On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
The sewing machine interference case, upon which the parties have been taking testimony for six months or more, between the application of Wm. C. Watson, manufacturer of the " Ten Dollar Sewing Machine," and the patents of A. B. Wilson, held by the Wheeler Wilson Manufacturing Company, the Grover Baker Sewing Machine Company, and I. M. Singer Co., was decided last week by the Commissioner of Patents in favor of the latter, thereby establishing their exclusive right to the " rough surface and spring pressure feed" in combination.—New York Tribune. [To prevent misapprehension we would state that the facts in the above case, as we understand them, are simply these:—W. C. Watson, believing that he could prove a prior date of invention over A. B.Wilson, applied for a patent on the spring pressure feed, and obtained a declaration of interference. Testimony as to date of invention was then taken upon both sides. The Commissioner of Patents, upon an examination of the testimony, decides that Watson has failed to establish his priority of invention and his application for a patent is accordingly rejected. But there is nothing in this decision which establishes the "exclusive right" of the above-named wealthy firms. Questions of this latter character are beyond the province of the Commissioner, being left to the courts for adjudication.
