The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-12-21

10 fact distinction in ayorof those who have violated
tne inventors right and an nvanohto any infrnger OF
ths patent 10 take advantage OF This notice. and free him
sell irom future restraint patent may be taken out
wbout suncent SPECIFICATIONS 10 cover all which
Invented and shown in the model, and better in
formed as 10 The requirements OF The law than the nven-
to may lake advantage Of this notice 10 the injury Of him
whom the law should be framed TO protect The sixty
days noee 10 an invitation TO the dishonest 10 for
ward and lake ad OF any defect In the specifications
They have only 10 Manufacture the composition toget
uplhe machines Or by way OF beginning to few bolts
or something OF that kind, and have the right to il
ever aer As to the sc,re tdeids provided IN this hill
VIII direct me attention Of the Senate 70 convention OF ia
memorial in relation to the defects Of the existing law
q patents" They point out as defect in the law OF
1890 mat y permits the defendant IN suit for damages
70 pull the patent in issue and that il provided
ny which the validity oil patent might be tested and
finally settled by properly constituted tribunal. The
mss hs ,p asy COMPLAIN ina. Inc validity o. patent
They propose that court shall be established. by The APP
polnlmen OF special Judges, to be associated with, The
circuit Judges Tor The purpose OF trying causes growing
out Of patents; they also propose commission 10 decide
on the extension oil patents
In address delivered by the Hon John X Kane. be-
fore the franklin institute OF tie State OF pensy
no Porays in powerfully descriptive language the
inability OF any ordinary court to examine and try
involving the question OF patent He speaks OF himself
as member OF the bar and OF the bench, and treats il
great mistake to suppose that lawyers and judges should
be capable ofjudgng of all the of science which
patent case may be involved | would much rather
that we should have special court established Try all
suits growing gu, Of patent cases Such a tribunal
would be able TO test by single suit the validity OF
patent and thus settle the question OF the inventors
right, and leave him free from harassing suits, which
make him poorer instead Of richer by the badly lecured
property which he has in his invention
But as the Committee on Patents have indicated their
views, and The means which they rey by presenting
as amended this BILL and the Committee the Judiciary
have not, so far am informed proposed to establish
such atrblna for the trial OF patent as has been
alluded to- this preference must be considered upaaina
bic therefore, when in order propose to offer as sub
sute for the bill OF the committee providing, among
other things for regularly augmenting damages; that
the merorious inventor, the valid patent may be better
protected by increasing the penalty for every additional
Judgment 10 suit for damages progressing the
Der OF the decisions in favor OF the patent On the other
hand an Invalid patent would be restrained by like pro-
gression oil damages against the paenee In this manner
litigation may be to some extent limited.
think this bill we have under consideration cannot
be amended so as 10 answer any valuable purpose 1t
will fail to give 10 inventors the benefits that ought TO
be secured to them and the courts before whom the suits
will be brought may, from their habits OF thought the
very eminence to which they have attained in their all
blDg profession and probably will, be less qualified
TO decide the nice questions in natural philosophy which
patent case will often present will here remark that
is strange, in law anedaory OF the act to secure to
inventors an exclusive right, that there should be dis
elimination against them. suits to maintain that
right Sach however is surely the case in that feature
winch makes the decision against patent repeal III but
the decision be in favor Of the PATENT then the aenee
may go 10 the next to answer like summons by some
Tie hazards oftryng again the merits OF his claim to
patent be'ore court such as IS provided, and at
point remote. perhaps. from models, books, and wit
nesses necessary TO explain and establish the justice OF
the letters patent ne holds
The court proper for such investigation would be
one composed OF students of natural science well of
law adopts IN the mechanic arts; court permanently
organized to try originating in questions TO the
validity OF patents and which daily would acquire
exact information in relation 10 all the subjects which
would come before II.
shall al the earliest proper moment offer substitute
Tor the bill, unless-which would greatly prefer-the
whole matter can be postponed indefinitely.
Mr.. TURNEY. shall not follow the example of
the senator from Mississippi. and go into the discussion
OF tine merits OF the bill do see the importance Of
discussing i upon this amendment which have offered
the proceedings Of law shall be stayed until the validity
Of the patent be tried upon that writ, until the
further order Of The court Suits cannot be multiplied
not competent to try patent cases Why, sir, If Judge
eaRnot Try patent case, most assuredy such Judge
would be Incompetent to try man for murder under the
laws OF the United States In a steamboat explosion
for instance under certain circumstances the engineer
wonid be guilty OF murder and, upon such trial.
well as upon patent case, is involved species OF sci
ence, knowledge OF mechanism and kind OF informa
ton that does not belong Judge lawyer. So, in
other cases, when man is indicted for murder, how Of
ten does happen that necessary TO investigate the
character OF wound The existence OF suspected poi
SON. with nicely which the skill Of physician only
possesses l. the court incompetent then, to try man
ior murder ny no means You eau before lne eoaI,
the cour and jury have the full benefit OF the skill and
science OF the experienced physician 10 enable them
Judge aud determine the facts OF the case. Judges
ns competent 10 try patent this description of
which they in the daily habit of hearing and
to their jurisdiction them never heard any objec
ton. As well might you require separate court to be
organized 10 try the lawsuit of the joiner, because the
Judge is carpenter-as well require the separate
gan1aon OF court TO Try the OF The shpbudsr
because the Judge does not understand that branch OF
buslness-as TO require separate ladges 10 pass upon
patent Those who prosecute that branch OF
can Afford TO bring before the court all the skill which
necessary IN order elicit the information TO determine
scientific 10 their opinion upon the merits OF the
particular case, well TO the general principles Of
science involved
see no objection 10 this bill upon the ground that il
does not organize separate cosrt but ii the
ator is upon that subject that there should be
separate court the Judges oil which should be mechanics
or chemists doctors, because lawyers Incompetent
its Of this proposonlhe making of remedy by seire
facias II he is correct in his argument, ii would go 10
prove and 10 demonstrate that incapable OF egis-
latng upon the subec-he Senate is incapable OF pass
ing laws regulating this branch OF business and nobody
caa do II but Inventors, or some particular classes OF me-
chancs, OF who devote their attention 10 mechan
ical science concur with him in no such doctrine as
to organize special court for this branch OF litigation
Is that an argument against the provisions Of this bill
that II shall be competent, when you get proper rbu
nal one that is competent TO pass upon the casetha
there shall be power TO repeal patent obtained by
fraud and couptonl Would be wrong 10 say that the
highest tribunal should have the power rid the CON-
punity OF such patent obtained by viany! That is
The only effect Of the sctrs faeiasto cut of litigation
The paientee may many people as he pleases for
infringing bis patent "A decision against him does not