Blandford Takes the Blame in City Flume Patent Suit
The Statesman accuses the city administration of forcing a contractor to take the fall for a costly legal infringement on a flume project.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
City Attorney H. S. Blandford is taking the blame for the city's settlement in the Allen suit regarding patent infringement in the building of the Worley flume. The Statesman suggests Blandford is under pressure from the dominant political machine, which has threatened his job. The city faced legal action after building a flume that infringed on Charles I. Allen's patent for connecting wooden stave pipe. Despite warnings from Allen prior to construction, Mayor Hunt reportedly dismissed the patent, believing he had used a similar device in Vermont decades earlier. Contractor Worley, who lost money on the project, is being positioned as the scapegoat to shield the administration's own negligence.
“It is an injustice to lay the blame for the infringement of the Allen patent upon Contractor Worley, who did not make a cent upon the East Alder street flume, but came out several hundred dollars in the hole.”
This 1903 conflict over municipal procurement and patent infringement highlights the perennial struggle between local political machines and public accountability. The 'Worley flume' incident mirrors modern municipal debates where administrative hubris, often driven by political patronage or financial gain, conflicts with legal reality and the public interest.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.