394 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE ON THE PATENT-LAWS, defrauded of their invention between the time of taking out a patent and lodging the specification. Conceives that the best remedy for this state of things would be that recommended by other witnesses, namely, that the inventor should be secured from the time of his first affidavit, &c. But there remains a still more important difficulty to be got over--the difficulty of maintaining a patent, however good, after it has been obtained. There is, unfortunately, a very prevailing notion that a patent is fair plunder that there is nothing dishonest in doing every thing to defeat a patentee: combinations are constantly formed to oppose and annoy him; and evidence suborned to show that the thing was known before the date of the patent, "such evidence as it is in the power of almost any man occasionally to obtain." Conceives that in this state of law and society patents, however good, may be rendered almost useless. The best remedy for these evils appears to witness to be this, that after a person has publicly used his patent for any given number of years-say five-and no one has thought it worth his while to bring a scire facias against him on the score of its not being a novelty, and therefore not a fit subject for a pateut, whilst he has on his own part used all due diligence to prosecute infringements-the patent should be deemed good and valid; and that an injunction should issue against all future transgressors, and not be dissolved, the same as if his patent had been proved valid in Court. Believer that according to the existing law a principle cannot be patented unless reduced to practice; and thinks the law a good one. Conceives it would be better to drop the use of the word altogether, and that the Judges should be bound simply to consider whether the thing done be an entire and new fact, and one worthy of a patent. Believes that it would be advantageous in many instances to patentees, and not injurious to the public, if specifications could be kept concealed from the public; and sees no objections to such concealment, as long at least as the patentee does not find it necessary to come into Court to prosecute for infringements, when of necessity the specification must be made public. Benjamin Rotch, Esq., again examined. Proposes that instead of a patent being annulled because one or two things which are claimed in it as new; are not new, a certain portion of the term only should be forfeited. 1 9. Mr. John Isaac Hawkins, examinedz Published thirty years ago in America A View of the Real Nature of the Law of Patents," and objected to the patentee being charged any thing for having the expense of his exclu sive privilege secured to him. The expense of a patent in America was then and is still 30 dollars (L6.458.) Found many cases where poor men had found out an invention, and spent the whole of their money in bringing it to perfection, to whom the expense of the patent was felt as a grievance.. Pleaded the cause of the poor in the public papers at the time, and has not since his arrival in England seen any reason to alter his opinions. Has fre quently undertaken to bring monted. men and inventors together, but the, negotiation has generally failed, because the inventor is afraid to disclose his invention for fear of losing it; and the monied man is afraid to embark his money in an invention with respect to which he is not completely informed. It is become almost a proverb, that few patentees ever reap the advantage of their ingenuity; and in the opinion of witness the expense of the patent is one cause of this state of things, Conceives the consequence of charg ing any considerable sum for patents to be, that none but bold speculators. take patents. Thinks that if patents, were given free of cost, the public' would be benefited by the inventions of the cautious and sober-minded, and that thus a source of permanent wealth to the country would be opened. Is well acquainted with many cases in which a poor inventor has remained poor, while the capitalist has realized a great fortune by the invention, because the invention could not before being patented be shown to persous competent to judge of its value has prevented a great number of patents being taken out in England and France, by laying before the parties the difficulties they would meet with in negotiating with men of capital, prior to taking out a patent; and firmly believes, that he is at the present moment the confidential depository of important inventions, which if they could be patented free of cost, and thus become marketable commodities, they would immediately occasion employment to thousands of people. Knows also of several instances of valuable inventions having been MINUTES OF EVIDENCE ON THE PATENT-LAWS. lost to the public by the death of the inventors, when if the parties could have been made secure, they would have treated with capitalists, and the inventions have probably become important staple articles of manufacture. Would propose that patents should be put upon the same footing as copyrights, or rather as statuary, for the protection of which there is a special statute. Would have the publication of any new discovery to constitute the evidence of exclusive right, and that the publication should consist in sending to certain offices written or printed copies of the specification attested by the signature of the inventor; and also advertising for sale copies of the same for a reasonable price in a certain number of newspapers. Placing patents on this footing, would tend to prevent monopoly by opening a wide door to competition. It has been apprehended by some that the great increase in the number of patents, which would be the consequence of throwing off all the fees, would occasion so much litigation, as to become a great public inconvenience; but in the opinion of the witness, this evil, if it should be found to exist in the early stage of the change, would soon correct itself; because every trial of a patent cause would tend to enlighten the public mind, and enable persons to decide many critical points without an appeal tó a court of law. It is very probable that more litigation would be generated by the increase of a thousand ships employed in commerce, than the increase of a thousand patents; but who would imagine