Case ID: us-ct-cl_41/html/0110-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Ho wet, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JAMES W. BEACH v. THE UNITED STATES.
    [No. 21255.
    Decided January 29, 1906.]
    
      On the Proofs.
    
    This case is for the use of the claimant’s patented device for the pneumatic transportation of mail matter. The claimant seeks to recover, both upon an express contract and upon an implied contract. It appeal's that he offered the right to manufacture and use under his patent for a consideration expressed in his proposals, and that the Postmaster-General made no reply thereto, but subsequently contracted with another party for the construction of. pneumatic tubes under another device. The claimant insists that this device embraced his invention, protected by his patent, and that his ¡ offer of the right to use for a consideration named, with the retention of his proposals and the subsequent use of hiSj device, constitute an express contract. The claim for an implied contract rests upon substantially the same facts.
    I.Under the Act 13th July, 1892 (27 Stat. L., p. 145, § 0), the Postmaster-General was authorized to examine into the subject . of more rapid dispatch of mail matter in cities by means of pneumatic tubes or other systems, and to report the costs, advantages, etc.; but he had no authority in this experimental stage to enter into a contract binding the United States for the use of a patented device.
    II.Under the Act 21st April, 1902 (32 Stat. L., pp.' 107, 114), the Postmaster-General was authorized to contract for the transmission of mail by means of pneumatic tubes, but only after public advertisement therefor, and not until after a careful investigation as to the means and practicability of such service, nor until -a favorable report in writing shall have been submitted to the Postmaster-General by a commission of not less than three expert public officials. The Postmaster-General was not authorized to contract with anyone whose contract did not comply with these conditions.
    III.Where the claimant, an inventor, sent his proposals to the Postmaster-General offering his patented pneumatic mail transportation device for a price specified, and the Postmaster-General made no reply, neither accepting the bid nor rejecting it, but subsequently entered into a contract with another patentee for pneumatic tubes, to be constructed under his device, there was no express contract with the claimant, •' tbongb the tubes furnished to the defendants may have embraced elements of the claimant’s invention' and have constituted an infringement of his patent.
    IV. Where the claimant offered his device to the Postmaster-General and the Postmaster-General contracted with another inventor for pneumatic tubes to be constructed according to the latter’s device, the case is identical with ScMllmger’s ease (155 U. S. B... Í63). No contract can be implied. If the device used infringed on the claimant’s invention, his remedy was against the contractor for the infringement. The court is without jurisdiction of an action for infringement by the United States. The cases relating to patent litigation in this court reviewed.
    
      The Reporters’ statement of the case:
    The following are facts of the case as found by the court:
    I. The claimant, James W. Beach was and is a citizen of the State of Illinois.and of the United States, residing in the city of Chicago, in the State of Illinois, and has at all times borne true allegiance to the Government of the United States, and has not in any way voluntarily aided, abetted, or given encouragement to rebellion against the said Government; and is t}ie owner of the claim sued upon, and no assignment or transfer of said claim or any part thereof or interest therein has been made.
    II. Prior to July 26, 1892, the claimant herein, James W. Beach, had been granted letters patent by the United States for an invention relating to pneumatic transportation, and known as Letters Patent No. 261318, and dated November 14, 1882. The object of said letters patent was set forth to be an improvement by said Beach on inventions theretofore granted relating to pneumatic transportation, which was to provide a continuous current of air passing through a tube, pipe, or box at great velocity, into which current of moving air the article or matter to be transported or conveyed was set forth‘to be in limited quantities, continuously projected or impelled, and also to transmit such article or matter through the tube while in a state of suspension in the air in the'tube, and without contact with the sides or bottom of the tube. These objects were illustrated by mechanism disclosed by accompanying drawings.
    
      III. Prior to July 26, 1892, the claimant herein, James W. Beach, had been granted letters patent by the United States for an improvement relating to pneumatic transportation, and known as Letters Patent No. 444088, and dated January 6, 1891. The objects of said letters patent were set forth to be, first, to create a current of air, gas, or other fluid in a pneumatic pipe or other conduit by providing and maintaining, substantially, a continuous current or a large volume of air, gas, or other fluid under pressure at any desired point or points along and between the ends of a pneumatic line, pipe, or conduit, and providing means or mechanism for directing the course of the current created by the escape of said volume from pressure, which said volume or current of air, gas, or other fluid thus directed shall at such point or points be allowed to escape into or be forced into or shall enter said line or pipe under pressure, as aforesaid, and be impelled forward in said line or pipe at great velocity and through the use of his invention or device in the direction desired; second, to increase the velocity of a current of air, gas, or other fluid moving in a pneumatic' pipe by forcing, impelling, or allowing to escape from under pressure at any desired point or points along or between the extreme ends of a pneumatic pipe) into said current at great velocity in the same direction in which said current is moving, and not in an 023posite direction, a further, additional, or other volume of air, gas, or other elastic fluid, thus allowing the matter or commodity in course of transportation in said pneumatic pipe to be transported throughout the entire length of said pneumatic pipe, if desired, without stop or delay; third, to create and maintain a current of air, gas, or other elastic fluid throughout the entire length of a pneumatic pipe or conduit (having both ends thereof open and unobstructed) by allowing to escape from under pressure (or by forcing or impelling at great velocity) into said pipe at any desired point or points between the ends of said pneumatic pipe in the direction desired a volume or continuous current of air, gas, or other elastic fluid, and to transport the mails, grain, flour, and all suitable commodities through said pipe by means of said current of air, gas, or other fluid so to be ere-ated as aforesaid; fourth, to create a current of air, gas, or other elastic fluid, or to increase the velocity of a current of air, gas, or other elastic fluid within or moving in a pneumatic pipe by impelling- or forcing into said pipe (in the direction desired) at a point between-the ends of said pipe a current or large volume of air, gas, or other fluid, and by withdrawing or exhausting the said current or part thereof from said pneurptatic pipe at a point forward or in advance of said last-mentioned point, and, fifth, to provide means for operating the machine so as to accelerate the velocity in or create said current in said pneumatic pipe in either direction as desired.
    IY. Ten prior letters patent were issued by the United States Patent Office for original and new and useful .improvements in pneumatic conveyors or devices for the transmission of letters, messages, and small packages through small pipes, as follows:
    Needham patent of September 6, 1864.
    Wood patent of May 28, 1867.
    A. E. Beach patent of October 26, 1869 (not the same person as the plaintiff).
    Siemens patent of July 26, 1873.
    Dowd patent of May 18, 1875.
    Leaycraft patent of June 13,1876.
    Randolph patent of September 12, 1876.
    Ely patent of December 13,1879.
    Hatch patent of December 23, 1879.
    Ploren patent of April 11,.1882.'
    Y. Pursuant to the authority of section 6 of the Post-Office appropriation act of July 13, 1892 (27 Stat., 145), the Postmaster-General had published the following advertisements in several newspapers:
    ' “ MATT. SERVICE BY PNEUMATIC TUBES OR OTHER SYSTEMS.
    “ PoST-OeEICE DEPARTMENT,
    “ Washington, D. 0., July 26,1892.
    
    “Authority is given the Postmaster-General by the provisions of the act making appropriations for the service of the Post-Office Department, approved July 13, 1892, £ to examine into the subject of a more rapid dispatch of mail matter between large cities and post-office stations and transportation terminals located in large cities by means of pneumatic tubes or other systems,’ with the view of ascertaining the cost and advantages of the same.
    “Acting upon this authority, I hereby give notice to all persons who are the inventors, assignees, or otherwise owners of any pneumatic tube or other device suitable for and adapted to said service to present in writing, under seal, on or before Thursday, the 8th day of September, 1892, addressed to the ‘ Postmaster-General, Washington, I). C.,’ and marked ‘Rapid Dispatch of Mails,’ a full description of such tube or device, together with a statement of' the evidence of title to or ownership of the same, which evidence may subsequently at any time be required by the Postmaster-General. Said description must state the kind and quantity of motive power used in operating the same; the method of its application; the capacity of the tube or device, and offer to submit a test; the precise place and terminals where it is proposed to conduct the test; the date at which the tube or device will be in condition to be tested, and the time that will necessarity be occupied in making the test; and, generally, anything else whereby the Postmaster-General can judge of the relative value of the several tubes or devices that may be submitted and the adaptability of each to said service.
    “ It is preferred that the tests aforesaid be conducted in the city of New York, Brooklyn, Philadelphia, Chicago, or Washington, D. C., and between adjacent cities, or between a post-office and substation or transportation terminal.
    “ It is also requested that each of said descriptions be accompanied by a proposal offering to license to, or otherwise invest in, the United States the right to use the tube or device, to lease by the year, or to' sell, assign, and transfer it to the United States as a purchaser.
    “ The tests aforesaid must be made without cost to the United States, and tipon the express condition that the person offering said tube or device waives all claim against the United States for any expense attending the construction, tests, or preparation for said tests, or any other expense attending the same. The Postmaster-General has ho authority in laxv to contract for the expenditure of money for the use of or purchase of any such invention, nor is there any existing appropriation out of which the cost of the same could be paid.
    “ The right is reserved to decline any test of any tube or device submitted in response to this advertisement, and to reject any proposal that may be made.
    
      “ The propositions and result of all experiments will be the subject of a report to Congress.
    “ JOHN WANAMAKER,
    
      “Postmaster-General. ”
    The following letter was written by plaintiff to the Postmaster-General, presumably in answer to said advertisement: [James W. Beach, attorney at law, 94 Washington Street, Boom 37.]
    “ Chicago, Aug. 20, 1892.
    
