PR E F A CЕ.

THE various Reports of proceedings at law and in equity relating to patents for inventions which have been printed are only to be found in extensive law libraries, distributed over upwards of one hundred volumes, and in very few instances are there to be found two Reports of patent cases in one volume; the patentee, the inventor, and the manufacturer can therefore have no opportunity of becoming acquainted with the views and opinions of the Judges on the various questions of patent law, and the constructions which have been put on the wording of the specifications.

To draw a specification correctly requires a thorough knowledge of the various decisions in causes involving patent rights, also an intimate acquaintance with the practical working of the invention to be described; and further, in order that the extent of the invention may be well defined, correct and extensive information should be possessed by the person engaged as to what has been previously patented and used in the manufacture to which the invention relates. There are no rules for drawing a specification as there are for preparing other legal documents, the language of a specification is necessarily that of the factory, the technical terms and expressions of the workshop must be used in order to

a workman understanding the description of a patented invention, and these are often wholly incomprehensible to a Judge and to other legal men until they are explained. These circumstances render it very difficult to obtain a correct legal opinion of what is the contents of a specification, or the probable construction which a court of law would put upon it. A manufacturer may thoroughly understand the working of the invention described, but for want of information as to the construction put by courts of law on similar documents, he is unable to judge of the legal extent of the claims to invention. If a barrister be consulted and he be not intimately acquainted with the practical working of the particular manufacture, and with what had been the precise state of that manufacture before the patent (which can very seldom be the case), his opinion will be of little use—in fact, counsel's opinion on a patent can only be useful when he is made acquainted with all the facts which surround the case both for and against the patent ;—on the other hand, a man of science unpractised in law is only qualified to judge of the correctness of the description of the invention, as to whether it is sufficient to enable a workman to carry it into practice. Law, science, and much practical knowledge of manufactures are necessary to be possessed by the same individual, or brought together in different persons, in order to draw a specification, or to give a correct opinion of the construction which a court of law will put on a particular specification.

I have often been requested to publish a collection of the law reports of patent cases for the benefit of patentees, manufacturers, and inventors, in order that they who already understand the practical part of the question may become better able to judge of the legal