that an addition of a thousand ships employed in the commerce of the country would be a public inconvenience? Considers that the law as now administered is illadapted to the decision of disputes on patents, because juries are generally totally ignorant upon the subject; but if a special jury of men conversant with the subject were summoned, should conceive the present system might be preferable to any board of commissioners; it would give more public satisfaction than any such board. Specifications are not now sealed in America; but they used to be so previous to 1790, when, in consequence of the pernicious operation of the practice, it was abandoned. The public were not able to know whether a person had a patent or not: a man as serted he had, and there were no means of determining the fact. In 395 Austria, at the present day, specia fications are sealed; but when in Vienna lately, heard it continually spoken of as a grievance. Conceives that the specification should be always open; and farther, that it should be the first thing, as witness believes it is in all countries, except England, as perfect as the inventor can make it in the first instance, but open to amendments at any time during the fourteen years. 8th June, 1829. Mr. John Farey, again examined. Delivered in, 1. A List of Acts of Parliament and Decisions of Courts of Law relative to Patents. 2. A List of the Patents granted in each year since 1796. 3. An edition of the Foreign Laws of Patents, in French, with a manuscript translation into English of the American, French, Belgian, Austrian, and Spanish Laws (all of which are printed in an appendix). Believes that there are many secret inventions of value which it is not the interest of inventors to disclose, under the present system; and that individuals often endeavour to realize the whole profit of a very small extent of business, for as long as they can preserve their secret, rather than look to a small share in the profit on a very extensive open practice for fourteen years, under a patent. For instance, Dr. Wollaston had a mode of preparing malleable platina, which he practised in secret for a long time, and only disclosed on his death-bed-probably very imperfectly. Mr. Watt invented and made a machine for executing sculptures which he never disclosed, any further than as the machine which he left behind him may have explained itself. An ingenious mechanic at Sheffield, named Gilpin, had a machine for cutting the teeth of cog wheels, and another for making hard steel spindles for cotton spinning; the works he produced by them were most excellent, but he kept the means secret, and witness does not think they have been practised with any success since his death. Independently of the risk of such secrets being lost altogether, it is a great public loss to keep them locked up; for they cannot be extensively practised in secret, and the possessors must lay a very heavy tax on the little business they do execute in secret with their own hands: the processes too would be more likely to get improved if they were made publicly known, and new appli 396 MINUTES of evidenCE ON THE PATENT-LAWS. cations of the inventions would be made, which cannot be made whilst they are kept secret. Thinks that (besides amending the law so as to lessen the inducements to secrecy) public purchases of many inventions should always be contemplated, and that a fund should be provided for the purpose. Couceives that the protection of a patent right is decidedly calculated to render new inventions more generally known and used; and is of opinion that many great inventions would never have been brought to bear as they have, but for the encouragement afforded by a patent. Mr. Watt's steam-engine may be quoted as a great example. Considers that the public derive benefit even from patents for trivial inventions, such as snuffers, stirrups, corkscrews, &c.; for by the operation of patents, the making and vending of patent articles, which have merit enough to sell, is multiplied and accumulated into considerable trades, which would never have arisen to any such extent without patents, because no indi viduals would have devoted themselves to have created such trades, if others could have supplied the demand as freely as themselves when created. Having been cultivated under a patent, and established as distinct trades by interested patentees, such trades continue to be permanent after the expiration of the patents; that is the origin of a number of considerable trades at Birmingham and Sheffield, and in London. Is not aware of any serious inconvenience having arisen from the refusal of patentees to grant licenses ; for a person so refused can always practise the invention without a license, and the patentee could not, it is believed, recover in that case more than nominal damages from him, Conceives that any provision for compelling patentees to graut licenses at a price to be fixed by arbitration, would do more harm than good. Is confident that the best way is to leave patentees full liberty to use their rights as they think best. From witness's experience in the proceedings of courts, he has not been inclined of late years to complain of the administration of the patent law by judges and juries, when it has become known what that law is, and when sufficient evidence has been tendered. What witness sees reason to complain of, is the obscurity of the law; the difficulty of knowing what it is; the manifest injustice of many of its provisions, when expound. ed by the judges, who often acknow. ledge its hardships, and the excessive expense of stating a case in the prescribed form, so as to enable the court to really decide according to the law. Witness's own opinion is, that when sufficient trouble and expense have been gone to, to make tho subject intelligible to the courts, they examine very patiently, and decide so as to leave no reason to complain of judges and juries, but ample reason to complain of the law. Considers the practice of granting patents for inventions imported from abroad of decided advantage. We have derived almost as many good inventions from foreigners as have originated among ourselves. The prevailing talent of the English and Scotch people is to apply new ideas to use, and to bring such applications to perfection; they do not imagine so much as foreigners. 