    “Hon. JohN WaNamakeR,
    
      “Postmaster-General, \V ashington, D. G.
    
    “ Dear S.ir : I, the undersigned, desire to submit to the' Postmaster-General a description of a pneumatic tube or device (of which I am the inventor and owner) suitable for and adapted to the rapid dispatch of mail matter between large cities and post-office stations, and transportation terminals located in large cities; and I also desire to accompany said description with a ‘ proposal offering to license to or otherwise invest in the United States the right to use the tube or device, to lease by the year or to sell, assign, and transfer it to the United States,’ as a purchaser, pursuant to your advertisement dated July 26th, 1892, entitled £ Mail service by pneumatic tubes or other systems.’
    “ I am unable to determine from said advertisement whether the Postmaster-General requires under said advertisement that said proposal shall fix or name a price at which the owner will so license, lease, or sell, assign, and transfer to the United States the right to use the tube or device. In accordance with the suggestion of Mr. Michener (whose letter I enclose herewith), I respectfully request that the Postmaster-General will kindly inform me at an early day what interpretation I shall put upon said advertisement with reference to the point now being considered; that is to say, whether my said proposal should or should not name a price at which I, as the owner aforesaid, will so license, lease, or sell, assign, and transfer to the United States the right to use said tube or device.
    “ I remain, very respectfully, yours,
    “James W. Beach.”
    “ Private Ofeice JohN WaNamaker,
    “ City Hall Square,
    “ Philadelphia, Aug. 23d, 1892.
    
    “ James W. Beach, Esq.,
    “ Chicago, III.
    
    “ Dear Sir : In reply to your letter of the 20th, I beg to say that the advertisement for pneumatic tubes states each offer shall be accompanied by proposals to license to, or otherwise invest in, the United States the right to use the tube or device, to lease by the year, or to sell, assign, or transfer to the United States. Such proposals must, of course, fix some price to be of any value. ■
    “ Yours, truly,
    “ J NO. WANAMAKER,
    “ Postmaster-General.”
    The claimant answered said advertisement by letter, under seal, of August 30,1892, as follows:
    ■ ' PROPOSAL OP BBAOI-I.
    [Law office of James W. Beach, 94 Washington street, Chicago, Illinois.]
    RAPID DISPATCH OE MAILS.
    “ Hoil. JOHN WANAMAKER,
    “Postmaster-General, Washington, D. 0.
    
    “ Sir : In accordance with the advertisement of the Postmaster-General, which said advertisement is dated July 26th, 1892, and is entitled ‘ Mail service by pneumatic tubes or other systems,’ I, the undersigned, James W. Beach, of Chicago, Illinois, hereby propose and offer to license to or otherwise invest in the United States the right to use the said two pneumatic devices, or either of them, that is to say, the devices mentioned and described in Letters Patent No. 261318 and in Letters Patent No. 444038, granted by the United States to the undersigned, James IV. Beach, mentioned and described in the description of said devices accompanying this proposal, and signed by said James W. Beach (said two devices being also described in Exhibits £ C ’ and ‘ D ’ annexed to the description of said devices filed herewith in the office of the Postmaster-General by the Beach Pneumatic Conveyor Company), or to lease by the year, or to sell, assign, and transfer it to the United States as a purchaser, said right being the exclusivo right in and under said letters patent, and each of them, in and to all the States and Territories of the United States, save and excepting therefrom the States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, Blinde Island, Massachusetts, Michigan, and the District of Columbia, heretofore sold and assigned to said Beach Pneumatic Conveyor Company by the undersigned.
    “ And I, the undersigned J ames W. Beach, hereby propose and offer as aforesaid to license to or otherwise invest in the United States all of my said right in, to, under, and by virtue of said letters patent, and each of them, in and to all the States and Territories of the United States, save and excepting said States of Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Michigan, and the District of Columbia, for and in consideration of the payment to me, the said James W. Beach, my heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, by the United States of the sum of eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) on the first day of September in each year during the term of said license or leasing or investment in the United States as aforesaid.
    “And I, the undersigned, James W. Beach, hereby further propose and offer to sell, assign, and transfer to the United States all of my said right derived and possessed by me under and by virtue of said two letters patent, in and to all the States and Territories of the United States, save and excepting therefrom the said States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, Bhode Island, Massachusetts, Michigan, and the District of Columbia, for the sum of twenty millions of dollars ($20,000,000), to be paid by the United States to me, the undersigned, James W. Beach, my heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, on or before the first day of September, A. D. 1893, and upon payment of said sum of money last mentioned to me at the time and .as aforesaid by the United States, I will sell to and make and execute to the United States a good and sufficient assignment and transfer of all of my said rights granted and by me possessed as aforesaid under and by virtue of said two letters patent in and to all the States and Territories, save and excepting therefrom the said States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, Bhode Island, Massachusetts, Michigan, and the District of Columbia.
    “And I, the undersigned, hereby further propose and' offer to so license, to lease to, or otherwise invest in the United States all of my said right under and by virtue of said two letters patent (for, and the said pneumatic devices or conveyers to be used solely and only for the purpose of collecting and transmitting the United States mails, and for no other, purpose or purposes) in said entire United State's, save and excepting therefrom the said States of Maine, New Hampshire,' Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Michigan, and the District of Columbia, upon the express condition that the United States shall pay therefor and in consideration thereof to me, the undersigned, James W. Beach, my heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, on the first clay of September in each year during the term of said license, or leasing, or investment in the United States the sum of three hundred and fifty-four thousand five hundred and eighty dollars and twenty cents ($354,580.20), being the amount of money expended annually by the United States for that branch of the postal service known as the “ Eegulation wagon, mail-messenger, mail station, and transfer service ” in twenty-six cities only, not including the cities of Washington, D. C., Providence, R. I., Boston, Mass., and Detroit, Mich., as shown on page 112 of the report of the Postmaster-General, 1888.
    “And I, the undersigned, hereby further propose and offer as aforesaid to license or lease to the United States for mail pulgosos only, as aforesaid, a right or rights, and upon reasonable and equitable terms, and for a reasonable consideration to be paid to me, the undersigned, my heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns therefor, by the United States, the amount thereof to be agreed_upon by the United States and the undersigned James W. Beach (either by mutual agreement or by arbitration) a right or rights as aforesaid to construct ancí operate within said entire United States, or either of them (save and excepting therefrom said States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Michigan, and the District of Columbia), one or more of said pneumatic conveyers or devices, said consideration to be based upon the mileage of the pneumatic tubes to be used, or upon a small percentage of the total (present) annual cost of the transportation of the United States mails within said United States.
    “ This proposal is made upon condition and the same shall not be binding upon the undersigned unless the United States shall by the Postmaster-General accept said propositions, or one of said propositions, and shall notify me, the undersigned, of said acceptance on or before the first day of August, A. D. 1893.
    “ In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal at Chicago, Illinois, this thirtieth day of August, A. D: 1892.
    “ James W. Beach, [seal.]
    ■ “ In presence of—
    “ Edward J. Qtjennt. (%)
    “ Jacob H. Hopkins.”
    [Letter of Beach forwarding his proposal.]
    “ Chicago, September 1, 189A
    “ RAPID DISPATCH OP MAILS.
    “ Hon. John Wanamaker,
    “Postmaster-General, Washington, D. 0.
    
    ‘‘ Sir : In connection with the annexed proposal I beg leave to call your attention to the fact that although the sum mentioned as a consideration to be paid annually for a license, or by way of royalty, for the use of the devices mentioned for all purposes for which said devices are suitable as a means of transportation, is in the aggregate a considerable sum of money, yet said sum, large as it is, is only a fraction over three per cent of the sum annually appropriated by the Congress and expended for one class of inland transportation of the mails, as appears from inspection of the post-office appropriation bill for the current fiscal year.
    “ The amount named as a consideration for which said devices (rights) would be sold is such sum as would annually, if placed at interest at four per cent, produce said sum or royalty.
    “ Of course we expect, at our own expense, to demonstrate in a positive and convincing manner that the said pneumatic devices will, when in operation, do and perform all that is claimed in the accompanying 4 Description ’ of said devices. And if our said demonstration be satisfactory and convincing as aforesaid, it occurs to me (aside from any feeling of covetousness) that the amount named is not a tithe of the • actual value of the inventions.
    “ I should be greatly pleased if said pneumatic system could be in operation at Chicago at and during the World’s Fair. Said system in operation would in a marked degree show the advancement of the postal service of the United States.
    “ The undersigned is prepared to enter into a contract with the United States to construct or cause to be constructed (and operated, if so desired) one or more lines of said pneumatic devices in any city of the United States or between any cities or towns in the United States (whether near or far apart), upon terms and for a consideration to be mutually agreed upon, and upon executing said contract the undersigned will secure the performance of any undertaking which he may so enter into by a good and sufficient bond.
    “ With great respect, I remain, sincerely yours,
    “James W. Beach:”
    [Letter from the Beach Pneumatic Conveyer Company, 94 Washington street, Chicago.]
    RAPID DISPATCH OE MAILS.
    “ Honorable JohN WaNamaker,
    “Postmaster-General, Washington, D. 0.
    
