Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

2d Session.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.

APRIL 16, 1880.-Ordered to be printed.

No. 495.

Mr. KIRKWOOD, from the Committee on Pensions, submitted the fol

lowing REPORT:

The Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred the petition of Elizabeth Vernor Henry for a pension, have examined the same, and report:

That petitioner is the sister of Edmund Wilkes Henry, late a commander in the United States Navy, now deceased. Commander Henry entered the service in 1842, and died in the service in 1873, leaving neither widow, minor child, mother, nor father surviving. Petitioner is his only surviving sister, and was born July 12, 1823. The law allows pensions to sisters of deceased soldiers or sailors only when they are under the age of sixteen years at the death of the brother under whom they claim. In this case the petitioner was, at the time of her brother's death, about fifty years of age, and is clearly outside the law.

The committee ask to be discharged from the further consideration of the petition.

[ocr errors]

2d Session.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.

APRIL 19, 1880.-Ordered to be printed.

No. 496.

Mr. KERNAN, from the Committee on Patents, submitted the following

REPORT:

[To accompany bill S. 1082.]

The Committee on Patents, to whom was referred the bill (S. 1082) for the relief of Smith E. G. Rawson, have had the same under consideration, and made sundry amendments thereto, and report the same, as amended, favorably, and submit the following report:

The report of the House Committee on Patents correctly states the facts of the case.

That report is as follows:

[H. Report No. 537, 46th Congress, 2d Session.]

The Committee on Patents, to whom was referred bill H. R. 2537, submit the following report:

In this case the committee has decided to report a substitute, and recommend favorable action on the bill because they find exceptional circumstances connected with it, and believe that no precedent can thereby be established to make a general rule for the extension of patents.

The subject-matter of this patent is exceptional in itself. It is a surgical appliance of a delicate and private nature, and its beneficial effects have been in the direction of relieving the suffering and sustaining the weak.

Of its value as an invention there can be no doubt. This is fully established by the testimony submitted to your committee of such eminent surgeons as Doctors Van Buren, Belcher, and Linsly, of New York City; Hall, of Saratoga; Bulkley, of Washington; and Bliss and Connor, surgeons in the United States service.

The evidence shows that the patent was originally granted on August 4, 1863, for the period of seventeen years; that for the first eight years there were virtually no returns, notwithstanding the inventor and his family worked faithfully, laboriously, and constantly to introduce the invention, investing all his own means, the separate estate of his wife, and borrowing funds from friends and relatives in the enterprise. But the article was of a character that confined it to a necessarily restricted market, and closed to it the ordinary channels to publicity, by advertisement and exhibition.

As soon as these indefatigable efforts had produced results by estab lishing a business in 1871, the hostility of infringers was manifested, followed by a long course of litigation, and expenses to the inventor of about $3,500.

About this period, also, the extraordinary exertions of years, and the anxieties of the business and litigation, preyed upon the health of Mr. Rawson, and he was prevented by illness for a considerable time from giving such care and attention to the promotion of his business as would develop it to the full extent. Nevertheless, he worked to the utmost of his strength, and with the assistance of his family maintained the manufacture of the patented article. Mr. Rawson died on July 9, 1879.

It is further to be noticed that Mr. Rawson gave his whole time and effort to the introduction of his invention. He did not speculate by disposing of licenses, but himself manufactured; he did not sell his invention, but struggled himself to make it a success. His accounts, verified by affidavit, show that for the entire life of the patent, the profits realized both from the patent and the business of manufacturing, representing the aggregated labors of himself, wife, and children, amount to $19,177.12. But the long illness, with the consequent heavy expenses, have left the inventor's family without money or property.

The widow of Mr. Rawson is the petitioner for the extension of the patent proposed by this bill. She is entitled to consideration, having invested her private estate in the enterprise at its inception, and having faithfully assisted her husband by her manual labor, her encouragement, and advice during all the long years of his struggles. Believing, therefore, that the exceptional character of the invention, its benefit to the public, and the peculiar circumstances of difficulty that attended its introduction to public use, render it a case eminently entitled to the consideration of Congress, the committee recommend that the substitute to the bill do pass.

Wherefore, your committee recommend the passage of the amended bill herewith presented.

[ocr errors]

2d Session.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.

APRIL 19, 1880.-Ordered to be printed.

No. 497.

Mr. WALLACE, from the Select Committee to Inquire into Alleged Frauds in the Late Elections, submitted the following

REPORT:

Your Select Committee to inquire into alleged frauds in the recen elections was directed by the authority given it "to inquire whether any citizen of any State has been dismissed or threatened with dismissal from employment or deprivation of any right or privilege by reason of his vote or intention to vote at the recent elections, or has been otherwise interfered with, and whether citizens of the United States were prevented from exercising the elective franchise, or forced to use it against their wishes, by any unlawful means or practices."

The attention of the committee was directed, by a number of affidavits upon this subject, to the State of Massachusetts, and the inquiry was prosecuted there and in the State of Rhode Island, where your committee was also pursuing another branch of the duty assigned to it by the Senate. The specific allegation was made that employers of labor in those States coerced their employés to vote as the employers wished, and that deprivation of employment was the penalty for refusal to do so. Among the data submitted to your committee in proof of this allegation was a circular, which was in these words:

DEAR SIR: Your co-operation with the Massachusetts Republican State central committee is most earnestly requested. It is in your power, by the authority you can exercise over those employed by you, to maintain the honor of Massachusetts, and keep it out of the hands of spoilers and political knaves who have selected General Butler as their candidate. His election would disgrace our State, and ruin our standing at home and abroad. A thorough canvass of those you employ and an early report to the secretary of the Republican State central committee will be thankfully received.

That this was issued in the canvass of 1878, by authority of the Republican organization, was shown to be untrue. Its origin could not be traced. It seemed to your committee to be a trick of partisan politics, originating with some irresponsible person and productive of no evil result to any workman.

A meeting of some twenty leading manufacturers and employers of labor was held at the Parker House, in Boston, during the canvass of 1878. Its purpose, as stated by the chairman of the Republican State committee, was not to raise money, but to arouse the interest of those in the meeting to the importance of the issues of the canvass; but there was no proof that any arrangement was there made to coerce employés or exercise any influence upon them. Indeed, it was expressly denied by the testimony.

Another meeting of manufacturers was shown to have been held at Worcester, Mass., in the office of Mr. Washburn, who was chairman of

« ZurückWeiter »