The Locomotive Up To Date The greatest accumulation of new and practical matter ever published treating upon the construction and management of modern locomotives, both SIMPLE and COMPOUND. By CHAS. MCSHANE, Author of "One Thousand Pointers for Machinists and Engineers. SPECIAL EXHAUSTIVE ARTICLES WERE PREPARED FOR THIS NEW BOOK BY THE BALDWIN LOCOMOTIVE WORKS BROOKS LOCOMOTIVE WORKS COOKE LOCOMOTIVE AND MACHINE CO. RICHMOND LOCO. AND MACHINE CO. With contributions from more than one hundred prominent railway officials and inventors of special railway appliances. 736 Pages, 6 x 9 inches 380 Illustrations. AN ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY ON ALL SUBJECTS RELATING TO THE LOCOMOTIVE It was not Mr. McShane's intention to present his sole views upon any subject, but to represent the entire thought, discovery and research, both practical and theoretical, in locomotive construction and management. It is of inestimable value to every railroad man and inventor, not only in being scientifically correct, but from the conscientious endeavor everywhere apparent to render thoroughly intelligible to the reader every detail of each subject based upon the most recent practical and experimental tests, by a man of wide experience in all the details of the subject. You will find in mechanical journals the facts; you will find in this book the reasons for the facts. Plain, simple and explicit language is used through the book, no mathematical demonstrations being given or required. The illustrations are exquisite examples of the highest class of engraving and printing, and no labor or expense has been spared in contributing toward the richness, elegance and beauty of the workmanship. Bound in Fine Cloth, $2.50. Sent by mail, free of postage, to any RICHARDS & CO., 305 Broadway, New York, N. Y. MECHANICAL 1,800 MECHANICAL MOVEMENTS for $3.00 MOVEMENTS DEVICES APPLIANCES T JUST ISSUED 10th REVISED EDITION OF Mechanical Movements. By GARDNER D. HISCOX, M. E. Author of "Gas, Gasoline and Oil Engines, etc., etc." Contains over 1,800 specially made illustrations, with descriptive text and over 400 pages. HIS BOOK is a Dictionary of Mechanical Movements, Powers, Devices and Appliances, embracing an illustrated description of the greatest variety of Mechanical Movements and Devices in any language, covering nearly the whole range of the practical and inventive field. For the use of Machinists, Mechanics, Inventors, Engineers, Draughtsmen, Students, and all others interested in any way in the devising and operation of mechanical works of any kind. AMONG THE SUBJECTS INCLUDED ARE: Mechanical Powers-Transmission of Power-Measurement of Power-Steam Power, Boilers and Appliances-Steam Appliances-Motive Power, Gas and Gasoline EnginesHydraulic Power and Devices-Air Power Appliances-Electric Power and Construction-Navigation and Roads-Gearing-Motion and Devices Controlling Motion-Horological, Mining, Mill and Factory Appliances-Construction and Devices-Draughting Devices-Miscellaneous Devices. What one of our customers said of this book: "Once owning this book I would not be deprived of it for ten times its cost." Over 400 pages, tenth edition, price, $3.00. "" ADDRESS RICHARDS & CO., 309 Broadway, New York, V. S. A. (P 6702) SPECIAL CIRCULAR OF THIS BOOK SENT FREE ON REQUEST. 1263 1263 1268 Assignment Must be by Instrument Signed by Inventor-Ex parte Designs-Drawing Must Show Design as It Appears to Observers-Ex United States-Trade Marks-Certified Copy Foreign Registration... 1263 THE Patent and Trade Mark Review A monthly journal for the publication of new laws and other related subject-matter. Volume 1, October, 1902, to September, 1903; Vol- ADVERTISING RATES. Personal Advertisements, 2 Cents per word. We do not solicit the advertisements of Patent Agents or Solicitors. WHILE THE UTMOST CARE IS TAKEN TO INSURE ACCURACY IN THE MATTER THAT APPEARS IN THE REVIEW, NO RESPONSIBILITY IS ASSUMED ON ACCOUNT OF ERRORS OR INACCURACIES WHICH MAY OCCUR THEREIN. United States. Trade Marks. Under a recent ruling it is now required that foreign trade-mark owners shall file a certified copy of the registration of their mark in their own country. Japan. Patents. DATE OF COMPLETION OF INVENTION. Especial attention is directed to the fact that under the new rules, now in force, it is necessary to state, in connection with each application, the date upon which the invention was completed. EFFECT OF PRIOR PUBLICATION. We are indebted to Mr. W. Silver Hall, of Tokio, for the following discussion of this subject. For previous articles relating to the same subject see PATENT AND TRADE-MARK REVIEW, pp. 707 and 934. Decisions of the Court of Cassation, and of the Patent Bureau. Although there are still certain minor points respecting the above subject in regard to which no definite judgment has yet been pronounced, and no absolute precedent has yet been established, I think it well to lay before you such information as