Gilson v. Blanchard
This text of 83 Mass. 420 (Gilson v. Blanchard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
By a fair interpretation of the language of the contract, the passage of the proposed act and its ratification by the president are made conditions precedent to the obliga[422]*422tian of the defendant. The words, “ Then I will not increase ” &c. refer to these events as well as to the payment of the money.
A reference to the apparent object of the parties confirms this view. The patent law protected Mr. Blanchard’s machine, but not its products ; and lasts made upon similar machines in the British provinces were sold in market, in competition with those made by his licensees, and without the payment of any royalty. All the parties were interested to obtain protection against such competition by an amendment of the patent laws; and, as an inducement to the licensees to contribute towards the expense of an effort to procure the amendment, Mr. Blanchard agreed that, if they would contribute the sum stipulated, he would, in, case they succeeded, give to them the monopoly of supplying the market within the limits of their licenses. But he carefully guarded against putting the control of the matter out of his own hands in case they should not succeed.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
83 Mass. 420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilson-v-blanchard-mass-1861.