Virginia Argus — Richmond, Va., 1810-05-01 00:00:00, page 4

irjLf abates y
Bkhoy) Madison’s I
&AP OF VIRGINIA
For Sale at this OflSce. /
»-■■-■—- - ■ ....
ftn SALE A1 TUIS OFFICE
•IT* A raw HAVDSOMK COPIES Of I
GIBBON’S
DECLINE & FALL
or THE
"ROMAN EMPIRE ;
fo which it added,’(In this edition only)
THE VERT IN TK HR STING
Lilli of the AUTHOR,
Sight Vols, l.aigc Octavo, Price 20 Dol
lars N
TO TUI
MILLERS
Of the United States.
TAKE NOTIC E—
That Congress did on the twen»y-first
day of January, eighteen hun
dred and eight, pass the fol
lowing Act:-—
AN ACT
For the relief of Oliver Evans .
EE it enacted by the Senate and
House of Representatives or the U. 3.
of America, in Congress assrmbl.d,
That it shall and may be lawful for th.
Secretary of State, on application in
writing by Oliver Evans, to cause let
ters pateut to be made out in the man
ner and form prescril>cd by t^e act
tniuieu, -nn act 10 promote me pro
gress of useful arts, and to repeal the
act heretofore made for that purpose,”
therefe gran ing to said Oliver Evans,
hi3 heVs, executors, administrators
and assVns, for a term not exceeding
fourteen war;, the iull and extlut-ivc
right and wotrty of making, construe*
ting, using, and Vending to he used,
his invention, discovery and improve* i
irunts, in the art of manuf. ctu.ring
floor And meal, and in the several ma
chines,- which hb has discovered, in
Vcijtcd, improved and applied to that
purpose : Provided, that no person
who may have heretofore paid the said
Oliver Evans for license to use his
said improvements, shall be obliged to
renew said license, or subject to dam
ages for not renewing the same : And
provided also, That no person who
shall have used the said improvemerus,
or have erected the same for use, be
fore the issuing of the said patent, shall
be liable to damages therefor.
J. ii. VARNUM,
Speaker of thc^Housc of Repre
sentatives.
CEO ; CLINTON,
Vice-President ef the United States,
'and President of the Senate.
January 21, 1808.
Approved,
THi JEFFERSON.
That in pursuance of said act letters
patent were made out, and delivered
to said Oliver Evans, bearing date ja^
nuary 22d, 180J, granting to him, his,
heirs, executors, administrators, and
assigns, for the term ol fourteen years,
the iull and exclusive right and liber
- ■ _--O’ ----O’ —
vending 10 others to be used, hi3 said
improvement \ and also of making,
constructing, using, &c. all the m;t
chines, viz. his improved elevator, hi*
improved conveyer, his improved hop
perboy, his in.proved drill, and his im
proved kiln drier.
I hat under my snkl patent, my es
tablished prices for license to use m)
said improvements in the manufacture
of flour and meal, are as tclluws,
■viz.
For elevating and conveying grain,
elevating and conve) ing mud, and lor
cooling the m< ul, and attending the
bolting hoppers in a tingle mill, di iving
but one pair of millstones at a time,
one hundred dollars ; and for every
additional pair of millstones driven at
the same time, either by the same
wheel or power, or by different wheels,
or powr.rn, one hundred dollars.
For either elevating and conveying
grain, or elevating and convey ing meal,
or for cooling the meal, and attending
the belting hoppers, when used sepa
rately, fdty dollars for every pair of
stones running at the sanre time j and
for any tr. o of the aforesaid parts, used
jointly without the othsr third purt, sc
vt nt)-five All 'rs fotVach pair of mill
•tones running at tbb same time.
And for tlev.atitw rice in rice mills,
fifty dollars ; lorJach elevator for each I
s ngle mill, andgTor the use of either
of the irachineyTor any other purpose,1
Mblty dollars. / .
C>And for kilnYier, fifty dollars
or each paii/of mill stones, with in
ert, in e%rn case, from the date of
_ iy patent, or from the time of begin
ning to use the same unity paid.
And l< r license to use mV patented
strew mill lor breaking aifd grinding
ftaru substances, ouch as plaster, &c. dr
(ndiin corn to be ground with the cob,
iwen-.y dollars.
That the Circuit Court of the United
States for the districtoi Pennsylvania,
judges Washington and Peters presi
ding, did at the lass October term, de
c .de a rase, and so construed the said
act of-Congress, as to adjudge that all
those who are using my said improve
ment* without license, are liable to
damages, until they obtain license.