    “ Sir : The undersigned, The Beach Pneumatic Conveyer Company (a corporation created and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Illinois), in compliance with the advertisement of the Postmaster-General, bearing date July 26th, 1892, a copy of which advertisement is hereunto annexed, marked ‘ Exhibit A,’ respectfully represents unto the Postmaster-General that it is the owner of a pneumatic tube or device (a pneumatic system) suitable for and adapted to the service in said advertisement (Exhibit A) mentioned; that its said pneumatic tube or device, and the right to make and use the same, was by it derived by purchase and assignment to it (to the extent hereinafter mentioned) from James W. Beach, of Chicago, Illinois, of two certain letters patent issued by the United States to the said Beach as the inventor of the several devices therein and hereinafter described.
    “ The following is a full description of said device, together with a statement of the evidence of title or ownership of the same, and offer to submit to test, etc., etc.:
    “The device described in said first-mentioned letters patent, being patent No. 267318, dated November 1-1, 1882, is constructed in the manner following, to wit: A pneumatic pipe of the diameter required is laid or placed between any two points desired. Assuming that said pneumatic pipe is. say, eight inches in diameter and is placed in one or more of the principal streets of a city where mail collections are large. One end of the pneumatic pipe is located in the city post-office; at or near this end of the pneumatic pipe the air in said tube or pipe is by suitable machinery being continuously (when said device is in use) exhausted, while at the same time at the far or remote end of said pipe air is being-forced into said pipe; by this means a current of air is established in said pipe; by this means a current of air is established in said pneumatic pipe moving in the direction of the post-office (or substation, as the case may be) at very great velocity. This pneumatic pipe may also form part of a circuit from and to the city post-office. Said pneumatic pipe at all desired points is furnished with a suitable device for mailing written letters; this device consists of a pipe of proper size and length, with the upper end projecting above the ground and the lower end thereof connecting with the interior of said pneumatic pipe, and having suitable valves through which written letters to be mailed pass in entering said pneumatic pipe. The current of air being established in the pneumatic pipe, the person desiring to mail (from the street or building) letters will enclose said written letters in a suitable envelope or covering and raise said valve and insert therein his written letters (and envelope .inclosing the same) and drop or let go the valve, whereupon said letters will by said current of air be almost instantaneously (and quite safely) deposited in the city post-office, where they will be received in a suitable receiver or £ air lock,’ from which said written letters may upon their arrival, or at pleasure, be ‘ dumped ’ or deposited upon the table in the post-office.
    “ For the transmission of large bundles or packages of mail matter this system contemplates the use of a suitable vehicle therefor, to be propelled in or through said tube, but not so for the collection to a common center of the mails, as from distant points upon the street (or from the houses or buildings along the pneumatic line) to the post-office, in which case a suitable envelope or covering only will be used; in this connection allow us to call you attention to Exhibit : E,’ heretofore annexed (being a copy of a letter, the original of which is ready to be produced for your inspection), as explanatory, in part, of the reason why no vehicle (other than the atmospheric air in said tube) will be required in the collection of the mails. As you will observe from the inspection of said letters patent now being considered, said device was designed not only to perform the work of transporting the United States mails, but also for the purpose of transferring grain in the manner and by the means therein indicated; and in considering the statement contained in said ‘ Exhibit B as to the working of said device, we should bear in mind the fact that a single letter or á single grain of wheat is but a light matter, aiicl in the matter of weight but an insignificant one when exposed to a gale of wind moving with a velocity not equaled in nature. A windstorm moving at the rate of one hundred miles an hour would doubtless destroy your residence, if in the course of such storm, and a windstorm moving at less than three times the velocity last mentioned against the building in which your Department is situated would scatter the material of which it is constructed as autumn leaves are scattered and transported by the ordinary hurricane.
    “ The pneumatic system above described may also be used in transmitting packages and bundles of mail matter, in which event, as above indicated, a vehicle for such purpose will be used. The manner of inserting the cylinder or vehicle into the pneumatic tube is accomplished through self-closing valves, the pneumatic pipe. at the point of insertion or forwarding station being so constructed as to permit the insertion of said vehicle in the pneumatic tube or pipe without interrupting the continuous flow of air passing through said tube. At the receiving station said vehicle with its load will be received and its forward progress stopped by a suitable ‘ air cushion ’ embraced in the receiver there located. Any particular vehicle or cylinder (or loose letters, if desired) may, by a suitable switch described in said patent now being considered, be ‘ cut out ’ or ‘ switched out ’ of the main pneumatic line into a suitable receiver located at airy point between the two ends of the pneumatic pipe.
    “ Tour earnest attention is invited to the claims allowed to the inventor in said first-mentioned patent, believing, as%we do, that they were entirely warranted by the state of the art and by the invention of said Beach, and that we are fully protected in the use and enjoyment thereof to the extent in said patent and herein (in part) indicated, and that this company has the exclusive right, as aforesaid, under said patent and claims, to introduce the matter to be transported in said pneumatic pipe and continuous current of air moving therein at any desired point or points between the extreme ends of said pneumatic pipe, and that this corporation has the like exclusive right under said patent to ‘ switch ’ or divert the matter in transit from the pneumatic tube at any point or points between the extreme ends of said pneumatic tube.
    “ The device described -in the other of said letters patent, being Patent No. 444038, dated January 6th, 1891, issued to said James W. Beach, for improvement in pneumatic conveyers is intended for use in connection with and as part and parcel of a long line of pneumatic pipe, as between distant towns or cities. It may be briefly described as follows: That is to say, a pneumatic pipe of any length and diameter required is constructed, said pipe being at any point between the ends thereof enlarged in such manner as to have somewhat the appearance of a double cone with the large ends placed together; at the largest part or portion of this enlarged section of pipe is an aperture through which air may pass from an air compressor or ‘ blast engine,’ into the interior of said pneumatic pipe. Within said enlarged portion of said pneumatic pipe is. placed a short movable pipe of the same interior diameter as the portion of said pneumatic pipe which is not enlarged. This movable pipe is a little shorter than the total length of the enlarged portion of said first-mentioned pipe,, and said movable pix>e is chamfered (upon the outside) at both ends thereon in such manner as to substantially form an even, smooth, air-tight joint when either end thereof is jjressed forward and x>laced in contact by means of the screw (hereinafter mentioned) with the interior of said enlarged or conical portion of said XDneumatic pipe. This movable x>ipe is mounted upon a ‘ lug ’ (being a thin xsiece of metal) in such manner that said movable pipe may be moved lengthwise by means of the screw upon which the lower end of said lug is mounted; said lug is moved backward and forward through a suitable slot in the bottom of said enlarged portion of said pneumatic pipe, which slot is covered by a suitable housing to prevent the ingress and egress of atmospheric air. One end of said screw projects through and outside of said housing, where it is provided with a wheel or lever in order to provide means for turning said screw. The manner of operating the device last described is to turn said wheel and thereby .turn said screw until the thread of said screw (by means of said lug mounted thereon) has carried said movable pipe into close contact at one end thereof with the interior of said enlarged or conical portion of said pneumatic pipe. By this means an air chamber is formed between the outside of said movable pipe and the inside of said enlarged part of said pipe, having an opening or place of discharge (at one-end of said movable pipe) for the atmospheric air, which is forced into said air chamber through said air compressors or ‘ blowing engines ’ as aforesaid.
    “ In operating this device, said movable pipe having been carried forward by said screw until one of the chamfered ends of said movable pipe is in close contact with the interior of said conical pipe as aforesaid, air is, by means of a blast engine, or other suitable device, forced into said air' chamber, whereupon the air so forced into said air chamber escapes through said place of discharge,, and no one particle of air has time to escape, move backward, or react through said movable pipe before being impinged upon by other swiftly advancing particles of air, and the result is the creation and maintenance in said pneumatic pipe of a current of - air moving in the same direction throughout the entire length of said pneumatic pipe; and this is so without regard to the distance said pneumatic device or pneumatic engine is located from either end of said pipe, and thus a pneumatic pipe, having the same interior diameter throughout (substantially) its whole length (and being open at both ends if desired), may be operated by forcing air at any point along the line thereof into the side of the pneumatic pipe, and matter to be transported may be transmitted in the one direction throughout the entire length of said pneumatic pipe by the means here described, and by simply turning-said screw until the other or fore end of said movable pipe has come in contact with the interior of said conical or enlarged part of said pneumatic pipe said current of air will be overcome and set moving and established in the opposite direction, and said matter may be .retransmitted by means of said current of air last mentioned throughout the entire length of said pneumatic tube in the direction opposite to the direction first mentioned. This device also includes means for exhausting the air or taking the air from said tube in order to increase its velocity. Any number of these pneumatic engines here described may be placed in the same pneumatic line and may all be operated in the same direction at the same time, or different sections of said pneumatic line or pipe may at the same time be operated in different or opposite directions, and at the same or different velocities, and a single section may at the same time be operated in opposite directions, or toward and having a common point (between the ends of said section) of discharge for the matter in transit.
    “ We can exhaust air from said pneumatic tube at any point desired and within a distance of, say, ten feet from ■ such point. We can, by means of this device, force into said pneumatic tube another volume of air as well also as the volume of air which we exhaust as aforesaid, and thus give a new impetus to, or add to, the momentum of the current of air moving through said penumatic pipe from which current a portion was so exhausted as aforesaid.
