Virginia Argus — Richmond, Va., 1810-04-24 00:00:00, page 4

) ff as
?* I X L E r s
©f (fnc 'United States.
TAKE NOTIC E—
3 hat Congress did on the twenty-first
day of January, eighteen hun
dred and eight, pass the fol
lowing Act
AN ACT
For the relief of Oliver E vans •
BE it enacted by the Senate and
House of Representatives of the U. d.
of America, in Congress assembled,
That it shall and may be lawful for the
Secretary of State, on application ia
writing by Oliver Evans, to causa let
ters patent to be made out in the man
ner and form prescribed by ths act
entitled, “An act to promote the pro
gress of useful arts, and to repeal the'
act heretofore made for that purpose,”
thereby grapiiogtn said Oliver Evans,
his heirs, ex.cutors, administrators
and assigns, for a term not exceeding
fourteen years, the full and exclusive
right and liberty of making, construc
ting, using, and vending to be used,
his invention, discovery and improve
ments, in the art of manufacturing
flour and meal, and in the sevoral ma
chines, which he has discovered, in
vented; improved and applied to that
purpose: Provided, that no person
who may have heretofore paid the 6aid
Oliver Evans for license to use his
said improvements, shall be obliged to
renew said license, or subiect to dam
ages for* not renewing the seme : And
provided also, That n« person who
shall have us .' the said improvements,
or have creeled the same for use, be
fore the issuing ef the said patent, shall
be liable to damages therefor.
J. VARNUM,
Speaker of the Haase of Re pre
sentatives.
CEO ; CLINTON,
Vice-President cf the l! ite States,
and vr^sic’aii •! hi Senate.
January 21, 1808.
Approved,
TH; JEFFERSON.
That injiursuance of said act letters
pa l ent v e:e made out, and delivered
to said Oliver Evans, bearing date Ja*
nuaf422d, J808, granting to “aim, his
heirs, executors, administrators, and
assigns, f or the term of fourteen years,
the lull and exclusive right and liber
ty of making, constructing, using und
vent ing to others to be used, his said
improvement ; and also of making,
constructing, using, &c. all the ma
chines, viz. his improved elevator, his
improved conveyer, 1m improved hop
perboy, his in proved drill, undhisinr.
proved kiln drier.
f ha^ under my said patent, my es
tablished prices for license to use my
?aid improvements in the manufacture
of flour and meal, are as follows,
viz. '
For elevating and conveying grain,
elevating and conveying meal, and for
cooling the meal, and attending the
bolimg hoppers in a single mill, driving
I ut one pair ot millstones at a time,
cue hundred dollars; and for every
iddilional pair of millstone* driven nr
the same time, either by the same
wheel or power,or by different wheels
or power*, one hundred dollars.
b or oither elevating and conveying
gr;„n, or elevating and conveying meal,
or for cooling the meal, and attending
the bolting hoppers, when used sepa.
lately, fifty dollars for every pair of
stones running at the same time ; and
for any two ui the aforesaid parts, used
jointly without .he other third pnrt, se.
vtnty-f.ve dollars for each pair of mill
smpea running; at the same time.
Andfor elevating rice in rice mills,
^yff*-svs ; for each elevator for each
and ior the use of either
of tne machines for any other purpose,
fifty dollars.
And tor the kiln drier, fifty dollars
for i-.ich pair of mill itones, with in.,
teptr, in each case, from the da e v'
my patent, or from the rime of begin
ning to rase the *arm until paid.
And for license to use my patented
strew mill lor 1 recking and grinding
bird Mlt»i*tantes, such a-, plaster, See. or
^ It di?n corn to be ground with the cob,
— twenty dollars.
I )\Ai rhe Circuit Court nf the United
Sates for the district of Pennsylvania,
judges Washington find Peters presi
ding, did at the last October term, de*
c;de a ca e, and so construed the said
ac t of Coi gte»», as to adjudge that all
those vh:. nr using my said improve
ments without license, are liable to
d**'*6e*» ^ey obtain license.
I d.j therefore give this public no
. tier, nod rrtrncsily request all th-sc it
llm Ui itrri States, who are using m
said pa inted improveinentn, or an, o
theii., with, ul iy license, to pay .
the au v»- rates, <o the Subscriber, o
Jwutcs i Kush, Philadelphia, or to Cap
tain Job* Moody, of Virginia, fcvah
Evai:s, City of Washington, Nathani
el Williams, Esq. Baltimore, Joseph]
Evans, nearvNew-Port, Delaware state,
Samuel Nicholson, Esq. *
I or to George Evans, 'Pittsburg, or to
f any other agent or attorney I may ap
point, and who are duly authorised to
receive the same, and to grant such li
cences only as arc subscribed with my
sign manual.