I do therefore give this public no
tice, and earnestly request all those in
the United States, who are using irfy
said patented improvements, or any of
them, without iry license, to pay at
the .above rates, to the Subscriber, or
James I Kush,!'niladelphia, or to Cap
tain John Moody, of Virginia, Evan
Evans, City of ashington, Nathani
el Williams, Esq. Baliimore, Joseph
Evans, near New -Port, Delaware state,
Samuel Nicholson, Esq.
or to George Evans, Pittsburg, or to
any other agent or attorney 1 may ap
point, and who are duly authorised to
receive the same, and to grant such li
cences only as are subscribed with my
sign manual.
Those w ho reTuse or neglect, will
please excuse me if i in iutuVe refuse
to expend all my profits in travelling
to collect, and should put roy demands
into the hands of attornies at law, who
will of course send the marshals at the
expense oi those who invade my rights.
I w «M be very thankful to those who
shall save me the disagreeable neecs
siK’.
OLIVER EVANS,
By his Agent,
JOHN MOODY.
Richmond; Virginia, April
4, 1810.
The following decision on the pa
tent right of Mr. Oliver Evans, of this
city, was given at the last session ol
the Circuit Court of the Onited States,
held by Judges Washington and Pe
ters.
Oliver Etans,
John
This was
a violation
right, and t
case agree
The pin
the impro anulact6re
of flour, h . hed, and the
patent right by him,Kere
tolore obtainedSmyingbet^dtcIared
by the ^urt void m tne action of the
said Evl^bagainst Chambers ; nndths
time for^Jnch the said patent^sfaa
j granted havmtealso run out, anklet ol
Congrsa, entiifcd an act lor^fne reliel
of Oliver Evans wiupasse^n the 21st
| January, 1808—itvVorfsequcnce ol
which, the said OlhrfnSduly obtained
| letters patent, byrfing J^e the 22d
January, IS'OjMC notice wn^-cof was
given to t^rdeftnd mt in ^^ruary
OntJlC 7th May, 1302, durin^^he
conusance ol the former patent, tike
de|j^idant purchased of the plaintifli|
ffght to use the said improvement at
his mill, on Wissahiccon creek, in Phi
ladelphia country, in this districr, for
one wheel-and a pair of stones; blit
piior to the passing said act of Con
_ L'_ »• IV 1-1
vu^nv UUU LUdMIlUCJl
to apply acd use the same improve
ments, \6r two -wheels and two paired
stones in the same mill.—The questL
on •ubmityed, is whether the defen..
dant is liable for damages, for the use
of said iinprovervnnts, in application
to this second wheel and p&iroi stones,
since the act of the 22d January, and
whether if so he is liable oefore notice
irons the plaintiff. If the opinions of
ol the court ba in favor of the plaintiff,
judgment to be entered generally, and
amount to be adjusted afterwards by
attornies.
Judge Washington delivered the opi*
nion of the Court.
It is contended by the plaintiff,
that the defendant in liable for using
the plaintiff’s imprerement, in appli
cation t* tttc second wheel and pair ol
stones, since the 22d January, 1803, or
at all events, since the time when the
defendant received notice of the plain
tifl’s patent; because the proviso in
the act passed on the 21st ol January,
1-EwHS f°r the relief of Oliver fcvan9,
extends only to cases of improvements
erected for use, or used prior to the
passage of said la w, and dues not pro*
tfet the defendant from damages, for
using after the issuing of the patent
under this law, an improvement erect
ed prior thereto.
On the other side it is insisted that
such a construction would render this
an cx post facto law, and consequent
ly repugnant to the constitution.—To
avoid, which, it would be so construed,
as to «>nneet w ith the use ol the im
provement the erection of it, subse
quent t^ the grant of the patent.
A#tbctegh the court at t ie last term,
and upon the first argument, felt
strongly inclined to give it the con*
"Struction tohtetivle l for'by the defen
dant ; yet upon further reflection, we
are satisfied that we bhohld do a vio
lence to the words, which no rule of
construction should warrant.
The words of that proviso are “ that
no person who shall have used the said
improvement, or have erected the same
for use, before the issuing of the said
' patent, shall -be liable to damageb
therefor.”
That is, shall be liable for-having e
recled, or for having U3«d the improve
ment, at any time prior to the patent.
But respect to the usc’fef it, after issu
ing of the patent, no protection what
ever is afforded, against the claim for
damages, under this law*
The next enquiry is—does the ge
neral law give to the plaintiff a right
of recover)'-bgainst a person who e
rected a machine prior to the issuing
of a patent to the first inventor of it,
and who afterwards made use of the
same.