    “ If desired, we may combine said two pneumatic devices in one device, and by so doing can operate a pneumatic line or tube of any required diameter for any distance required (from San Francisco to New York, if you so desire), and at any speed or velocity for the matter in transit desired, and in either direction, either for the whole length of line or any particular section or sections thereof, as between stations, at will. In combining said two devices said pneumatic engines last described will be properly connected with the pneumatic pipe first described at the points desired between the reservoir and the receiver in said first-mentioned patent described. The method of operating the combined devices is the same as hereinbefore described for each separate device. In reversing the current of air in the pneumatic pipe of said combined devices of course the reservoir in said first-mentioned patent will become, the receiver, and .the receiver therein described Avill become the reservoir therein described.
    “Atmospheric air is used as motive power in both devices; that is to say, is so used for driving said vehicles or carriers and for collecting letters to the post-office as aforesaid, and the current of said air is established and maintained in said pneumatic pipe in such direction as desired, either by steam power, electricity, or water power operating suitable exhaust and compression apparatus or machinery, preferably air pumps and blast engines. For low velocities and short pneumatic lines we may establish and maintain said current of atmospheric air in said pneumatic pipe, either by exhausting the air therefrom, or forcing the air through said pneumatic pipe only, but for any line other than an extremely short one the air should be exhausted at one end of the pneumatic tube and a volume of air should at the same time by suitable compression apparatus or blowing engines be forced into the far or remote end of said pneumatic tube, and for long lines of pneumatic tubes said combined device must be used. Air pumps and blast engines will be found to give positive and satisfactory results in all cases. The pneumatic pipe is constructed of metal, and when established for the transmission of packages, where there is little commerce to keep it bright, it should be constructed of or line with a noncorrosive material; for the collection of written letters to the post-office the interior of said pneumatic pipe should be of noncorrosive material.
    “ The quantity of motive power used in the operation of said pneumatic system bears a direct ratio to the amount of matter transmitted — the diameter and length of the pneumatic pipe, and the speed with' which the same is transmitted — in other words, the service required. It is obvious that it will require a greater amount of motive power to move , a given weight of mail matter in a given time the distance of 500 miles than it will to move the same matter in the same time a distance of only five miles. (As intimated, it is perfectly practicable by the pneumatic system here described to transmit mail matter a distance of five miles or five thousand miles without stop if the Government should so require.)
    “ In the absence of data as to the particular service required as aforesaid, it is impossible to give exact figures as to • the motive power which will be required. However, in order to comply with the terms of said advertisement, we will say that a steam engine capable of developing 250 horsepower will operate said system of pneumatic tubes suitable for and adapted to said postal service as aforesaid many miles in length, and a system capable of collecting to the post-office in a time more written letters than the entire combined force of employees employed in the post-offices in the city of New York ancl the city of Chicago can collect and deliver to the post-office in twice the time required by said pneumatic system. The capacity of said tube or system of course depends, as last suggested, upon the diameter and length of tube ancl the velocity of the current of air moving in the pneumatic tube ancl matter therein in transit, ancl, as was said above, said steam engine when developing 250 horsepower will for all practical purposes within a large city furnish unlimited capacity for the transmission of mail matter, either of loose letters or by placing the same in carriers or vehicles, and for any reasonable short distance within a city a steam engine capable of developing 50 horsepower will, when properly applied in operating said pneumatic system, furnish ample power to operate said system, and will also furnish ample capacity for transmitting all the mail matter which can be conveniently placed therein, with abundant and proper facilities therefor.
    “ In accordance with the terms of said advertisement this company offers to submit to a test of its said pneumatic tube and device to be held in the city of Chicago, Illinois, in the thirty-first ward of said city — the precise place and terminals where it is proposed to construct said test are as folloAvs— that is to say, commencing at the southeast corner of Halsted ■ and 100th street in said city, said pneumatic line or tube will extend east in said 100th 'street to Beach avenue, thence south in said avenue to 102d street, thence east in said last-mentioned street to Clinton street, thence south in Ci inton street to the first alley north of and running parallel with Tracj'' avenue, thence east in said alley to the lot on which the post-office, known as Fernwood post-office (Fernwood, Illinois) , is situated, the terminals mentioned in said advertisement being the power house at the southeast corner of Halsted and 100th street aforesaid and said post-office. Said tube or device will be in condition to be tested within six months from the first day of October, A. D. 1892. We shall use in this test a steam engine capable of developing 50 horsepower, and do not expect to use to exceed 30 horsepower in the operation of the length of line mentioned, a distance of about seven-eighths of a mile (or mile and two-thirds in the complete circuit). The diameter of said pneumatic pipe will be eight inches. The weather permitting, the time neces'sarily occupied in constructing said device and pneumatic tube will not exceed the period of four months, and this period might be shortened if we did not contemplate the construction of a new design of compression or blowing engine and exhaust apparatus or air pump, a design not found in the market and one which we are advised can be operated at very small expense for repairs and coal, and one which will give very efficient service when in actual use. After said device is all ready therefor, the time necessarily occupied in making said tests will be short — in the discretion ■ of the Postmaster-General, of course — and need not occupy more than one day.
    “ This corporation is duly organized under the laws of the State of Illinois, and it purchased of said James W. Beach,' said inventor, all the right, title, and interest in and to said two inventions so secured to him by said two letters patent for, to, and in the States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, Bhode Island, Massachusetts, and Michigan, and the District of Columbia, and for, to, and in no other places, and upon said purchase being so made as aforesaid this company received from the said Beach a proper assignment thereof in writing, by him duly executed, which said assignment Avas thereafter duly recorded in the Patent Office at Washington, D. C., and is ready to be produced for your inspection. There is not noAV, and there has mwer at any time been, any encumbrance or lien upon said patents, or either of them, or any interest therein; that the evidence of title to said tAvo letters patent all appears of record in said Patent Office, and that said records show the issuing of said letters patent to said James W. Beach and said assignment to this company of said interest, and nothing further concerning said two letters patent, or either of them, or the title thereto. And this company further represents that said James W. Beach is the owner of all interest in said tAvo letters patent not assigned by him to this company as aforesaid, and that this company and the said Beach are both entirely solvent, and that there is no judgment remaining Ainsatisfied rendered by any court against the said Beach or against this company, and that this company has no bonds or other indebtedness outstanding.
    “The test aforesaid will be made without cost to the United States and upon the express condition that this company Avaives all claim against the United States for any expense attending the construction, tests, or preparation for said tests, or any other expense attending the same.
    “ For a more particular description of said pneumatic device, your attention is respectfully called to the copies of said tAvo letters patent, annexed hereto and marked, respectively,
    ‘ Exhibit C ’ and ‘ Exhibit D,’ and to the printed pamphlet marked ‘ Exhibit G,’ all of said exhibits being hereby referred to and made a part hereof. Your attention is also called in this connection to the three clraAvings submitted liereAvitli marked, respectively, 1 Exhibit E ’ and 1 Exhibit F ? and ‘ Exhibit H,’ the same being also hereby referred to and made a part hereof, it being understood that said draAVings are not to be considered as detail drawings, but only intended to give a general view of said deAÚces. Said drawings will, it is believed, be readily understood in vieAV of said letters patent and of the special requirements of the postal service. We also respectfully call the attention of the Postmaster-General to the proposal accompanying this description ottering to license or otherwise invest in the United States the right to use the said tube or device, to lease by the year, or to sell, assign, and transfer it to the United States as a purchaser.
    COST OE CONSTRUCTION.
    “Approximately, the cost of constructing said pneumatic line with material now to be found in the market (the pneumatic tube being 8 inches in diameter) will be, per mile, $8,000, and the machinery, air pumps, and blowing engines at the ends of the line will cost about $70,000.
    “ For long distances said reversible pneumatic engines will be required; they will cost not to exceed $1,500 for each machine or pneumatic engine; and suitable pumps and blowing engines, to be used at and in connection therewith, now to be found in the market, can be had for $12,000 each. (See said Exhibit ‘ B.’)
    “ Special machinery can be constructed to use in place of said blowing engines and air pumps, being a design not now found in the market, which will not cost more than one-half the said air pumps and blowing engines now found in the market will cost, as above indicated.
    “A special desigh of pneumatic pipe can also be made, which will in use prdve satisfactory, at a cost of an eight-inch pipe of not more than $4,500 per mile. In cities haying elevated railways, and where the requirements of the mail service will permit, providing satisfactory arrangements can be made, it would be well to attach the pneumatic tube to the superstructure of such elevated railways, both for mail collections and for package business; said pneumatic tubes may be placed in the ground, in the streets, or be elevated above the surface of the streets, at pleasure.
    “ This system contemplates the use (when necessary, as aforesaid) of vehicles or carriers in said pneumatic tubes. These carriers may be of the well-known variety and construction so familiar to yourself and to the general public that no description thereof will be necessary, or said carriers may be of a design not now found in the market, but of a design which we have in course of construction and which we believe to be superior in all respects to the carriers hitherto used in pneumatic tubes.
    “All of which is respectfully submitted.
    “ In witness whereof the said the Beach Pneumatic Conveyer Company has caused its corporate name to be signed and its corporate seal to be affixed hereunto, by its president and attested by its secretary, this 30th day of August, 1892.
    [CORPORATE SEAL.] “ BeACH P. C. Co.,
    “ By G. W. S.,
    
