Year: 1877




his victim, and amused himself by sticking
splinters In his body and witnessing his
The colioquy between Colonel Young and
Judge Crump becoming quite acrimonious,
Judge Hughes said the Interruptions must
cease.


Colonel Young, continuing, said counsel
for defence had charged that this was a con-
spiracy OF the liquor-dealers to defeat the
law. No doubt the liquor-dealers were op-
posed to the law. Unjust and oppressive as
it is-singling out particular class OF citi-
zcns and putting them under the bon Of
suspicion, and surrounding them with spies
and iniormers-no wonder they want to de-
feat the liquor.law. Suppose this was the
purpose, what has that got to do with the
question? Mr.. Yeunglng might say that
the State, in carrying out this law should
not use his property without compen sation.
The Legislature might have avoided all
this by not tying the State down to one
single register to carry out the law, and
when it IL found that the State is using the
property of one who interposes for the pro-
lection OF his rights, why counsel eyclaim,
| aYou are obstructins the great State OF Vir-
ginia, and it is monstrous." Laws Of Con-
gress eco be oyerriddenand private rights
violated that DR.. Moffett and the punch
might collect the revenues OF the State.
That question had nothing to do with the
case, for this is a question OF legal right.
Judge CrlImp had asked the Court TO dis
solve the Injunction and let him go on with
! the manufacture OF the machines, and he
would keep an account Of the profits and
turn them over to the plaintiff. This
| is tie very reason why the Court
should impose the restraining order,
and r;.T leave the plaintiff to his sepa-
rate actions against all the numerous


parties who may use the invention. What
| right had the defendant to manufacture
these machines and fix the price so low that
there would he no profit, and then render
the patcntce an account. The very pur-
pose OF the Injunction is to restrain the
commission OF such an injury.


| Colonel Young apologized for occupying
the attention OF the Court for so long time,
which would not have been done except by
way Of reply to The counsel who spoke yes
tcrday. .-. .a.t-s


Judge Hughes decided to overrule the
motion for the postponcment OF the motion
for preliminary Injunction, and fixed the
hearing for tomorrow morning. lie sald
Il great deal OF useless discussion had been
INDUCED i'm by counsel on both sides not
pertinent to the case. Judge Hughes SUD
nitted the following suggestions to the
counsel in tic case.


Bv section III o: tie United States Re-
yiscd Statutes, the Circuit Courts OF the
United States have jurisdiction, exclusive OF
the State Courts, OF all cases arising under
the patent.rigtt laws Of the United States.
This cause is therefore here by necessity.
The complainant could carry it nowhere
else. 1t is certainly not here by choice OF
the Court The question to be tried Is whe-
thcr the complainant has proprietary right
to the exclusive use in Virginia OF areglster,
and OF which defendants register Is an in
frinscment. That, with such qucs-
tions as necessarily enter into il, Is
the only question that is here for trial.
With the incidents of the question, with the
politics of the Motfett register, the Court
has nothing to do, and ia not permitted
by the limitations Of its jurisdiction to have
anything to do. The Legislature OF the State
OF Virginia has lately devised new system
OF taxation, wise, just, and proper, SO far
rs this Court can say, but it has unfortu-
natesy confined the State to the use OF one
particular register or instrument named IN
the act. II her use OF that instrument would
deprive the complainant OF apropertr which
the law OF the land gave him, and which the
fundamental law of the United States, OF
the State, and Of England, whence we de-
rived our laws, declares shall not be taken
from him except after just compensation or
by due process OF law, then the Legislature
OF Virginia has. placed the State before the
Court in an attitude which every good
citizen must regret, and / myself would
exceedingly regret il her counsel should
bring her. here in q carping temper. But
however she may be brought here, or what
ever incidents may attach, legltlmately or
illigitmately, to this adjudication, the Court
must decide the simple legal question pre-
sented for its decision with exclusive re-
gard to the rights OF the case, and without
anv respect whatever TO persons, be they
State or citizens. The simple question is
whether the complainant's rights will be in-
frinsed by the use OF the particular inStrll-
ment to which the Legislature OF Virginia
has confined the State in proceeding for her
new system Of taxation. This question OF
infringement is evidently difficult one,
and the court would like to have the aid OF
counsel-the intelligent and kindly aid OF
counsel-in deciding it. And the Court Is
ready to concede in advance that the
citizen who believes that this Motfett
register is an infringement OF complain
ants rights may be as loyal to the inter-
csts, the good name, and the honor OF VIZ
sinia, as the citizen who believes 1t not an
infringement. 1t is charged in the answer
that there is combination Of persons in the
State whose aim is to defeat the State in her
revenues. II that be so, it Is one OF those
unpleasant incidents Of this cause to which
have referred, but which does not form any
part Of the simple and only issue which the
Court has Jurisdiction to pass upon. The
reply Of complainant to this charge is, that
these persons are merely erdeavormS to de-
feat by legal means what they believe to be
burdensome law upon themselves as
class. But those matters constitute the poll
tics OF the question, over which the Court
has no Jurisdiction, and can take none. All
that is said on that subject in the answer is
irrelevant, cannot be considered by the
Court, and might just as we'll be stricken
out OF the answer. -..-.-.... .. .. ...


Judge Crump expressed his regret that
the Court had given its opinion II advance
upon the question Of conspiracy, as he was
prepared with authority to support the an
swer.


Judge Hughes said that question had
better be discussed first. The Court dis
claimed anything except to contine the case
TO the question Of interference.


\ colioquy took place between counsel rs
to the propriety OF consolidating the pre-
llminary anu nnal bearing OF the lnl unctloll,
and continuing the case to fixed day, and
the subject was held under advisement.


Judge Hughes remarked that If it was
desirable to try the question OF "interfer-
ence" by jury that most excellent one
was in attendance, and the case could be
tried tomorrow.


. DEAN SWIFT ANTICIPATES PROFESSOR
HALL.-In reference to the late discovery of
the moons OF Mars, correspondent OF the