I have been able to obtain up to date; and as the case of Kajima v. Sakamoto is still the leading one, I make no apology for reverting to it, especially as my previous Circular N (dated 19 December, 1903) was not quite correct as regards one minor point. The circumstances of the case are briefly as follows: On 18 August, 1891, Mr. Tatsuzo Sakamoto, filed an application for a patent for a "lap machine," for the preparation of cotton, for which a patent No. 1601 on the Japanese register, was granted on 25 May, 1892. Nearly ten years later Mr. Unosuke Kajima filed an application at the Patent Bureau for the cancellation of the patent on the ground of anticipation and consequent want of novelty, and this application was granted by the Patent Bureau on 7 February, 1902. The patentee, Mr. Sakamoto, thereupon appealed to the Court of Cassation for a reversal of the verdict of the Patent Bureau, which was granted on 4 May, 1903, upon the following grounds: It was claimed by Kajima, and admitted by Sakamoto, that a description of a similar machine had been published by the British Patent Office on 6 August, 1872 (some 20 years previous to Sakamoto's application), in sufficient detail to allow it to be copied and reproduced in Japan. The special articles and clauses of the Japanese Patent Laws affecting this particular case, and cited in the course of the two trials, are as follows: (A) The Monopoly Patent Act (Government Notification No. 7, 1885), Art. IV, Clause 2: "That which has been generally used or known prior to the application for a patent is not patentable." (B) Old Patent Law, 1888, Art. II, Clause 3: "Articles which have been in public use before the application for a patent are not patentable." (C) New Patent Law, 1899, Art. II, Clause 4: "Articles which have been publicly known or publicly used before the application for a patent are not patentable.” (D) New Patent Law, 1899, Art. XXIX: 66 * * * the interested party or parties may demand a trial before the Patent Bureau for the determination of 'their respective rights." (E) New Patent Law, 1899, Art. XXX: "Any person finding that an invention for which a patent has been granted falls under Art. II, Clause 4 (see "C" above), may demand a trial before the Patent Bureau in order to annul the patent." (F) New Patent Law, 1899, Art. XXXII: "The reasons for a judgment tried at the Patent Bureau must be stated when delivering it.” (G) New Patent Law, 1899, Art. XXXVI: "The Supreme Court, if it considers that there is reasonable ground for bringing an action, shall quash the original judgment, and shall send the case back to the Patent Bureau for a new trial. "An opinion expressed by the Supreme Court on a point of law shall be binding on the Patent Bureau with regard to the case in question.” Both parties were represented by counsel. The reasons given by the Court of Cassation for quashing the previous judgment of the Patent Bureau are very voluminous and involved, but may be condensed as follows: (1) Although the phrase "generally used or known" occurs in the Monopoly Act of 1885 (see "A" above), the old Patent Law of 1888 (see "B" above) only refers to "articles in public use,” implying that merely theoretic or academic "knowledge" is not sufficient to debar an application for a patent. (2) The application in question, made in 1891, and the patent subsequently granted in 1892, are governed by the provisions of the old Patent Law of 1888, as the new Patent Law of 1899 (see "C" above), in which the phrase "publicly known" is again introduced, was not then in force. Consequently, the argument that the machine for which the patent was granted was devisable from others already "known" is inadmissible. (3) The judgment of the Patent Bureau is based upon the phrase "previously known or used," and this phrase is applied and interpreted in a world-wide and unlimited sense, and is extended to articles devisable, although not actually devised. But this interpretation would extend the scope of the law beyond the range of human possibility, and it would follow that no valid patent could be granted for any invention until a world-wide investigation had first been carried out in order to ascertain if anywhere in the world any anticipation by previous use or knowledge had occurred, so that the invention could be pronounced an absolute novelty throughout the world. But such a construction of the phrase is evidently not contemplated by the Patent Law, nor is it calculated to encourage new inventions. Consequently, the application of the phrase "publicly known or used" must be limited to the area to which the Patent Law actually applies, that is to say, to "public knowledge or use" within the Empire of Japan; and in the present case no evidence has been adduced that such a machine, or even a printed description of it, was generally known or used in Japan, or even known or used by the applicant himself, prior to his application for the patent in question. |