      “Its President.
    
    “ Attest:
    “A. C. B., Secretary
    
    “ £ Exhibit B,’ Beeerred to.
    “[Gordon, Strobel and Laurean,Limited, engineers, manufacturers, & contractors. E\ W. Gordon, chairman; J. C. Gray, y. chairman; Y. O. Strobel, sec’y and treasurer.]
    “ Philadelphia, February %,1891.
    
    “ Mr. James W. Beach,
    
      iiEbbitt House, Washington, D. G.
    
    “ Dear Sir : Since our conversation of yesterday I have weighed your general proposition to transmit mail matter by currents of air, and it seems to me quite feasible.
    “As it is well lmown, in straight or practically straighl conduits the rapid How is in the centre, diminishing gradually, perhaps approximately as the square of the distance, until at the periphery there is no current at all, no matter how rapid it may be at the centre. This is clearly seen in looking into an ordinary return tubular boiler; the flame will be seen to point directly to the centre of the tube. Mail matter, then, dropped in the centre of the tube would follow this line in the centre and not touch the sides at all, the current in the centre being sufficiently rapid.
    “ The volume of air and pressure required for this conduit would dej)end very largely on the size of the conduit and the character of the mail matter to be distributed.
    “ To enable you to estimate on the possible cost of machinery for this purpose, we ivould state that an engine capable of delivering 9,000 feet of air per minute at atmospheric pressure, compressed to 10 pounds above the atmosphere, we could sell on cars here for $6,000.00.
    
      “ This engine is duplex, and would be, I think, admirable for the purpose, giving a very steady flow of air.
    “A single engine capable of blowing 15,000 cubic feet of air would cost on cars here $9,500.00.
    “ We should think two of the former engines would be 
      just the thing. These engines are handsomely built, economical in steam, and very strong.
    
    
      " Yours, very truly,
    
    
      "GORDON, STROBEL & LAIJREAU, LTD.,
    
    
      "F. W. G6RDON, G1iairmai~."
    
    “ BBAOI-I TO THE POSTMASTEJt-GENERAIi.
    “ RAPID DISPATCH OF MAIL.
    “ Chicago, Sept. 1st, ’98.
    
    “ Hon John Wanamaker,
    
      “Postmaster-General, 'Washington, D. C.
    
    “Dear Sir: Upon my own account and by direction of the Beach Pneumatic Conveyer Company, I this day forward to you, by registered letter, a package containing my proposal as an individual and the proposal of said the Beach Pneumatic Conveyer Company, made in accordance with the advertisement of the Postmaster-General, which said advertisement is dated July 26th, 1892, and is entitled ‘ Mail service by pneumatic tubes or other systems,’ together with two descriptions of said devices in said proposals mentioned and three drawings in said descriptions referred to. Said two proposals are in separate envelopes, ivith'the proper accompanying descriptions mentioned, and are sealed and addressed to the Postmaster-General, as required by said advertisement.
    “■Please file and consider said proposals in accordance-with the terms of said advertisement.
    “ With great respect, I remain, sincerely, yours,
    “James W. Beach.”
    “ Office of the Postmaster-General,
    
      “Washington, T). G., Sept. 9th, 1898.
    
    “ Sir : You are invited to be present, in person or by representative, on Wednesday, September 14th, 1892, at 12 o’clock noon, in the Office of the Postmaster-General, at the public reading of the propositions under advertisement of July 26th, 1892, in regard to pneumatic service.
    “ Very respectfully,
    “John Wanamaker,
    
      “Postmaster-GeneralR
    
    “ Mr. James W. Beach,
    “0J Washington Street, Room, 37, Chicago, IMP
    
      [Telegram.]
    “ Chicago, Sept. fflth, 1898.
    
    “ Hon John Wanamaker,
    “Postmaster-General, Washington, D. G.
    
    “ Replying to your favor of the 9th inst., Hon. L. T. Michener will represent me at reading of propositions. Please communicate with him.
    “James W. Beach.”
    [James W. Beach, attorney at law, 94 Washington street, room 37.1
    “ Chicago, Oct. 8th. 1892.
    
    “ RAPID DISPATCI-I OP MAILS.
    “ Hon. John Wanamaker,
    
      “Postmaster-General, Washington, D. 0.
    
    “ Dear Sir : In the matter of the proposals submitted by the Beach Pneumatic Conveyer Company and by the undersigned, concerning the ‘ rapid dispatch of mails,’ I desire to call your attention to the fact that our proposals to license by the year the use of our devices solely and only for the collection and transmission or dispatch of the United States mails throughout the entire United States is for a sum of money exceeding fifty thousand dollars less than was paid last year for that branch of the mail service known as the ‘ Regulation wagon service ’ in a few cities only, being the limited number of cities where such service is established, all of which will appear from inspection of your last annual report, and said proposals so submitted as aforesaid. And in view of the fact that the ‘ press ’ reports state that the Postmaster-General has arranged for some sort of a pneumatic transmission of the mails, in connection with the post-office at Philadelphia, I desire and deem it my duty to suggest that my patents for ‘ improvement in pneumatic conveyer ’ (copies of which have been filed in your office, together with the description furnished you by said company) cover a £ switching ’ system and that a pneumatic switch is covered by the claims allowed me.
    “And I desire to further suggest that any projection or indentation upon the interior of a pneumatic pipe, such as is necessarily embraced in other possibly £ switching ’ devices, will cause a current of air moving in said pneumatic pipe at said places of projection or indentation to £ move in some given direction or trend,’ or, in other words, will cause a local £ ripple ’ or air current; if so, later patents for alleged £ switching ’ or branch devices can not stand as against my prior invention covered by said patents.
    “ I assume that the Government desires to secure the best device and patents, the use of which will not end in loss or disaster to the Government, and in this connection I may be allowed to say in general terms that any unauthorized inden-iation or projection upon the interior of a pneumatic pipe would, as Ave are advised, be an infringement upon the first of said patents granted to me, as would also any other branch or ‘ switching ’ system, so constructed as aforesaid.
    “And further, that the introduction into the pneumatic pipe of the matter to be transported at any point between the extreme ends of said pipe is covered by my said patent, as is also the introduction of the matter to be transported into said pneumatic pipe into a continuous current of air moving therein.
    “And I again respectfully call your attention to the claims allowed me in said patents.
    “ In writing this I am to be understood as insisting upon the merits and prioriPy of our inventions and patents, the first of which said patents was granted many months before any other patent ivas granted for a purpose in any degree similar (to which my attention has recently been called), and will, of course, so be regarded and treated by us.
    “ I remain, with great respect, yours, very truly,
    “ James W. Beaci-i.”
    VI. The evidence does not establish to the satisfaction of the court that plaintiff’s letters patent were conveyed or delivered to the Postmaster-General.
    VII. Seven other persons or companies answered the advertisement of the Postmaster-General for bids.
    September 15, 1892, the Postmaster-General appointed a commission of three expert postal officials, as required by the above-mentioned said appropriation act, to examine into-the merits of the pneumatic tubes and other systems so advertised for; and that commission reported to the Postmaster-General on September 29, 1892, as follows:
    “ PoST-OeEICE DEPARTMENT,
    “Washington, D. 0., Wth Sept., 1892.
    
    “ Sir : The committee named in your order of the 15th of September, 1892, for the purpose of examining into the merits of the pneumatic tubes and other systems, as set forth in the Postmaster-General’s advertisement dated July 26, 1892, beg to submit the following:
    
      “Eight separate propositions were regularly presented within the time mentioned in the advertisement, and it has been thought worth while to submit in brief a schedule of the same, stating the general conditions or terms upon which the owners will place their respective devices at the disposal of the Government, or submit the same to its experimental tests.
    “No. 1. — H. A. Lewis, Norristown, Penna. Electric device. Will submit tests at his home in two months of small device which-he proposes to sell or lease.
    “ No. 2. — J. B. Atwater, Chicago. Electric. Asks an examination of a full-sized carriage for mail service now on exhibition in Chicago. Can not put in operation a device on scale answering Department’s requirements for lack of means.
    “ No. 3. — Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey. Pneumatic. Will put down line between main post-office in Philadelphia and substation at Third and Chestnut streets, without cost to Government and without obligation to purchase or lease. After one year’s trial will lease or will sell at cost if desired by Government.
    “ No. 4. — Kelly Pneumatic Tube Company. Pneumatic. System, now in operation in Chicago and St. Louis. Offers to build a line if Government will agree to purchase or lease when its success is demonstrated.
    “ No. 5. — Collins Automatic Pneumatic Switching Tubes Company, New York. Pneumatic. Will submit to test the experimental line in New York between 137th street and Locust avenue.
    “ No. 6. — United States Automatic Dispatch Company, New York. Electric. Makes no proposition to submit a test line, but will rent for five years for first-class mail matter, anywhere except New York and Brooklyn.
    “ No. 7. — Leake Pneumatic -Transportation Company, Philadelphia. Has an experimental line at Burlington,-New Jersey. Asks that it be examined, and if satisfactory, will put in a plant wherever Department wishes, provided the Government agrees, if it works satisfactorily, to contract with the Leake Company in such manner as it now contracts Avith carrying companies or individuals and at the same price as they iioav jiay for mail transportation; or it Avill authorize the Government, on certain terms, to construct its own lines..
    “ No. 8. — ■ James W. Beach and the Beach Pneumatic Con-Areyer Company, Chicago. Will make contract to construct experimental line for a consideration to be mutually agreed upon. Will sell or lease. Experimental line to be in -readiness in from four to twelve months from October 1,1892.
    
