Lord Mansfield, in summing up the case to the jury, stated, that he had received a letter from one of the jury, which he had mentioned to all the Judges, to the effect that if the objection to the patent on the grounds of the invention being only an addition to an old machine were to prevail, that objection would go to repeal almost every patent that was ever granted. The verdict was for the plaintiff, with 500l. damages.

Mr. Justice Buller, in citing this case in Boulton and Watt v. Bull, says: "In Morris v. Bramsom, which was tried at the sittings after Easter term, 1776, the patent was for making oilet holes or net-work in silk, thread, cotton, or worsted, and the defendant objected that it was not a new invention, it being only an addition to the old stocking frame. Lord Mansfield said, after the former trial on this patent, I have received a very sensible letter from one of the gentlemen who was upon the jury, on the subject whether on principles of public policy there can be a patent for an addition only. I paid great attention to it, and mentioned it to all the Judges. If the general point of law, viz., that there can be no patent for an addition be with the defendant, that is open upon the record, and he may move in arrest of judgment. But that objection would go to repeal almost every patent that ever was granted.' Though his Lordship did not mention what were the opinions of the Judges, or give any opinion himself, yet we may safely collect that he thought, on great consideration, the patent was good. Patent for addition Since that time it has been the generally received opinion good, if confined in Westminster Hall, that a patent for an addition is good, but then it must be for the addition only, and not for the old machine too.

theroto

(at the top of the house) fronted the fields, he took notice that in the heat of the summer the workmen laboured with them open, and on the Castle Hill Bramsom and his witnesses took their station, with a powerful telescope, early in the morning, when Bramsom usually worked the most diligently lest his frames should be discovered by their noise. He' by this means saw Bramsom sedulously employed in using the tickler machine, and immediately entered an action against him."

Of late years the Court of Chancery have assisted patentees in discovering whether their patents are infringed, by ordering an inspection of the works of the suspected party, on a case of reasonable suspicion being made out to the Court.

W. C.

OF PATENT CASES.

35

35

EDGEBERRY v. STEPHENS.

In the King's Bench.

A GRANT of a monopoly may be to the first inventor, by the 21st James I., and if the invention be new in England, a patent may be granted though the thing was practised beyond the sea before; for the statute speaks of new manufactures within this realm, so that, if they be new here, it is within the statute: for the Act intended to encourage new devices useful to the kingdom, and whether learned by travel or by study, it is the same thing.

Agreed by Holt and Pollexfen in this case.

LIARDET v. JOHNSON.

Before Lord Mansfield, C. J. 1778.

THIS was an action brought for an infringement of the plaintiff's patent, granted 1773*, for a composition or

The specification was in these words:"To all to whom these presents shall come, I, John Liardet, of Great Suffolk-street, in the parish of Saint Martin's-in-the-Fields, in the city of Westminster, clerk, send greeting. Whereas I the said John Liardet did, by my petition, humbly represent to his present most excellent Majesty King George the Third, that by much study aud expence I had invented a composition or cement for all the branches concerning buildings, to which the same is applicable, with a grease for frictions, preserving steel, iron, and various other uses. And that in regard, I was the first inventor thereof, I therefore most humbly prayed his said Majesty that he would be graciously pleased to grant unto me, my executors, administrators, and assigns, his royal letters patent, for the sole use and benefit of the said invention within that part of his said Majesty's kingdom of Great Britain called England, his dominion of Wales, and town of Berwick-uponTweed, and also in all his colonies and plantations abroad, for the term of fourteen years, according to the statute in that case made and provided. His said Majesty being willing to give encouragement to all arts and inventions which might be for the publick good, was graciously pleased to condescend to my request, and therefore by his royal letters patent bearing date at Westminster the third day of April, in the thirteenth year of his reign, of his especial grace, certain knowledge and mere motion for himself, his heirs and successors, did give and grant unto me the said John Liardet, my executors, administrators, and assigns, his especial licence, full power, sole privilege, and authority,

stucco for the covering the walls of houses. This patent was set aside in consequence of insufficiency of the specification.