Those who refttsc ofr neglect, will
please excuse me if I in future refuse
to expend all my profits in travelling
to collect, and should put my demands
into the hands of attornies at law, who
will of course send the marshals st the
expense of thost who invade my rights,
i will be very thankful to those who
shall save me the disagreeable neces
sity.
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 of
the Circuit Court of the United States,
held by Judges Washington and Pe
ters.
Oliver Evans,*!
vs. £
John Weiss. J
This was an action on the ease for
a violation of the plaintiff’s patent
right, and came on upon the following
case agreed i
The plaintiff being the inventor of
the improvements in the manufacture
of flour, hereafter mentioned, and th*
patent right for the same by him here
tofore obtained having been declared
by the court void in the action of the
said Evans against Chambers ; and the
time for which the said nar-nt
granted having also run out, an act of
Congrss, entitled an atft for the relief
of Oliver Evans was passed on the 21st
January, 1808—in consequence of
; which, the said Oliver duly obtained
letters patent, bearing date the 22d
January, 1803; notice whereof was
given to the defendant in.aflaEfruarv
ia»t. rmr
On the 7th May, 1802MddH’ng the
continuance of the formei^kuMfn, the
defendant purchased of the plaintiff a
right to use the said improvement at
his mill, on Wissahiccon creek, in Phi
ladelphia country, in this district, for
I one wheel and a pair of stones; but
; prior to the p ssing said act of Con
gress, he applied & used, and continues
I to apply acd use the same improve
ments, lor two wheels and two pair of
stones is the same mill*—The questL
on submitted, is whether the defen.,
dunt is liable for damages, for the use
of said improvements, in application
to this second wheel;and pair of stones,
since the act of the 22d January, and
whether if so he is liable before notice
irom the plaintiff. If the opinions of
of the court be in favor of the plaintiff,
judgment to be entered generally, and
amount to be adjusted aiterward3 by
altoruirs.
Judge Washington delivered the opi
nion of the Court.
It is contended by the plaintiff
that the defendant is liable for using
the plaiiuiiTs improvement, in appli
cation to tne seconri-wheel and pair of
•tones, since the 22d January, 1808, or
at all events, since the time when the
defendant received notice of the plain
till’s patent; because the proviso in
the act passed on the 21st of January,
1808, lor the relief ot Oliver Evans,
expends only to cases of improvements
erector! lor use, or used prior to the
passage of said law, and docs not pro*
tret the defendant from damages, for
using afer the issuing of the patent
under th s law,an improvement erect
ed prior thereto.
On the other side it is insisted that
such a construction would render this
*»n ex post facto law, and consequent
ly repugnant to the constitution.—To
avoid, which, it would be so construed,
as o connect with the use ot the in»
prt vcnrif nt the erection of it, subse
qu nt to the grant of the paten;.
A though the court ot the last term,
and upon the first argument, fell
strongly inclined to give it the con
Htructjnn contended for by the defen
dant ; yet upon further rffiection, we
are satisfied that we should do a vie*
knee to the words, which no rule of
construction should warrant.
1 he words of ihat proviso nre “ that
no person who shall have used the said
improvement, or have erected tnc.sima
hi use, before the issuing of thMH
parent, shall be liable to damage?
there for.”
i’hat is, shall he liable for having e.
reeled, or for h aving used the' improve
•rient, at any time prior to the patent
iiut respect to the u*»« of it, after issu
ing of the patent, no protection what
! *ver is afforded against the claim fo
.‘damage-;, under this law.
" txl:!
The next enquiry is—does the gc
'neral law give to the plaintiff ft right
•f recovery agaiust a person who c
| reeled a machine prior to the issuing
ol a patent to the first inventor of it,
and who afterwards made use of the
same.
The act of the 17th 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
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 tbe Sth section of the
act ol 21st February, 1793, thus con
necting the using with the devising of
the improvement, there can be none
under the Sd section of the act ol 1800,
which repeals the whole of the 5th sec
tion of the old lawk
It is plain that the using of tin im.
pr vement invented by another, and
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 been a good deal criticised, is sy
nonymous with make, a* one of
the plaintiff’s counsel seemed to tbink,
or means to invent, a mere act
of the mind, a construction which,
whether it be to make, or to contrive,
to plan, form or design, it is unnecesu.
sary in this case to decide, because the
charge against the defendant is the u
smg of the plaintiff’s improvements,
uuiounactcu wuu me maxing or ae
rising it.