The act of the lYth April, 1800,
. which as to this point is the only law
in force, declares that if any person,
without permission from the inventor,
shall make, devise use or sell the thing
whereof the exclusive right is secured j
to the patentee, he shall pay three times
the damage sustained by the patentee,
to be ascertained by a jury. Now
whatever doubts might Have existed
as to the meaning of the words de
vise and use,” in tfte 5th section of the
act of 21st February, 179S, thus con
Inecting the using with the devising of
the improvement, there can be none
under the 3d section of the act of 1800,
j which repeals the whole of the 5th sec
tion of the old law.
j It‘is plain that the using of an im.
provement invented oy anotner, ana
secured by patent, is of itself an of
fence, no matter at what time such
improvement was devised or made.
Whether the word “devise,” which
has beeu a good deal criticised, is sy
nonymous with . make, as cue of
the plaintiff 's counsel seemed to thick,
or means to invent, a mere act
of the mind, a construction which,
whether it be to make, or to contrive,
to plan,/or m or design, it-is unneces*
aary in this case to decide, because the
I charge against the defendant is the u*
! sing of the plaintiff’s improvements*
i unconnected with the making of de
vising it.
But it is objected to this construed*
, on, that it would render the law ex
post facto in operation, in respset to
..one who has erected his improvement
prior to the graating of the patent* to
, the plnintiff.
It must be admitted that cas«3 of
great hardship may occur, if after a
man shall have gone to the expense of
erecting a machine, for which the in
ventor has not then and hever may ob
tain a patent, he shall be prevented
frona using it by the grant oi a subse^
quent patent and its relation back to
the patentee’s prior invention. But
the law in this case cannot be termed ex
post facto, or even retrospective in its
^ operation, because the general law de
] dares befonhaud, that the right to the
j patent belongs to him who is the first
inventor, even before the patent is
granted; and therefore any person
who, knowing that another, is the first
inventor, yet doubting whether that o
j trier will ever apply lor a patent, pro
; ceeds, to construct a machine, of which
j it m y afterwards appear he is not the
; first inventor, acts at his peril, and
I with a full knowlrdge of the law, that
j by relation back to the first invention
as ttbsequent patent may cut him out
of the use of the machine thus erected.
Not only may individuals be injured
by a liberal construction of the words in
the lawT but the public may suffer if an
obstinate or negligent inventor should
j decline obtaining a patent, at the same
I time keep others at arms length, so as j
: to prevent them from profiting by the !
j invention for a length of time, during
: which the 14 years arenot running on.
• liut all these hardships must rest with
Congress to correct. It is beyond
our power to apply a remedy. No
such hardships exist in this case, where
the defendant erected the improve
ment, with a knowledge not only that
the plaintiff was the first inventor,
but had absolutely obtained a patent
ahhough it was afterwards declared in
valid. ,
The circumstances of this case ren
dcr it unnecessary to give an opinion
as to the right of a first inventor altei
patent obtained, to recover against one,
who believing himself to be the firsi
inventor, constructs a machine or im
1 provemont upon the principles of his
new invention, or uses the same after
such patent issued.
L pon the point of notice, we think
that the act of 1803 being a private
act, the defendant is liable, only from
the time he received notice of the law. i
Judgment for the plaintiff.
j Estimation of the profits arising from
j th* use of Oliver Evans's patent <
Improvements in the art of m«*
rmfactunng flour, tkc.
1 he machinery receives the grant
from the waggon or bag or vessel ami
carries it through th« whole process,
naking all the meal into superfine flour
at one operation, finishing as k goes,,
without manual labour, making at least
28 Ibd. superfine flour more out of t.
very 5 bushels of wheat, than is made
m rhe old way, gaining the difference ,
in price between superfine flour and so
much middlings, saving grain and
meal from being wasted, and manufac
turing as much in five days as the mill
could do in six days, without these im
provements.
They save the wages and board of a
man and boy (in a mill manufacting
20 blls. flour per day) per year
is ' ’ 3 400
The difference in the price
between 28 lbs. superfine flour
and midiings say 43 lbs. on 20
bbls. per day, S 8 83 l-3d, say
300 days, is - . - 2500
They save from being wasted
in grain and meal per day, say
33 1-3d cts. is per year of 300
days .... 100
The mill gains one day per
week, 52 weeks at {5 10 is 520
% S u520
To reduce eac^of^e abAve items
as low you can, then if interest is
counted^t will shoKV how fast frugal
millers will insensibly grow rich by
their use and thsd those who had dis
cernment to avail themselves early of
their great use (both those, who refuse
to pay as well as those who generous
i., _— i
- *. 1-j - r- .
growing rich by the use of the im
provements, while chose \\3jo obstinate
ly persisted in opposition to their in
troduction, have deprived themselves
of the benefits, their profits have been
lessened in proportion as the others
have been increased, and will so conti
nue as long as they persist. The in*
Venter’s demand for license to use the
improvements, is not one third part of
the Imerest of the profits that ths mil*
ler may gain by the n in 14 years, as
he knows that no miller without them,
■can ata&din competition with auothcr
Who hh^^plied them so a3 to yield
their full benefits—but if miiiers
Will ^as they generally have done) ap*
ply them so as not to yield them more
than one fouth part, he is not to blame,
he has given full directions for the ap
plication in his millwrights* guide.
