CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS.

SAMUEL S. GREENE, in Equity, vs. WILLIAM BISHOP.

The defendant objects to the 5th, 6th, 7th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th direct interrogatories as immaterial, irrelevant, asking opinions not admissible.

T. K. LOTHROP,

Deft's Solicitor.

Interrogatories to be propounded to Dana P. Colburn, Albert A. Gamwell, James L. Stone, Zuinglius Glover, John Kingsbury, of Providence, in the State of Rhode Island, and Daniel Leach of said Providence, on behalf of the complainant in the above entitled action.

1st. Please state your age and occupation?

2d. Please state whether or not you have read and examined, and are you familiar with, most or many of the useful and valuable works on English grammar and language; and whether you have been in the habit of studying and teaching works on these subjects; and if so, for how long a time?

3d. Are you familiar with the complainant's works on the analysis and structure of the English language; if so, how long since, and in what manner, did you acquire such familiarity?

4th. Do you, or do you not, consider these works of Mr. Greene, the complainant, to contain novel and original matter? If you do, please state how many, and what particular points you so consider to be original with him, and explain the same fully.

5th. If, in answer to the last interrogatory you state any points you deem original, do you think that you would or would not have known the facts, if these points had been previously published?

6th. How nearly do Mr. Greene's books resemble that of De Lacy, when treating of these particular points, if any?

7th. When did you first see Mr. Greene's works or either of them, and did you or not then form an opinion as to the novelty and originality of the same, or of any of the points thereof? and if so, what was that opinion? State also whether you have made subsequent examinations and studies thereof, and whether your opinion was changed.

8th. Have you seen and examined Covell's Digest of English Grammar? 9th. Please state whether Covell's Grammar contains the particular points, or any of them, which you have stated to be original with Mr. Greene, if you have stated any such.

10th. Do you or not think that Mr. Covell could have arrived at these results and could have set forth these points, if any, without having previously seen Mr. Greene's books?

11th. What particular portions of Mr. Covell's book, if any, do you, as a teacher of Grammar and language, consider to give it its value, and would be likely to lead to its adoption in Schools, in preference to the Grammar formerly in common use?

12th. In what points, if any, does the second edition of Mr. Covell's book differ from the first edition?

13th. Does or does not the second edition of "Covell's Grammar" bear as much resemblance to "Greene's Analysis" as the first edition does?

14th. What, if any, is the difference between the two editions of Covell's Grammar, and if any there be, is it a difference in substance and meaning, or in phraseology? Do the alterations, if any there be, in your opinion render Covell's second edition a more valuable school book than his first edition, or do they render it less valuable?

15th. Is the similarity between Greene's and Covell's books, if any there be, obvious at first on a hasty perusal of the two, or does it require a careful examination to detect it? Were your first impressions of a similarity, or of a want of similarity, if any, strengthened or weakened by a subsequent more careful examination and comparison?

16th. Please try the experiment of analyzing a sentence by Mr. Greene's method of analysis as set forth in his book. Please analyze the same sentence by the method set forth in Mr. Covell's book. Please set forth at length the sentence so analyzed, with references to the pages of both books, to show the rules, and names, &c., you use in doing this. Are, or are not, the results similar? Are the technical words used in both books the same or similar, or dissimilar? Would the result be the same or similar, or dissimilar, if this sentence were analyzed by the method set forth in any other book with which you are acquainted? Are or are not the same technical words used with the same meaning in any other book with which you are acquainted? Would you or not be likely to have known it if these results or technical words were to be found in any other book?

CLARKE & SHAW, Complainant's Solicitors.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS.

SAMUEL S. GREENE in Equity, vs. WILLIAM BISHOP.

Cross Interrogatories on the part of the Defendant, to Dana P. Colburn, Daniel Leach, Albert A. Gamwell, James L. Stone, Zuinglius Glover and John Kingsbury, all of Providence, in the State of Rhode Island.

1st. How long have you known, and what have been your relations with Samuel S. Greene, the complainant in this action, whether intimate or otherwise? Please state fully.

2d. Whether or not you have been associated with him as a teacher? If yea, when, and for how long a time?

3d. Whether or not you had any knowledge of the complainant's work on Grammar, prior to its publication?

4th. When and for what purpose you first saw and examined the complainant's work on Grammar? Was it or not at the complainant's request?

5th. When and for what purpose did you first examine Covell's Digest of English Grammar? Whether or not it was at the complainant's request? Have you read the Digest entirely through, and if yea, when did you first read it through?

6th. Whether or not you have ever been consulted by Mr. Greene with reference to this suit, or have been asked by him to examine Covell's Digest of English Grammar, or to compare that with Greene's book? If yea, state fully the time and circumstances.

7th. Please name the principal valuable and useful works on English Grammar which you have examined and are familiar with. Also state which of them you have read through, and when you first did so.

8th. If you answer yes to the fourth direct interrogatory, point out the pages, the paragraphs, and exact passages, in the complainant's book, containing these original and novel points, and specify the precise novel or original points.