12th June, 1829. Thomas Aspinwall, Esq., Consul of the United States of America in Londen, examined. Described the American law of patents. The chief points in which it differs from the English are, 1. That the specification must be lodged before the patent is granted. 2. That the whole proceedings may be completed, and a patent obtained in one day. 3. That after a patent has existed three years unchallenged, the patentee cannot be called upon to defend it by any process in the nature of a scire facias. 4. That a patentee can dispose of his right to any number of persons, and to any body, without limitation; it descends also to his heirs; and if an inventor dies previously to securing a patent, his heirs, and even his devi sees, have a right to take out the pa tent after his death in the name of the executor or administrator. 5. That patents are not granted in the United States to foreigners unless they have been resident for two years, or have obtained a special Act of Congress in their favour. 6. That a foreigner ap plying for an American patent is obliged to make oath that the invention has never been made known or used in any foreign country; aud, 7. that there are no patents of importation Can you state whether from the cheapness of patents in America, very great number are taken out?About 200 annually. Is the number found to be any inconvenience; is there any complaint Let AB represent a perfectly uniform bar, suspended by its centre C. Upon this lay another bar, EF, of exactly the same length; it will still be in equilibrium. Again, if this bar be divided into two parts at any one point, viz. G, it will still be at rest. Now the centres of gravity of those two parts will be at their centres of magnitude, as they are perfectly uniform; consequently, if these two parts are suspended from the points on which these centres were pressing, (viz. M and L) by strings fastened to the centres of gravity N and O of the two parts HI and IK, they will still be at rest; and it is evident that the bar HI is to the distance IO, as the weight IK is to the distance IN, and which are exactly the same propor tions as were before given. It is not requisite that the lever be straight; the same principles will apply with regard to those that are bent. Let ACB be a lever, whose fulcrum is at C, and let the weight W-20lbs. be suspended from a point B, at a distance of 4 inches from C; conse A Fig. 2. B PO 397 quently the weight has a tendency to produce motion equal to (20×4=)80. Now let the power equal to 5lbs. act on a point A, at a leverage AC=16 inches, therefore its tendency is 5x16 80, which is the same with that of the weight, consequently, they are in equilibrium. The pressure on the fulcrum is not the same with either of the former kinds of lever, it is found in the following manner: on the line CB (fig. 3) take a part CD, in the same proportion to the opposite force P, as a part CE of the line CA bears to the weight W; and by completing the parallelogram CDFE, the diagonal CF will bear the same proportion as the pressure exerted on the fulcrum. A hammer when drawing a nail is an instance of this kind of lever. The same principles also apply whatever number of forces are applied. If the several forces, having a tendency to turn the lever round in one direction, be multiplied into their distances from the centre, and their amount be equal to that of the forces acting in the opposite direction multiplied into their distances; and if they are equal, the lever will be in equilibrium. To calculate the pressure exerted on the fulcrum, add all the forces downwards; and from this sum subtract the sum of those acting upwards, and the difference will be the pressure. When the weight of the lever itself of which is at C, and let the power P act on the oblique arm CB, and the weight W act at right angles to the lever, as AW. Now the tendency of a body to turn a lever round a fixed point, is found by multiplying the force or weight into the length of a line drawn perpendicular to the direction of the force from the centre; but CB is not perpendicular to BP, consequently the line PB must be continued to E, from which point the perpendicular EC must be drawn; and the tendency of P to produce rotation, will be found by multiplying the weight P by the line CE, and not by CB. This rule is applicable in every case; and is this, that the perpendicular distance of the centre from the line of direction multiplied by the weight will give the tendency of that weight to produce rotation. But even in this case the power and weight are still acting parallel to each other: the next case for consideration is, when they are not so. Let AB be the lever acting on the fulcrum C, and let the power P and the weight W act in the oblique directions AD and BI, by means of strings passing over the pulleys D and in this case as in the last; viz. multiply the quantity of force by the perpendicular distance of the line of direction from the centre. But CB is not perpendicular to BI (the line of direction), therefore that line must be continued to a point 5; from which point a perpendicular line will meet the fulcrum c, therefore the weight W must be multiplied by the line Cb, which will give its tendency to produce rotation in the same manner: the effect produced by the power Pis found by multiplying it, not by the arm of the lever CA, but by the perpendicular distance Ca; and if these two effects be equal, the lever will be in equilibrium. When there is only one axis it is a simple machine, however many resistances or powers there may be, or in whatever directions they may act; but when there is more than one fixed axis, the machine becomes compound. (To be continued.) ON FLYING. Sir, Several articles on flying, by different authors, having appeared in your miscellany, every one of which being most certainly insufficient, there needs no apology for making some strictures thereon. Your correspondent M., No. 287, p. 447, is entitled to be first noticed, as he announces that "the art of flying in the air in every direction by purely mechanical means" "has at length been achieved!" and that circumstances [not of a selfish, but] of a personal nature render it necessary that he should dispose of a fourth share of "the incalculable pecuniary profits of the discovery" for £1500. Now, the probability or improbability of the attainment he |