      “ Your order appointing the committee directs that report be made before the close of September, 1892. We understand that your object in naming an early day was to obtain, if possible, a practical test of some of the systems before the setting in of the winter season, as in all of the principal cities "the breaking of the street pavement is prohibited by city ordinances after December 1st, or after heavy frost.
    “ The committee respectfully present that it would not be possible, within the time stated, except by neglecting other daily duties, to make proper examination of all the systems proposed in the eight answers to the advertisement; but inasmuch as one proposition has been made which is more favorable to the Department than any other, for the reason that no other of the proposals offers in definite terms (and without obligation on the Government’s part to purchase or rent) to give a specific service of a practical character within the near future, the committee deem it proper to make this particular proposition the subject of a preliminary report, to wit:
    “ The offer known as ‘ No. 3,’ submitted by the Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey, is to put down in the streets of Philadelphia, between the post-office and the East Chestnut street branch post-office, pneumatic tubes to connect these two offices, without expense to the Department, and without charge for one year’s use of the same, and without liability thereafter. This offer is the best that has been received, and it is believed to bo highly advantageous to the Department, because it will enable it to make an immediate and practical test of the pneumatic system. Your committee, therefore, desire to make the copy of the proposition No. 3, hereto attached, a part of this report, and they recommend prompt acceptance of the offer, that the test may be made without delay.
    “It is worth while to add that in our judgment the "placing of a line unconditionally at the disposal of the Department for practical, everyday use will go far towards demonstrating, in a general way, the extent to which it may be made possible to substitute a tube system for the existing manner of performing transfer service within large cities, where time enters so largely into the necessities of the people.
    “ The committee desire, as well, to emphasize that in making recommendation that an arrangement be made with the Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey for the construction of an experimental line in Philadelphia, it does not wish to be understood as passing upon the merits of the system itself, that being a matter for consideration hereafter ; in like manner as it will be our purpose to give consideration to each one of the systems that have been submitted.
    “ The circumstances are such in the case of the Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey that immediate action is imperative; otherwise the opportunity for making the kind of test especially desired will have passed beyond the Department’s control — at least for six months to come.
    “ It is also worth while to say that the committee is desirous of effecting an arrangement, similar to that herein recommended with the Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey, with some one of the systems mentioned in the schedule, whereby, simultaneously with the inauguration of the practical test at Philadelphia, it will be possible to establish in this city an experimental line between the Post-Office Department and the city post-office.
    “ Should our recommendation have your sanction it will become necessary, so far as it relates to the Government building in Philadelphia, and the necessary motive power, to secure the authority and cooperation of the Secretary of the Treasury.
    “ J. LowRie Bell,
    “ A. D. HazeN,
    “ James Maynard,
    “ Committee.
    
    
      “ The Postmaster-General.”
    Pursuant to the report of the said expert postal officials, the Postmaster-General, on October 20, 1892, entered into the following contract with the Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey:
    “ This article of agreement, made the -20th day of October, A. D. 1892, between the Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey and the United States of America (acting in this behalf by John Wanamaker, the Postmaster-General),
    “Witnesseth, that whereas the said Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey made a proposition in writing, in response to the advertisement of the Postmaster-General bearing date of July 26, 1892, in reference to the furnishing and laying of pneumatic tubes for the despatch of mail matter (which said proposition is referred to herein and made a part of this agreement), to lay pneumatic tubes in the city of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, connecting the main post-office at Ninth and Chestnut streets with the sub-post-office on Chestnut street below Fourth street in said city, which said proposition was approved by the Postmaster-General :
    “ Now, therefore, the said Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey, in consideration of the premises and the further consideration that it will be permitted to enter said post-office building and the building in which said subpost-’office is located upon the conditions hereinafter stated, does undertake, covenant, and agree with the United States as follows,'to wit:
    “ First. That it will lay at its own expense a line of pneumatic tubes, composed of two parallel iron tubes each with an inside diameter of about six and one-eighth (6-J-) inches, in Chestnut street in said city of Philadelphia, connecting the main post-office at Ninth and Chestnut streets with the sub-post-office on Chestnut street below Fourth street.
    “ Second. It agrees to pay all expenses connected with the construction of the said tubes and the laying of the same along said street and into said post-office building and said subpost-office building, and also the entire cost of maintaining and operating the same during the period hereinafter mentioned, and to remove the -same entirely from the said post-office building and the said subpost-office building when required to do so by the Postmaster-General.
    “ Third. It agrees that all damages whatsoever done to said buildings, or any other property owned or leased by and under the control of the United States, shall be paid in full by it.
    “ Fourth. It agrees to submit drawings and specifications for the work, so far as the same relates to entering the said main post-office building, to the Secretary of the Treasury for his approval on or before the 25 day of October, A. D. 1892; and, furthermore, that no part of the approaches to said post-office building, or the masonry, or any other part of the same,-shall be disturbed until the consent and approval of the said Secretary shall have been obtained.
    
      “ Fifth. It agrees to submit drawings and specifications for the work, so far as an entrance into the building in which said subpost-office is located, to the postmaster at said city of Philadelphia for his approval on or before the first day of December, A. I). 1892; and, furthermore, that no part of the approaches to, or the masonry, or any other part of said building in which said subpost-office is located shall be disturbed until the approval of said postmaster shall have been obtained.
    “ Sixth. When they shall be completed, the skid. Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey agrees to turn over the said pneumatic tubes and all the appurtenances thereunto belonging to the Post-Office Department, and for the uses and purposes of the said Philadelphia post-office, for a period of one year from and after the date of the completion óf the same, for such practical tests as the postmaster at said' city and the Postmaster-General may see fit to conduct, which tests shall be made without cost to the United States.
    “ Seventh. The said Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey hereby waives all claims against the United States for any expenses attending the construction, maintenance, repairs, or operations (except as may hereinafter be provided for) of said pneumatic tubes, or of the tests, or the preparation for the tests of the same, or for any other expenses attending the said construction, repairs, operations, or tests aforesaid.
    “ Eighth. It is understood that this agreement is entered into on the'part of the said Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey with the understanding and agreement that the said United States (acting in this behalf by the Secretary of the Treasury) will consent to the use of not exceeding fifty (50) horsepower of the surplus steam in the boilers in the said post-office building at Philadelphia during the said period of said tests, or any part thereof, on condition that the cost of making any alterations or additions to the existing steam apparatus and connections in said post-office building, which may be consented to by the Secretary of the Treasury, sha-ll be borne and paid by said Pneumatic Transit Conripauy of New Jersey, and also that it will pay the cost of the steam supply for the said experimental tests upon the demand.therefor by the Secretary of the Treasury, it being 1/vft optional with him to determine if any charge therefor shall be made.
    “ Ninth. The said Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey further agrees, at the expiration of the period herein-before stated, to wit, a period of one year from the completion of said pneumatic tubes or at any intermediate elate thereof, to lease said pneumatic tubes to the United States year by year, or to sell, assign, and transfer the same to the United States at the cost thereof, and to authorize the use by the United States of all.the inventions in said pneumatic tubes and the appurtenances and devices connected therewith which are now or may then be covered by letters patent, by license, sale, or assignment as ma})- then be agreed upon by the said Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey and the Postmaster-General; provided that the right to lease, rent, purchase, or in anywise contract for the use of said tubes and all appurtenances thereunto belonging from and after said date shall by law be vested in any officer of the United States.
    “ In witness whereof the said Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey has, by its officers duly authorized so to do, hereunto set its hand and seal the day and year set opposite the names of each of said officers respectively; and the said Postmaster-General has hereunto affixed his official signature and caused the same to be attested by the seal of the Post-Office Department.
    “(Signed) .The Pneumatic Transit Co.
    “ Signed this 20 day of October, 1892.
    “ William T. Kelley, [seal.]
    
      “President.
    
    “ Signed this 20 day of October, 1892.
    “ O. T. IIarrop, (?) [seal.]
    
      “Beaty.
    
    “ In the presence of—
    “(Signed) Geo. W. Peed,
    “(Signed) Amos Bonsall,
    “ Witnesses.
    
    “ Signed and sealed by the'Postmaster-General.
    “[seal.] (Signed) Jno. Wanamaker,
    
      “Postmaster- General.
    
    “ In the presence of—
    “(Signed) J. Lowrie Bell.”
    Similar contracts were entered into by the Post-Office Department for like transportation of United States mail, at Philadelphia, Pa.; New York and Brooklyn N. Y.; and at Boston, Mass.
    VIII. Following is a list of patents which, according to the evidence, were granted to one Batcheller, and which were used, applied, and operated by the Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey:
    
      
    
    
      
      
    
    IX. Tlie evidence does not establish to the satisfaction of the court that James W. Beach, the claimant herein, was the first inventor of the devices for pneumatic transportation used, operated, and conducted for the transportation of mail matter by persons contracting with the United States or by the agents' of the United States.
    X. The evidence does not establish to the satisfaction of the court that the letters patent issued to the claimant, James W. Beach, covered the same devices actually put into practical operation and used by tlie corporation which, under an act of Congress, contracted' with, the Postmaster-General for transmitting mail matter through pneumatic conveyers.
    
      Mr. James W. Beach pro so.
    
      Mr. Felix Brannigan (with whom was Mr. Assistant Attorney-General Pradt) for defendants.
   Ho wet, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court:

The voluminous record in this cause (comprising several thousand pages), the character of the evidence, expert and otherwise, and the numerous exhibits pertaining to tlie art of pneumatics; tlie alleged appropriation by Government of plaintiff’s patented invention for transmitting mail by means of pneumatic tubes; the enormous sum demanded as damages ($20,000,000) upon the theory of contract for the use of plaintiff’s alleged improvements, and the persistence with which plaintiff has urged his complaint in the Executive Departments ancl in this court, combine to make this case one of unusual character and interest. The view we take of the controversjr brings the questions within a somewhat narrow compass, but it is believed that every issue of fact and law necessary to a right determination has been considered within the limits of this opinion.

