This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1883 Excerpt: ...a third more work. But it is alleged that this patent infringes an old patent which is soon to expire, which has been bought up by Mr. Burleigh." Fio. 96(6). IMPROVED WOOD ROCK-DRILL. Scale, A (The " old patent," referred to by Mr. Hudson, was the Fowle patent, which, it will be remembered, Mr. Burleigh purchased, owing to his own invention having also infringed the original direct-acting-piston claim of Fowle.) In his testimony before the Committee of the Legislature, in 1872, f Mr. Hudson further said (testifying as to the introduction of the Burleigh drill at Hoosac): "A contract was made with certain gentlemen (Dull, Gowan & Co.), and they came on and commenced work there. After they commenced work, a gentleman from Michigan (Ann Arbor), whose name I do not recollect, came on there with a drill that he had projected, and these contractors took that drill, and used it a day or two--i. e., they experimerited with it a little, and were satisfied with its success. But we were satisfied that this drill was an entire infringement on Mr. Burleigh''s patents, and that our obligations to Mr. Bnrleigh ought not to allow us to suffer the Michigan drill to be used by the contractors. It was there a few days, and was used to their satisfaction, I believe, and it operated very well; but we were all satisfied, and Mr. Crocker very particularly Tirged, that as Mr. Burleigh had allowed us to use his drill, and there was this understanding between us, wo were under obligations to exclude the Michigan drill. This was done peaceably and quietly, but that was the sentiment which prevailed." House, No. 359, p. C (Massachusetts Legislative Documents, May, 1868). x f House, No. 375, p. 14 (Massachusetts Legislative Documents, May, 1874). Sec " ...