But it is objected to this constructi
on,-that it would render the law ex
post facto in operation, in respect to
one who has erected his improvement
prior to the granting of the patent, to
the plaintiff.
It must be admitted that cases of
great hardship may occur, if after a
mah shall have gone to the expense of
erecting a machine, for which the in
ventor has not then and never may ob
tain a patent, he shall be prevented
from using it by the grant of a subse*
qucnt patent and its relation back to
the patentee's prior invention* But
the law ia this case cannot ba termed ex
post facto, or even retrospective in its
operation, because the general law de
clares beforehand, that the right to the
patent belengs to him who is the first
inventor, even before the patent is
granted; and therefore any person
who, knowing that another, is the first
nventor, yet doubting whether that o
ther will ever apply for a patent, pro
ceeds, te construct a machine, of which
it m *y afterwards appear he is not the
first inventor, aets at his peril, and
with a full knowledge of the law, that
by relation back to the first invention
us ubsequent patent may cut him out
of tho use of the machine thus erected.
Not only may individuals be injured
by a liberal construction of the words in
the laWj but the publio may suffer if an
obstinate or negligent inventor should
decline obtaining a patent, at the same
time keep others at arms length, so as
to prevent them from profiting by the
invention for a length of time, during
which the 14 vears arenot rnnninor nn.
Out 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
1 ment, with a knowledge not only that
the plaintiff was the first inventor,
but hud absolutely obtained a patent
Although it was afterwards daclared in
\ valid.
The circumstances of this case ren
i der it unnecessary to give an opinion
i ns to the right of a first inventor after
patent obtained, to recover against one,
who believing himself to be the first
inventor, constructs a machine or im
provement upon the principles of his
new invention, or uses the same after
such patent issued.
Upon the point of notice, we think
that the act of 1*08 being a private
act, the defendant ia liable, only from
the time he received notice of the law.
Judgment ior the ptaiwtifT.
Estimation of the profits arising from
the use of Oliver Evans’s patent
improvements in the art of ma
nufacturing flour, Sec.
The machinery rece ives the grain
from the waggon or bag or vessel and
carries it through the whole process,
making all the meal into superfine flour
at one operation, finishing as it goes,
without manual la our, making at leas!
lbs. superfine flour more out of c,
very 5 bushels of wheat, than is mad<
in the old way, gaining the difference
in'price between superfine flour and sc
much middling', saving grain anc
meal from being wasted, and manufae
• uringa* much in five days as the mil
r could do in six days, without these im
1 protemetus.
They save thr wages ar.d board of a
man and boy (in a mill manufacting
20 blls. flour per day) per vear
ia ' g400
The difference in the price
between 28 lbs. superfine flour
and midling3 say 43 lbs. on 20
bbls. per day, 55 8 33 l-3d, say
300 days, is - . 2500
They save from being wasted
in grain and meal per day, say
33 l-3d cts/is per year of 300
days - 100
'I he mill gains one day per
week, 52 weeks at 55 10 is 520
S 3520
To reduce each of the above items
as low as you can, then if interest is
counted, it will shew how fast frugal
millers will insensibly grow rich by
their use and that those who had dis
cernment to avail themselves early of
their great use (ooth those who refuse
to pay as well as those who generous
ly paid for licence) who have been
growing rich by the use of the im
provements, while those who o minute
ly persisted in opposition to their in
troduction, have deprived themselves
of the benefits, their profits have be«*u
lessened in proportion as the other*
have beer, increased, and wi.lsn conti
nue as long as they persist. The i ..
ventor’s demand for license to use tnc
improvements, is not one third part of
the interest of the profits that the mil„
ler may gain by them in 14 years, as
he knows that no miller without them,
can stand in competition with another
who has applied them so as to yield
mcir iuu oencnts—out it millers
will (as they generally hare donp) ap*
ply them so as not to yield titem mere
than one fouth part, he is not to blame,
he has given full directions for the ap
plication in his mill-wrights* guide.