Eliminating all questions relating to the alleged infringement of plaintiff's improvements for the present, not only for want of jurisdiction of the alleged tortioi^Laatek but also because of the amended petition which proceeds entirely upon the assumption that a contract existed with the plaintiff, the first thing to consider is the authority of the Postmaster-General and the action taken under that authority on the proposals.

The first dealing of the Government for the more rapid dispatch of mail matter between large cities and post-offices stations and .transportation terminals by means of pneumatic tubes limited the authority of the Postmaster-General. Section 6 of the Post-Office appropriation act of July 13, 1892 (27 Stat. L., 145), provided: “That the Postmaster-General is hereby authorized and directed to examine into the subject of a more rapid dispatch of mail matter between large cities and post-office stations and transportation terminals located in large cities by means of pneumatic tubes or other systems, and make report upon the expense, cost, and advantages of said systems when applied to the mail service of the United States, and the sum of ten thousand dollars is' hereby appropriated therefor.”

Pursuant to this authority the Postmaster-General published in several newspapers the advertisement set forth in the findings and under date of August 30, 1892, plaintiff answered, mailing a proposal stipulating that the same should not be binding upon him unless the conditions of his letter containing his proposal should be accepted by the United States and that he should be notified of said acceptance on or before the 1st day of August, 1893.

September 15, 1892, the Postmaster-General appointed a commission of three expert postal officials, as required by the appropriation act, to examine into the merits of the pneumatic tubes and other systems advertised for. This commission reported on September 29, 1892, that they had examined into the merits of pneumatic tubes and other systems set forth in the advertisement and that 8 separate proposals .were regularly presented within the time mentioned in the advertisement.

Among the "8 mentioned by the commission notice was taken of the plaintiff’s proposal, accompanied by the statement that it appeared to the commission from his bid that he would make a contract to construct experimental lines for a consideration to be mutually agreed upon and would sell or lease the same upon the condition that the experimental line was to- be in readiness within four to twelve months from October 1, 1892. The report of the commissi op was accompanied by a statement that one proposal (not ■ plaintiff’s) had been made without obligation on the part of the Government to purchase or rent, which was more favorable than any other; and for that reason and because no one of the other bids offered any definite terms in giving a specific service of a practical character within the near future, this proposal was recommended for acceptance.

An offer (submitted by the company with which plaintiff had no connection) to put down pneumatic tubes to connect two offices in the streets of Philadelphia without expense to the Government and without charge for one year’s use of the same and without liability thereafter was the one recommended as highly advantageous, because it would enable the Postmaster-General to make an immediate and practical test of the pneumatic system. The recommendation was emphasized by the statement that an arrangement could be made with the designated company for the construction of an experimental line without passing upon the merits of the system itself, which, in the opinion of the commission, was a matter to be considered after the experiment. This left the commission the opportunity, which was stated by them to be their purpose,'to give future consideration to each one of the systems submitted b}^ the various bidders on the original call for bids in that behalf.

Under the contention of express contract, it must be noted that correspondence not arising out of the advertisement and plaintiff’s immediate responses thereto but subsequent to the occasion which called forth the bids and action upon them is inadmissible to establish the alleged express agreement. The advertisement called for a full description of the tube or device, the kind and quantity of motive power used in operating the same, the method of its application, and the capacity of the tube and apparatus. It likewise called for an offer to submit a test; for the precise place and terminals where it should be proposed to conduct the test; for the date at which the tube or device would be in condition to be tested, and the time that would necessarily be occupied in making a test; and, generally, anything else whereby the Postmaster-General could judge of the relative value of the several tubes or devices that might be submitted and the adaptability of each to the service proposed to be inaugurated if the tests justified anything beyond the experimental stage of the matter.

Plaintiff’s response to the advertisement did not give the information which enabled the Postmaster-General to judge of the value of his letters patent. It was not letters patent alone that were called for by the advertisement, as plaintiff seems to have supposed, but tubes or devices in a condition toJiíi-tfistaíLat a time- and place to be mentioned by the person answering the bid, so that the Postmaster-General could judge of the value of the tubes under experiments to be made for the contemplated service. It was not incumbent on the plaintiff to transmit his letters patent at all except as they met the conditions of the advertisement with the other things called for. There ivas nothing contained in the original proposition of the plaintiff in answer to the advertisement which included an <tfiÜr,to submit any test at all. The precise place and terminals where it was proposed that the test should' be conducted were omitted by him. Details as to the date at which plaintiff’s tube or device would be in condition to be tested and the time that would necessarily be occupied in making the test were ignored.

It is clear that the plaintiff’s bid was entirely insufficient to establish anything like an agreement to pay him anything. The advertisement and plaintiff’s bid under it made none, and the general correspondence made none. On the face of tbe act carrying a small appropriation for an examination into the subject there-was no authority given by the lawmaking power to any of its officers or agents to bind the Government to the payment of anything. The act carried its own limitations and plaintiff was bound to know this independent of the advertisement. In the experimental stage of the matter which Congress wisely provided for, the Postmaster-General was without authority to contract with anybody for the permanent use or purchase of any kind of a patent.

Under an agreement made October 20, 1892, between the Pneumatic Transit Company of New Jersey and the United •States, it was provided that the party of the first part should be permitted to enter the post-office building at Philadelphia and lay at its expense a line of two parallel pneumatic iron tubes connecting the main office with a suboffice of that city. The company was to pay all expenses connected with the construction, maintenance, and operation of the tubes and to remove them when required. Upon completion of the work, at its expense, the company agreed to turn over these pneumatic tubes and all the appurtenances connected with their operation to the Post-Office Department for the period of one year from the date of the completion of the tubes for such practical tests as might be given to their operation, but without cost to the United States. At the expiration of one year from completion or at any intermediate date the company further agreed to lease these pneumatic tubes to the United States year by year, or to sell, assign, and transfer the same to the Government at the cost of the .company, including authority for the use by the Government of all the inventions in said pneumatic tubes and the appurtenances and devices' connected with them, which at the time of the contract were covered by letters patent or which at the subsequent time stated might be covered by letters patent, by license, sale, or assignment. Similar contracts were entered into by the-Postmaster-General for like transportation of mail at’ New York, Brooklyn, and Boston. These preliminary contracts were the basis of the authority subsequently given by Congress to the Postmaster-General to contract for the permanent system which 4s now in use because it appears that these tests were ultimately successful.

Subsequently, and after much delay and the grant of letters patent for improvements upon the original patents, Congress provided (32 Stat. L., 114) for the transmission of mail by pneumatic tubes or other similar devices. They appropriated, by this act approved April 21, 1902, for the service of the Post-Office Department for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1903, $500,000, payable to contractors under the authority of the Postmaster-General for a period not exceeding four years for the transmission of mail by pneumatic tubes. Public advertisement ivas required to be made where tho service was to be performed, and contracts for this service were made subject to the provisions of the postal laws and regulations relating to the letting of mail contracts except as otherwise provided by the act. No advertisement authorizing contractual relations with anyone was permissible until after a careful investigation as to the needs and practicability of such service. The act authorized the rejection of any and all bids, and no contract was to be awarded except to the lowest responsible bidder tendering-full and sufficient guaranties to the satisfaction of the Postmaster-General of the ability of such bidder to perform satisfactory service, and these guaranties were to include an approved bond in double the amount of any bid. The Postmaster-General was forbidden to enter into contracts prior to June 30, 1904, under the provisions of tho act, and the contracts were not to involve an annual aggregate expense in excess of $800,000, but such contracts only were authorized subsequent thereto as might from time to time be provided for in future annual appropriation acts for the postal service. All provisions of law contrary to those contained in this act of 1902 were in terms repealed.

Out of these acts of Congress, first for experiments and finally for contracts through the Postmaster-General, has arisen the plaintiff’s alleged cause of action on the theory now to be stated.

The allegations of the petition next attempt to make a case of contract, partly in writing and predicated on the original advertisement and correspondence, and partly in parol, founded, upon the use charged of plaintiff’s inventions in pneumatic tubes and devices by the Government under the authority of Congress. The petition alleges that plaintiff’s proposal authorizing the use of his inventions has never been returned to him and that no offer has ever been made to recon-vey to him his letters patent as they were submitted to the Postmaster-General pursuant to public advertisement, but that his proposal has been retained and is wholly under the control of the Government, so that he is deprived of all power over his letters patent and ox all opportunity to maintain suit for their infringement; that the Government has directly or indirectly entered into the use and enjoyment of his inventions ; that by reason of the execution of his proposal in writing and by reason of the retention of the proposal and by reason of the uses aforesaid, plaintiff alleges that the United States have assented to the terms of his proposal and become liable to pay. These allegations attempt to make a case for which plaintiff as the party performing thinks he is entitled to recover the fair value of his property as upon an implied contract for a quantum merv.it. That is to say, that if the alleged express contract be uncertain plaintiff is entitled to fall back upon the rights which resulted to him from what he thinks is the implied agreement.

Inasmuch as the forms of pleading in this court are not of so strict a. character as to preclude plaintiff from proceeding upon the theory of an implied contract, this phase of the complaint will be considered. The question comes to the use and the manner of the use of the inventions and the authority under which pneumatic tubes for the transmission of mail Avere employed.

Plaintiff has exhibited drawings and specifications of his inventions, which he says were the same found by him to be in the rise and enjoyment of the Government in the Philadelphia post-office. On this point, and as to the methods in use for transmitting mail matter, there is a vast amount of conflicting testimony of an expert as well as of a general character.