He and his agents have travelled one
hundred theusand miles traversing the
United States for 13 years, to teach
millwrights to build and millers to ap*
ply and use those improvements and
have been derided and insulted by ma
ny, while others more generous and
enlightened have freely paid for license
to us# them,and which defrayed the
expenses, but the time and labour
would have been lost had not congress
passed the act for his relief. Now if
any w^o would have remained igno
rant o\ those impicVements had not
sucn ^traorcnnary exertions been
made tiAnake them known, should use
them, and refuse to pay the inventor
one third part «»f the interest of the
principal they may gain, by his labours
and improvements, will he not be justi
fiable in receiving every cent ofdama.
ges that the law will give him, from
those he may be compelled to sue ?
' VIRGINIA :
At a Superior court of Chancery Holden at
the Capitol in R.clwnond, Feb. 10, 1810,
Barton & Fisher inercuants and partners.
Pltfs.
£ AGAINST,
Charles Conway, Henry Randolph; Ed
ward Bolling and Robert Bolling, ex’rs.
of John Boili ijr, deceased, Wr*. Friend;
Alexander Simms, Peierneltf "
ecutor, of Ji>hn Farrer de« '
Hoth, Wig ton King, John
ling Planch, William f
thew Cheatham, Archij
Alexander L^ng, Brett
S they, Janies Pepper, fhl
William Pmchback, Francis
Wllsher Bums, William Brooks, Dav'ul
Meade and Thomas Cheatham,
Dcfts.
This suit abates as to the defendant Charles
Conway fy hi* death, and «h« defendant Fran*
us Conway^ not having entered his appearance
and given security according to the act oi as
sembly, and the rules of this court and it ap„
peering te the satisfaction of the court, that lie
u not an inhabitant of this country, on motion
of the plaintiffs^ by counsel, it »s orucred that the
said defendant do appear here on the first day of
the next te;m and answer the bill of the plain*
ill's, a«fi that a copy of this order be forthwith
.nsettcJ in some news paper published in the
■ity of kichmond for two moiths successive y
and p'sfed at the front door of the capitol in the
said cityt
A ropy—.Teste
Peter Tinsley, c. c.
_ n.
$y* A rnasii suarbr or
Tissot’s
Gout & Rheumatic Drops,
IS )<m received ard frr Sale* at the Ar«
ga* Offise. H,
k * %
Law & Miscellaneous
BOUK STOriL.
LEWIS ADAMS, Has ja?t received
a fresh supply of BOOKS, among which are
Saeon's Abiidgrner.t, Coke's Institutes, An- ,
ton's Blackstone, few wuikj Cnmyn on Cun.
tracts, do. and Vo.. 3 Hening 4c. Mentor ..—
Also the following new Novels^ viz. Don Se
bastian, by Miss i'orter » hosa, or American
nius and education t Glcncarn, by me the author
of the Lawyer. Alto Sequel to the Antidote to
the Miseries cf Human l.ifd'. %
A general assortment of La w, Classical a. c'i
Miscellaneous Books as usual, wh.ch will be sold
on liberal terms.
Circulating Library.
LEWIS ADAMS, Having com
menced a Circulating Library, which at present
consists of about seven hundred volumes of No
vels and Romances, and one hundred a fifty vol
ume* of History, Voyages, Travels, and works
of polite htcra:ure, some of which are as fellows >
viz. Robert sen s America, 4 vol. OAavo ; Plow4
den's Ireland, 5 vol. do. Parent** Friend, 2 vol.
do. Austin's Letters, do. Littleton's^ do. Ho.
bertson** Charles V. S voU.d% Carr's Scotland,
do Depon's Voyage to the Spanish Main, 3 vol.
do. Barrow's Travels, do Mrs. West's LctttrS
to a young lady, do. Life of Sir Wm. Jones, do.
Bigland's Letters on the Study of History, d v
Johnson's Lives of the Poets, 4 vol. Lady Mary
Wortley Montague's works, 5 vol Gangantlli's
(Pope Clement XlV) Letters, 4 vol.