He and his agents have travelled one
hundred thousand miles traversing tho
United States for 13 years, to teaih
millwrights to build and millers to ap
ply and use those improvements and
have been derided and insulted by <a
«y» while others more generous and
enlightened h tve froely paid tor license
to use them, and which defray ed the
expenses, but the lime and labour
would have been lost had not cnngr s*
passed the act for his relief. Now it
any who would have remained igno
rant of those improvements had not
such extraordinary exertions been
made toaaake them known, should use
them, and refuse to pav the inventor
one third part of the interest of the
principal they m fy gain, by his labours
and improvements, will he not be justi
fi ible in recei ving every cent of dama
ges that the law will give him, from
those he may be compelled to sue l
Advertisement.
^ f LQFN out of the subscriber’s
stable on the 28th of last month in the night,
a light sorrel horse, 3cven years old. about
nve feet high, with a hanging mane and
switch tail trots altogether, and kss no
brand nor flesh mark, shews sorne^Barks
of the plough gear ; whoever wi^Shver
th« said horte to me, living on tne Carter’s
ferry road in Goochland county, near Wil
liam George’s Tavern, or give such inttl.
iigenco that 1 get him again shall receive
a reward of ten Dollars.
Thomas Pope.
April 3d, 1810. 5>
will be bold,
TO the highest bidder, at Hanover
Court House, on the 4ih Wednesday in
April next, being the 25th day of the
month)
A Tract of Land,
IN Hanover county, containing be
tween two and three hundred Acres, ad.
joining the lands of Edward G. J-ydnor
John and Reuben Howard., and the orl
phans of John Tail, dec. ab->ut 10 or 12
miles from Richmond, on the eas^hle of
the main road leading from thqQfcce to
New Castle fc Hanover Town.^meveral
streams run through the land, on which
meadows might be made ; also a good
Saw Mdl seat, which has been asceruin.
ed by level and admeasurement- It it
vrdl timbered, and a healthy situation,—
Three small tenements are on the Land ;
the al ove land is conveyed to me in trmt,
by John Scabrook to satisfy Edward G.
Oydnor, a certain sum therein expressed.
The Sale will be made in conformity to
.he AC\ of Assembly, entitled •* An A61
concerning executions and for other pur
poses^.
Tho: Tin^|cy, Trustee.
Hanover, March 28, 1810. 3w
Just Published, by the
Printer hereof,
THE LAWS, a
| Passed at the last session m t!.c
General Assembly of
K Virginia.
» March 20. If.
1
Law & Miscellaneous
j BOOK STORE.
LEJVIS ADAMS, Has just received
h frcshsupply of BOOKS, among which are
Bacon*a Abridgement, Coke's Institutes, An
then's Blacksto.tr, new worKj Comyn on Cwn.
tracts, do. and Vol. 3 licniug Be M^ntord—
Also the following new Novels^ viz. Don Se
bastian, by Miss Porter ; boss, or American ge
nius and education • Glcncarn, by the the author^
of the Lawyer. Also Sequel to the Antidote Uf
the Miseries of Human Life, "
A general assor-ment of Law, Classical and
Miscellaneous Books as usual, wh.ch will be sold
on liberal terms.
Circulating Library.
LEWIS ADAMS, Having com
menced a Circulating Library, which as present
consists of about seven hundred volumes of No
vels and Romances, and one hundred a fifty vol
umes c*f History, Voyages, Travels^ a :d work*
of oolite litera*a;e, some of which areas follows t
via Robertson's America, 4 vol. Oftavo , Plow*
den's Ireland, 5 vol. do. r-rcni't Friend, 2 vol.
do. Aus in's Letters, do Lutleton's, do. U«,
bertson*s Chsr.es V 3 vo s. d t. Carr'* Scotland,
do. Depon sVo, ag. t. tha Snanisn Main,3 vol.
do. Barrow's Trasa s. do Mrs. We.t'i Letu.fi
»o a yoingiady, r4>». Life of Sir Wm. Jones, do,
Bigl.tnd's Letteia on the $tu y 0f History. d>.
Johnson's Lives of the Poets, 4 vol. LadyMar/
iVor ey Mon ague's works, ■» vol Gaa^fn^hi'fl
(P e Clement XIV) Letters, 4 vol.
Wonderful Magtt?i.te 8 vol. SwTi^KAtl
government, 2 vol. 8ve.
wruks, ©vol Spect i tor, S vol TtflC3rvn'#
M:rroi,2 vol. Idler 2 vol. The World, 4 vol.
P u arch’s L'Ves, 6 vol. Rollin’s ancient
History^ 8 vols. Kcmlail’s Travels, 3 vol.