Lord Mansfield, in delivering judgment, said, the

that I the said John Liardet, my executors, administrators, and assigns, and every of them, by myself and themselves, or by mine or their deputy or deputies, servants or agents, or such others as I the said John Liardet, my executors, administrators, or assigns, should at any time agree with, and no others, from time to time, and at all times thereafter, during the term of years therein expressed, should and lawfully might make, use, exercise, and vend my said invention within that part of his said Majesty's kingdom of Great Britain called England, his dominion of Wales, and town of Berwick-upon-Tweed, and also in all his colonies and plantations abroad, in such manner as to me the said John Liardet, my executors, administrators, and assigns, or any of us should in our discretion seem meet; and that I the said John Liardet, my executors, administrators, and assigns, should and lawfully might have and enjoy the whole profit, benefit, commodity, and advantage from time to time coming, growing, accruing, and arising by reason of the said invention, for and during the term of years therein mentioned; to have, hold, exercise, and enjoy the said licence, powers, privileges, and advantages, therein before granted or mentioned to be granted unto me the said John Liardet, my executors, administrators, and assigns, for and during, and unto the full end and term of fourteen years from the date of the said letters patent next and immediately ensuing, and fully to be complete and ended according to the statute in such case made and provided; in which said letters patent is contained a proviso, that if I, the said John Liardet, should not particularly describe and ascertain the nature of my said invention, and in what manner the same is to be performed, by an instrument in writing under my hand and seal, and cause the same to be enrolled in his said Majesty's High Court of Chancery within four calendar months next and immediately after the date of the said letters patent, that then the said letters patent and all liberties and advantages whatsoever thereby granted should utterly cease, determine, and become void, any thing therein before contained to the contrary thereof in anywise notwithstanding, as in and by the said letters patent (relation being thereunto had) may more fully and at large appear. Now know ye, that I, the said John Liardet, in compliance with the said proviso, do hereby describe and ascertain the nature of my said invention, and declare that the same is composed of the several particulars following, that is to say, composition of the new cement: drying oil, any kind of absorbent matters, white or any coloured lead, solid whatsoever (gravel, sand, &c.) as circumstances will require it. Composition of the new grease for preserving steel, iron, &c. from the rust, and for frictions: take oil, any kind of absorbent matters mixed together, coloured as you please; the steel and iron must be covered with the said grease in the same manner as if painted. In witness whereof, I the said John Liardet have hereunto set my hand and seal this third day of August, in the year of our Lord 1773, and in the thirteenth year of the reign of our said sovereign lord George the Third, by the grace of God of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, king, defender of the faith, and so forth. "JOHN LIARDET."

general questions on patents are, 1st, whether the invention was known and in use before the patent; and, 2d, whether the specification is sufficient to enable others to make it up. The meaning of the specification is, that others may be taught to do the thing for which the patent is granted; and if the specification is false, the patent is void, for after the term the public ought to have the benefit of the discovery. Hence the law requires as the price the patentee should pay to the public for his monopoly, that he should, to the very best of his knowledge, give the fullest and most sufficient description of all the particulars on which the effect depends.

HICKS v. RAINCOCK.

In the Court of Chancery. 1784.

THE plaintiff filed a Bill praying an injunction to stay an infringement of his patent by the defendant, for using machinery for making loops in stockings. The defendant demurred, the plaintiff not having established his right in a court of law.

The Lord Chancellor overruled the demurrer.

EXPARTE BECK.

Before the Lord Chancellor (Lord Thurlow). 1784.

In this case, when the Privy Seal Bill was received in the Court of Chancery, on the 12th August, 1784, there was a caveat against the granting of the patent. The Lord Chancellor, after hearing the matter of the petition, took time to consider his judgment, and made his order the 27th of August, 1784, that the caveat should be discharged. The patent allowed four months for enrolling the specification. The patentee, without examining the document, imagined that the patent was dated on the day the order was given for discharging the caveat, prepared his specification on the 18th December, 1784, but was then informed that the date of the patent was the 12th. The patentee petitioned the Lord Chancellor to alter the date of the patent by making it bear date the 27th August instead of the 12th.

The Lord Chancellor said, that although he was perfectly satisfied that the patentee was well entitled to his patent, that his case was a very hard one, yet he could not make such an use of his power as Keeper of the Great Seal, as to alter a patent in any degree upon an application of this sort: that perhaps upon petitioner's applying for a new patent, the officers might, under the circumstances, be induced to remit their fees, but that he could give no relief.

ARKWRIGHT v. NIGHTINGALE.

In the Common Pleas, before Lord Loughborough, Feb. 17, 1785. THIS was an action brought against the defendant for infringing the plaintiff's patent, granted the 16th December, 1775.*

The specification was in the following words:-"To all to whom these presents shall come.-I, Richard Arkwright, of Cromford, in the county of Derby, send greeting: Whereas I, the said Richard Arkwright, did, by my petition, humbly represent to his present most excellent Majesty King George the Third, that I had, by much study, application, and expence, contrived, invented, and brought to perfection certain instruments or machines, which would be of public utility in preparing silk, cotton, flax, and wool for spinning, and constructed on easy and simple principles, very different from any that had ever been contrived; that in regard I was the first and sole inventor thereof, and that the same had never been practised by any other person or persons whomsoever, to the best of my knowledge and belief, I humbly prayed his said Majesty to grant unto me, my executors, administrators, and assigns, his royal letters patent, under his great seal of Great Britain, for the sole use, benefit, and advantage of my said invention, within that part of his said Majesty's kingdom of Great Britain called England, his dominion of Wales, town of Berwick-upon-Tweed, and also in his colonies and plantations abroad, for the term of fourteen years, according to the statute in that case made and provided: His said Majesty being willing to give encouragement to all arts and inventions that might be for the public good, was graciously pleased to condescend to my request; and therefore, by his royal letters patent, bearing date at Westminster, the sixteenth day of December, in the sixteenth year of his reign, of his especial grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion, did give and grant unto me, the said Richard Arkwright, my executors, administrators, and assigns, his especial licence, full power, sole privilege, and authority, that I the said Richard Arkwright, my executors, administrators and assigns, and every of us, by myself, or themselves, or by mine and our deputy or deputies, servants or agents, or such others as I the said Richard Arkwright, my executors, administrators, or assigns, should at any time agree with, and no others, from time to time, and at all times