Wonderful Magazine 8 vol. Sydney on.
government, 2 vol. 8vo. Sbakespe.ir’s
works, 9 vol. Spectator, 8 vol Taller 4 vol*
Mirror, 3 vol. Idler 2 vol. The World, 4 voL
Plutarch’s Lives, 6 vol. Koltin’s ancient
History, 8 vols. Kendall’s Travels, 3 vol,
Svo. Henry’s do. do. Life of Beattie, do.
Life and Pontificate of Leo the Tenth, 4
vol. do. Memoirs of Marmontel, 2 vol,
Trumbull’s History of Connecticut, do. An.
ecdotes of Frederick the Great,
Pnislia. dn. M'ntnri' nf (Ihili. ilA
Ramsay's Life of Washington,
Works, 3 vol. The Satires of Jut
lated into English verse by Wj
Esq. with notes and illustr&tid
royal rctavew
iiT" Presents the Ladies and Genttatua
of Richmond and its vicinity with the fol
lowing terms of Subscription, viz. for one
yeaf 6 dollars—for six months three dol
lars fifty cents—and for three months two
dollars—payable in advance. Fuur volumes
12mo. and 2 do. 8vo. .may be taken at one
time and kept ten days—3 cents per day to
J be paid for detaining books over the limit,
; ed time—any book injured while out, to bo
; paid tor by the person who took it. Rea
ders by the book to pay 9 cents per vol.
i IS mo. for five days, and 18 cents per vol.
8vo. for seven daysnrd cents per day for
any detention.
Should the Library meet with, that pat,
1 ronags which ha Hatters himself it will re«
: ceive, frequent additions will be made to it,
of nev£ and valuable publications. Thu
' greater the subscription the greater the
, Variety.
j The following new works have just been
| added to the assortment, viz. Romance of
I the Pyrenees,- 4 voi. Glencarn—Rosa or
'American genius and education—Ida of Ai '
i thens— and Don Sebastian, cr tho House
of Briganza, 4 vol. by the celebated Alfss
Porter, Authoress of Thaddeus ot War- *
; 3.iW and the Hungarian Brothers.
£7* A consignment of FOUR CRATES
, ofbTONE WARE just received and for
sale by
LEWIS ADAMS.
Richmond, April S. 1810. wtf
Advertisement.
s 1LOEN out of the subscriber’s
, stable on the 28th of last month in the night,
* light sorrel horse, seven years old, amput
i five feet high, with a hanging nun^Ld
switch tail, trots altogether, and \Mimo
( brand nor flesh mark, shews some
i of the pi: ugh gear; whoever will <TeAre r
. the said hoise to me, living on the Caner’s
jferry road in Goochland county, near Wil
liam George’s Tavern, or give such intel.
ligence that 1 g**t mm again shall receive
a reward often Dollars. •
Thomas Pope, *
April 3d, 1310. 5 if.' >
Archelaus Hugh
COMMISSION MERCHAN
On the B tsin, STOKES and SE
kind of PRODUCE on tlio usual
SION.
Richmond. (wl2m)
VIRGINIA :
In Halifax County Court, In Chancery, 26th
February, i8I0.
John Wimbish and Mfillivii Widish, Execu
tor* of John WimbisV dec. Vltf*.
aca,V.tj/^
John King, Dudly Gian. Sydnor,
liam Milner, Austin bpLiin and Am
Sydnor, f ^ Deft
THE defendnt foj^KingViiot havini
* tercd his apprag^Bec and »mri securi'
cording to the sy assembly aHA the ru
thi* court, an l (Appearing to twsatistaef
of the court that e it not an inhabitant of this
commonwealth, On motion of the plaintiff by
their counsel, it is ordered, that the said last
mentioned defendant do appear here on the 4.h
Monday in May next, and answer the bill of the
plaintiffs / and that a copy of f- i* order be
forthwi h inserted in me of the newspapers
published in the city ol Richmond^ for ei^ht
weeks successively, snd posted at the front Uooe
of the courthoutu of the laidconuty.
A Copy—Tests,
SAMUEL WILLIAMS, o. c «. o.
11Y virtue of a deed trust executed
to me by Isham Randolph for the purposes there
in mentioned, and rccotded in Powhall '
ty court, and bearing date the first <i»y^
gust 1807, will be sold r, Hugh Fret
vtrn^ln Powhatan county on Sa'urdayi
day of May next^ to t1tc highest bf
•ear'/ money, a negro girl named Mol?^
oned in sai l deed—?h» sab- wi I be rr.a<
ably to the pr »visions of said deed, and t<T ^
law in such case made, Ac. A
Kichard Crump, Tru’s.
Aptil 16th, 1810. w3tp. m