8vo. Henry’s do. do. Life of Beattie, do**
L fe and Pontificate ot Leo the Tenth, 4
vol. do. Memoirs of Marmon'el, 2 vol.
l rumlm l’s History of Connecticut, do. An.
ecdules of Fredenck the Great, King of
P ussia, do. Histnry of Chili, 2 vol. do*
itamsiy s inie oi Washington, do» V -un *
Works, S vol. The Satires of Juvenal tr ins.
lated into English vj rso l>v Wm. G flbrJ
Esq with no va und ^lustrations, 2 voL
toy I octavo*
87* Presents the Ladies and Gentlemen
ot It'Chmond and »i* vicinity w.th the Jal.
lowing terms of Sojscnp*>uit, vrz. for one
year 6 dollars—tor sia months three dol»
ars h'ty cents—and for threo months two
ldoharssr^.ayable in advance. Four volumes
12in<>. and 2 do. 8vo may ue (.»«.«n at one
time and kept ten days —3 cents per day to
bo pa d lor detaining hooks over the limit,
ed time—:any hook injured wnlle our, to be
paid tor by the person who took it. Heit- I
d-rs oy the book to pay 9 cent* per vol. [
| 12 mo. for five days, and 18 cents ptr vol.
8vo. for seven days«—3 cents per day for
; any detention.
! Should the Library nTret with that pat.
roaage which lie flitters himseif it will re.
ceive, frequent additions will be made to it,
of new and valuable publications. Tno
; greater the subscription the greater- tne
j variety.
The following new works have just been
added to the assortment, viz Romance of
the Pyrenees, 4 vo , Gleucarti—Rosa or
Amt r can genius and education—Ida of A.
thens— and Don Sebastian, or the House i
of Uriganza, 4 vol by tho celebated Miss 1
Potter, Authoress of Tnaddeus ot War
s.w and the Hungarian A other.s.
I?./- A consignment of F'JUR CRATES
of bTGNE WARE just rece ved and lor I
sal« by
LEWIS ADAMS.
Richmond, April 5. 1810. wtf
” VIRGINIA;
At a superior court of chancery hoi
den at the Cupitol in Rinchtnond,
Fehuary 26th 1810.
John M. Walker adni’r with '.he will an.
nrx’d of John Chris-.ian decee-ied, James
Paiiesoo, ihe i»me John M Walker
adm'r ot Joyce, Christian deceased, and
the said Jn^n M. Walker and Susannah
his wife, s ,e heiress of !h.* said Joyce
miimiciii ai-ri ucurge omun »hu iiir. said
John \1 Walker Ex colors of Lucy
Duguid, deceased, and George Chris,
tian bnd Joyce P. Iv.s wife, George E
Dugu'd and Elizabeth li s wife and Ly
dia Duguul, liens ot the said Lucy Du
gutd oeceascd. Pis. *
Against
Elizabeth, Patteson, exccu r>x and George
Christian, executor of Peier Pai e^on
deceased, and Ma^ha Patteson, Iviza
be h M'Hey olds, Cha’le* Pat n,
Peggy Pft teson, Polly Patteson, JBer*
Pai.eson, Jenny Patteson, flenr&Rr'
teson, Fanny Paticson, and
teson, and C >ar!e$ Hacon son and heir
of Nancy Hacon, la e Nai cy Palte on*
children 6c heirs at Law of Ci arlrs P&t
teson deceased* and Devisees of the
said Peter Palte .01 dccra'ted, Mary.
Anne Patteson widow of the said John
Patteson deceased* Cba»-les Phelps aod
Molly his wife, Lewis Dawson and Lu
cy Ins wife, S-miuel P. Christian a.id
Nancy hi* wife, Samuel Patteson and
John Pattcsoo infants by the »» id Sa nu«
el P. Christian specially av/igaed heir
Guardian, heirs of (he said John PaL.
teson deceased, Dcfts,
The Parties in the above n.en ioned
suit will take notice, That I have np.
pointed Monday the 14th day ot next
- Month fo9 the purpose of taking the ac
eountbdirecteti by the decree pronounced
in iWfiswid suit on the 26th February last*
on whidh d y the Parlies are request-d
to aAcntiVit Ay office in the City ol Rich
mond with jjieir Pape:a and Evidence
prepar (M^go into «he said accounts.
JOHN NIGJIOLSON, m. c.
April a. 1810.
A
Treatise
ON
v GARDENINGi
\ BY A t
llTIZEN of VIRGINIA,
‘ l or side at this Officwy price 25 cenU^^
I