoly which
threatened TO prevent cut rates Of re-
tdlors In an patented articles on tho
market was destroyed today by de-
cision Of the supreme court of the
United states.
The court held that the owners of
patents are not given The right by the
pataont law to control the price at
which retailers must sell to the con-
sumers. The decision In words app
Piled only To nerve tonic for which
"A patent had been issued, but viii
control al patented articles being
sold under restrictions not to resell
at cut rates.
The court reversed the policy
adopted In tho famous "mlmeograph"
case, decided little over year ago,
when only seven pustlCes were on the
,onch, but allowed that case to staI.
30 far AS II goes. Thus was accOmp-
lished what has been unsucessfuly
sought In congress ever since the
"mimeograph case" was decided
In the "mimeograph case" Justices
McKenna. Lurton, Holmes and Van
dervented upheld the right Of patent
owners to be used on the patented ar
ticles sold. Chief Justice White and
Justices Hughes and Lamar dissented.
To-day Justice Day who was absent a
year ago from the cour' and Justice
Ritney, appointed since then, Joined
with the chief Justice and Justices
Hughes and Lamar In overruling the
policy advocated by the four justices
who handed down the courts decls-
ion in the "mimeograph case"
Justice Day announced the decision
of the majority members. The four
minority justices contented themselves
with n mere statement that they dis
| sented, Justice Day said the manu-
facturers relied chiefly on the "mime-
oGraph case" An examination OF the
opinion Of the court In that case, he
said. showed that the restriction was
restrained because the machine was
sold at cost or less and that the own
cr depended on thep rofit realized
from the sale of unpatented supplies
to be used upon the machine for re-
ward for his invention. No such con-
ditions existed he added, In the pres
ent case.
In a further attempt to distinguish
the two cases, the judge said the re-
striction In the "mimeograph case"
was In regard to the use of the ma
chine and only a qualified title" to
tho patented article passed. In the
present case, he pointed out. the re-
striction was to keep UP the price"
the sale to the retailer having been
absolute.
Determination to decide all the
ca Sea under consideration by 1t before
adjournlng for the Ions summer re-
cess, the supreme coutr Of the United
states today further prolonged the
present term by the unprecedented act
70 fixing q date as late ~ Saturday
June IA, as tentative final decision
day. 1t will meet on June 8 to hand
down decisions and If the state OF
the business demands" Will hold an
other decision day after June H.
About fifty cases were disposed Of
today. buc there are still before the
court some 1l5 cases.
The cases undecided include the
state rate, the inter mountain rate,
the porter Charlton. the "Turpentine
trust" the newspaper publicity law
and the Nashville grain cases.