There is included in the list of patents issued by the Patent Office before plaintiff applied for any of his improvements: Needham’s, patented 1864; those of Wood in 1867; A. E. Beach (not plaintiff) in 1869; Siemens in 1873; Dowd’s in 1875; Leaycroft’s in 1876; B,andolph’s in 1876; Hatch’s in 1879, and Ely’s in the same year. (Horen’s patent was issued about the time of plaintiff’s first invention.) As all of these inventions antedated the alleged improvements which plaintiff says he made upon them, and rights under most of these letters had expired by limitation, they were open to experiment and use by anyone, which included the Government.

The Pneumatic Transit Company, which was incorporated under the laws of the State of New Jersey in 1892, had in its employ one Birney C. Batcheller as an engineer. This engineer designed some of the terminal apparatus that was first used and a system of tubes and devices which carried mails pneumatically was constructed under his direction and supervision. Defendants contend that Batcheller’s patents were used by the company with which the Government contracted, and it also appears from the report of the expert commission that in the main the Siemen’s patent was drawn upon in the subsequent contracts in connection with the improvements which Batcheller supplied. It may be. that all of the improvements designed subsequent to those of the plaintiff were utilized. Of this, however, we are not certain, nor is it material for reasons which hereafter appear. It does reasonably appear, and is material to state that some of the mechanism designed by this engineer is now in use by the system adopted by the. Post-Office Department. When these improvements were first used we do not know. These probably include ideas embodied in some of the various inventions granted many years ago, but seem to show improvements not appearing in the Beach (plaintiff’s) patents, such as an eccentric shaft for carrier, patented in 1895; gate for open receiver, patented in 1896; electro-pneumatic circuit-closer, bearing rings of layers of treated cloth, electric time lock for substation, valve for releasing receiver of trams, receiver, and sender, all of which were patented in 1897; chronograph, patented in 1898, and switch mechanism, cradle trams with lever release, eccentric carrier lid, closed receiver, open receiver, and regulating by-pass, patented in 1899; carrier lid locked by detachable key, 8-inch carrier eccentric and fingered, inner carrier, packing device for annular joints, and water-tight carrier chain hinge, all patented in 1900; pipe coupling, patented in 1901; vertical transmitter, return tube open receiver, pneumatic time lock, patented in 1902; pressure system, intermediate machine, vertical sender for double gate, and improved valve finger, patented in 1903, and a double gate open receiver, patented in 1904.

These are novel improvements upon all preceding inventions. Some, at least, of these improvements (and it may be all) are in use under the present system. These, together with various parts of the mechanism derived from other inventions and notably the devices described in Sie-men’s patent, seem to us to have been used by the contracting company. We do not definitely decide that they were so used, but in our view of this case, all those details which have been presented in the effort to show that plaintiff’s property was appropriated, especially in the material allegations respecting the wave motion of plaintiff’s inventions (upon Avliich he largely rests his case), seem to be wanting in the element of identity with the tubes and mechanism finally combined and put into actual use by other agencies. The necessary things to make an implied contract (from the very inception of the matter) are thus wanting. Not only does the complaint not state the facts necessary to make a contract by implication, but the findings show as between the plaintiff and defendants continual antagonism from the time the expert postal commission made its report to the time when, the recommendations and subsequent investigations of tlie Postmaster-General led him to make a contract (with others) under the authority of Congress. The bidding having been competitive and the right having been given by law to the Postmaster-General to reject any and all bids, we must presume that right was properly exercised when contracts were made with others.

Although we might stop here, we deem it proper (while going no further into the merits of the complaint) to say that enough has been said on the facts to carry us to the reasons which underlie everything else in the case in the matter of the right to proceed. The United States manufactured nothing. They acquired nothing substantial from plaintiff by the submission of his original letters patent, and they declined to act on any of his proposals. True, by the submission of the inventions to the officers of the Government gratuitous license to use the alleged improvements was never intended by Beach, nor was a tortious infringement contemplated by the United States. The use of an invention by the Government on contracts with others without the consent of the owners of letters patent is an infringement upon rights, but not a taking of property under an implied contract. In Schillinger's case (155 U. S. R., 163) (appealed from this court) it was held, citing Gibbons (8 Wall., 269), Morgan (914 Wall., 531), and Hill (149 U. S. R., 593), that the owner of letters patent for an invention who sets up in the Court of Claims that a contractor with the Government has made use of a patented invention in the execution of his contract without compensation to the claimant and against his protest, whereby there was a wrongful appropriation of the patent by the Government for its sole use and benefit, and that a right has accrued to him to recover of the Government the damages thus done to him, sets up a claim sounding in' tort of which this court has no jurisdiction. This case comes within the principles of that decision, although it does not appear here that Beach protested and objected to the use of the tubes and devices actually used, as it did appear in Schilling er1 s. case that the owner of the patent objected to the use by the Government of the patented invention shown there through the person with whom the Government contracted.

But here, as there, the Government contracted with another and independent party. That party was the company that claimed to own the inventions which by contracts with the Government the United States saw put into actual use. If the contracting company did not apply the Beach devices and the mechanism described in his letters, the cause of action comes to an end on the facts. If the contracting-company took Beach’s inventions and applied his ideas to practical use in the post-offices of the cities of the country under its contracts with the Government, then the company has infringed upon plaintiff’s rights as an inventor. It is, in this event, liable for the infringement at the suit of the inventor, but not in this court. The matter of the infringement by the company is something to be determined elsewhere, and not here, between the party claiming the infringement and the company charged with invading patent rights. If the Beach inventions were put into actual use by the contracting company with knowledge by the officers and agents of the Government that the contractors were infringing plaintiff’s patents, those conditions would make such officers and agents with knowledge of the unlawful use wrongdoers with the contracting company, but for such a case sounding in tort this court is equally without jurisdiction to proceed. S chilling eSs case would cover this state of affairs in the matter of jurisdiction as much as if the facts here were exactly analogous to the facts shown in that complaint.

In this respect, as to the uses alleged by the plaintiff of his invention, the complaint counts upon a tort in which the contractors are ■ necessarily involved by the disclosures of the record. If plaintiff’s premises be true, that his property was appropriated by that company and used under its contracts with the Government in the Philadelphia post-office, the wrong would be with the company, as the Government appropriated nothing. And it should be stated here that there is no proof showing that the Government or any of its officers had knowledge of any unlawful appropriation of plaintiff’s invention by others.

Being without jurisdiction of the company, the sole thing left to determine is the relation of the Government to the matter. Treating any infringement upon his rights as distinct from plaintiff’s claim of compensation for an authorized use, there is wanting the admission that plaintiff had any title to the apparatus used. In Langford v. United States, 101 U. S. R., 341 (affirming this court), it was held that when an officer of the United States took and held possession of land of a private citizen under a clciim that the land belonged to the Government the United States could not be charged upon an implied obligation to pay for its use and occupation. In United States v. Great Falls Mfg. Co. (112 U. S. R., 645, and 124 U. S. R., 581) it was subsequently held that if the United States appropriate to a public use land which they admitted to be private property they may be held as upon an implied contract to pay its value to the owner. So, in Hollister v. Benedict Mfg. Co. (113 U. S. R., 59) and United States v. Palmer (128 U. S. R., 262), title of the plaintiff was admitted. In United States v. Berdan Firearms Company (156 U. S.R., 552) a judgment of this court was sustained on an implied contract for the use of an improvement in breech-loading firearms; but there was no denial of the patentee’s rights to the invention.

In United States v. Lynah (188 U. S. R., 445) these authorities, with many others, were reviewed, and jurisdiction of the courts to subject the Government to the obligation of making compensation if there was a taking was sustained where the Government, in the exercise of its powers of eminent domain and regulation of commerce, through officers duly empowered by Congress, placed dams, draining walls, and other obstructions in the river in such manner as to hinder its natural flow and to so raise its waters as to overflow plaintiff’s land to such an extent as to cause a total destruction of its value. Two members of the court concurred as to jurisdiction on the ground stated in the opinion of the court, and also agreed with a third member in resting jurisdiction upon a taking within the meaning of the fifth'amendment to the Constitution irrespective of the question of contract or tort under that clause of the Tucker Act which vests the Court of Claims with jurisdiction of all claims founded upon the Constitution of the United States or any law of Congress. Three members of the court dissented on the subject of jurisdiction, as well as on the merits growing out of the character of the taking. The Government, not denying ownership of the land, admitted that the work which was done by their officers was done by authority of Congress, but denied that the work had produced the alleged injury and destruction. The principles declared do not conflict with the rule established in kSchillinger, sufra, nor do they declare Government liability for the acts of those appropriating another’s invention and. using that other’s invention in contracts with the Government. Though it is possible in the case at bar that the company with whom the contracts for transmitting mail by means of pneumatic tubes infringed in more or less degree plaintiff’s inventions, it is not our province to go into that. But nothing appearing in the findings and conclusions of the court is intended to prejudice plaintiff in any right he may assert against individuals or companies contracting with the Government for unlawfully using his inventions. If he made improvements on the pioneer patents by the use of which others are deriving the extraordinary profits which the annual appropriations for the transmission of mail by means of pneumatic tubes indicate the way it is left open for him to pursue his remedy, if he has any. We have only gone into the merits far enough to define the reasons for dismissing the complaint for want of jurisdiction.

Reserving questions relating to the taxation of costs, the pefcitioBjs-dásmissed.

Barney, J., had not been commissioned when this case was tried and took no part in its decision.