9th. Have you, or have you not known teachers of Grammar, prior to the publication of the complainant's book, give instructions in analyzing sentences, and employ various methods of analysis for this purpose?

10th. Did you or did you not, prior to the publication of Mr. Greene's book, at any time employ a method of analysis in teaching Grammar?

11th. Were or were not various methods of analysis, or of instruction in analyzing sentences in common use, among the teachers of English Grammar, prior to the publication of Mr. Greene's book?

12th.

Do or do not all methods of analysis resemble each other?

13th. Have you or have you not known some teachers of Grammar to employ in their instructions a method of analysis very closely resembling Greene's? 14th. If you answer in the affirmative the last five interrogatories, or any of

them, please state from what sources or authorities these methods of analysis are obtained.

15th. Have you studied the general subject of the elements and structure of language in other books than those on English Grammar? If yea, to what extent, and in what works and from what authors?

16th. Did you or did you not first learn from Greene's book or books the analysis and elements of sentences into members, and the nature of their construction, or any such matters? If so, state what portions of such knowledge was new to you on the reading of Greene's books.

17th. How many different works on English Grammar have you examined, and what are the names of them all?

18th. Did you ever previous to seeing Greene's books, or either of them, receive oral instructions or lectures on the nature of language, and the elements and principles of general Grammar? If yea, when, where and from whom?

19th. If you answer the 9th, 10th or 11th direct interrogatory, then please state specifically in answer hereto, each and every portion of Covell which you deem quoted from Greene, and each and every idea, principle, term and arrangement in Covell you deem derived from Greene.

20th. Do you or do you not think Covell's book a more desirable one than Greene's, for the purpose of instruction in schools? And which of them would be preferred for that purpose, if there were no copyright in question, nor any difference in the price, by judicious teachers of schools, who were not at all influenced by prejudice or partiality in respect of the compilers or publishers, nor committed to a preference between them?

21st. Have you ever given any written recommendation of Greene's book? If yea, when and for whose benefit?

22d. How do you esteem Greene's division of quotations into direct and indirect? Is it original? Is what he calls an indirect quotation, a quotation, or is it not?

23d. Specify what parts of Greene's terminology or his nomenclature is original with him.

24th. Whether or not you are a teacher, or in one of the public schools in Rhode Island? If yea, how long have you been so?

25th. Whether or not Mr. Greene is the Superintendent of the Public Schools in that State? If yea, when did he become so?

26th. Whether or not you were appointed by Mr. Greene, and whether or not he has any influence or control with regard to your appointment, removal or continuance as such teacher?

T. K. LOTHROP,

Defendant's Solicitor.

DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND, ss.

On this twenty-eighth day of April, A. D., 1855, personally appeared before me, Joseph S. Pitman, the commissioner named in the annexed commission, Dana P. Colburn, who being duly sworn according to law, to testify the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, gave the following answers to the several Interrogatories annexed to the said commission.

To the first direct Interrogatory he saith:

I am thirty-one. Teaching is my occupation.

To the second direct Interrogatory he saith:

I have read and examined many, and am familiar with quite a number. I have been in the habit of teaching, and studying such works, since 1843.

To the third direct Interrogatory he saith:

I am acquainted with them. I am very familiar with them. I saw them the spring of 1848, early in the Spring. I then examined the works, and have since taught them.

To the fourth direct Interrogatory he saith:

I do consider them to contain very much of such matter, and a great deal of such matter. I cannot state the precise number of points. I can mention many of them. The first which I will mention as in my view original is, that instead of confining the attention almost exclusively, to the separate words which are used in discourse, as previous writers on English Grammar had done, the author of these works presents each sentence as a whole, designed to express a thought, and each word or group of words, which is employed to express any part of the thought, as an element of the sentence.

Another point of originality is that he has developed, exhibited and classified, these sentences and their elements, in a manner which is new, complete, systematic and symmetrical, yet at the same time simple.

As another point, or rather in explanation of this, I will mention the following peculiarities of classification. Sentences are of three kinds, viz: Simple, complex and compound.

Elements are classified in five ways. First, as principal and subordinate. Second, as of five kinds, subject, predicate, adjective, element, objective element and adverbial element. Third, as being of three classes, viz; Words, phrases, and clauses. Fourth, as simple, complex and compound. Fifth, as similar or dissimmilar, that is of equal or unequal rank, or co-ordinate and subordinate; consequent upon this last a division of the connectives, which bind these elements together into two classes, co-ordinate and subordinate.

Again, in developing this system, he has devised many new terms, or employed others with new applications, such as elements of a sentence; principal and subordinate elements; co-ordinate and subordinate elements; similar and dissimilar elements; similar and dissimilar propositions, rank of elements; basis of an element; materials of sentences; assumed and predicated attributes; partial compound sentences; abridged propositions; simple complex and compound, applied both to elements and sentences; phrase restricted to a proposition and its