New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-04-10

j
Machay Walker CornelA r Provost John sullivan
,Aorp- Nsctsv Rscb.l smith N-vns
Pvsb5e-t'Itsosser Msrgaret Ruyod HanushM Mesero,e
b Bailey l.. Mnal.y =. NJ - ~
T. Bsv John Hutchinson Geo Sml,n
Moses oe Bschny Ann F. White MARY q Van Nuire
Jacob B.ackenv Mary Grant Mar ovens
Rockwell BarhoO- Mary Hickman Isaac sum
John helm frlrl - 'il'ss'H
r ,5srt c Helm Henry G. Tyer John A Dunn
Eugene Have Henry Dunn > Johnson
Tereuc CDuuough7 Robert Hplsud WIN Grant
John Van N0rden Josiah ?. Terry Nn. n HAY
John Hinc1man Msther Burger IrtefN lrnbiorcs
Wm smith Cornelius C. Van Moses Cnurchward
S,ry Jsoe - S,'9f lane II oxres geer
Susan ROBINSON Reaari Fowler Ralph R. Rola, Jr
MASSACHUSETTS
c 3 Culver Betsev Smith, James scanhn.
Riehs-d McNuIen John Holben Caroline BurghardL
I ! P1o ,ysr' Ma Bm.e Ma,yisne Dinchari
Edw Barrett Margaret Condor SNnuei l.-ouHdi
jos II Leonard, i1a1eih Etmler Amelia Dewey,
Siepher Palmer George Iron Edward Grndrod,
Henry Sherman, Lazy Lamassv George n carer
David Danu D.via L4massv. John McOonough.
L y Burghard John Curtin, and others.
J. b Fsirchid, Th0s Mccormick,
OPINION oF EDGAss fAS wlNHtE.
The ritnt amend patent depends entirely on ne Ign
Section Of the Act OF July g. 1880 and the ' SrcAol o. ur
Act OF March8 1857 Now, 10 regard 10 the arst.
An eussainaaon OF NJ Goosyeas's surrendered patent
:. esa sssefpSoh Or .pseihcson The
description and are clear and operative ana II
ohers entitled what he claimed the patent inpreg-
nabe S-condv Il not pretended here that Goodyear
aimed his hr-; patent more than he had right to
for the second patent all the claim u the hr- and
great deal Thirdly lihe description was detective
ori1-uhcieni the error % is plain, could not have arisen
ror nsfver-ncv accident or stake The FIRST patent IL
consistent throI ghout The specification commences by
dsclsr ug that his principal Improvement consists 10 he
robnirg of sIpur and white lead with the Infis Rubber
and IN submitting the compound thus formed 90 the action Of
heat Al regulated temperature by which combination and
exposure heat il will be far altered &C he then de-
scrhes The method Of making his improved India Rubber
fabric by due admXmre of Rubber phur and white ead,
and hs claim 90 DE the combining ~ The said gum with
sulphur and white cad astofOm airple compound and
also the process Of exposing the India Rubber fabric to the
seton OF hIgn degree Of heat by means Of which his i'm.
proved compound ef-ctuay changed The words IN
operative or invalid by reason OF defective Or insufficient
description specification" either that the speci-
cation sufficient sustain the claim made IN the psf
ent or nat me claim = not responye 10 me improvement
described IN the spectraiOnard the hst patent exhibits
neither Of these dects-he specification supports the claim
and the claim ia.hIs The spec hcatons
Now there Is not word IN all this Of the great claims
In his amended paienthe curing OF India Rubber sim
pie hy hest lie does appear have been
II The description he specification and the claim all
for triple compound which compound can be cured by
artificial heat To ca. this uadyerteucy. accident mis-
The r patent in any -e1.e be said 20 be- We or In
vsl1 by of any defect description.
FOlr.hiv II Goodyear knew when he issued his FIRST
patent thar smp rubber could be- cured bv heat one aud
did not claim L. must have been because he did be-
eve himself entitled % the claim or must have concealed
IL with sfrauduea deceptive Intention By his amended
patent be claims his a. the great ngenon-,he principal
10 which al others hl accessories and yet from June
l8A until December l3ft-mJre than i've years-he has
he'd hs The inference Of fraud deception IS
far one from me aci appearing by me papers themselves
am. therefore, OF opinion that the amended patent
granted 70 MI ifDpfNfar Illegal void ard proved
10 be By the ace of the letters themselves without The aid
ofsuxilsry testimony. EDGAR ;. VAN WlNKLE
New-York Feb 1857
| concur with Mr. Van Wink.e that the pa,en, recently
granted 20 Mr. Go dyeAr dated Dec q. 1927 upon the
surrender Of ms patent Of June, 1874 is VOID ,,..
February T. 1850 Z. CUTTING
On comparing the Original and amended letters patent
above referred TO- % opinion ihS. enough appears
the face OF them taken together TO show ihe nys dry Of
Boston February -, 1850.
Bo,roS, February -, 1850
printed opinions q Mr. Van Winke and Mr. Cutung 1t
formed from careful COLLATION. Of he Two letters pa
the orgus. dated l5h June, 49, and the amend
me1L dated 25h December 1893
mink cons derng he circumstances under which The
later issued and he strange shape In whcnit appears
hsi awaken he attention o every one convrfsani
OF hse matters who NAV these patents aud compare
htn only the state Of me patent law bat TO The
Respectfully yours, &c. BN RAND.
HI. DAY, NewYork.
w,sHiyGrox. Feb .. 1850
OPINION oF r II GuLErr- S1 You ask my opinion
concerning validity OH patent ssasd 10 Charr Good
year under date % December > 1885, upon he Surrender
OF he one granted % hu June D. lsiL
The 49, section u the Paeat Aci " 1895 authorizes
surrender hnd reissue;
st Where the patent granted i nop-rsive or invalid
byreasou OF defective insufficient description
cifcArOn.
Pseniee claiming 10 he pecdaIi'oa A. Us own invention
more ihsn he had nigh, % clam as neF
But {. can be doue l hose only when le inOpera
uysness or iuvAidIiy has arisen
lat By inadverency acc-e-,- or mistake and
ID Without any fraudulent or deceptive Intention.
No Patent can be surrendered unless s iloTerlfe or
fas4ld and only n the where his ap
pe4rs from the description specification and The Other
he Paienee his invention Wha, he had no
eht N claim a. The former appear by The face
OF The Patent ard the after from the facts ascertanef
lawful ms1ner In these cases can only BE- done 10
ahnce OF fraudulent intent AID where the error arose
from "insdvert-ncy, accident, or mistake There 5 10
aborfrv for the surrender IN any other case
TIE eight serron VI be Act Of l7 dOes increase the
pEh-r of csse where surrender . auhofz-d, bat y sr
p Authorizes The Commissioner u Ten patents are sur
rs@red 10 revise and restrict The srecrcaiun OF CAIN N
the sarne manner be could On en- or ginsl application
n he present case th- following questions arse;
Er.t Were the frs. elers nva1 or nop-rsyer 10 con
se1ueuce Of accident nsdgerency, Or mistake, ard VIII
OF any frsudu eut iuf-rL
Seoad The Comm ssoner iaving received The rurrsn-
dsrec eers paicu and issued ones are as acis "a
. doing The Ahselre Of fraud and COLLISION conclusive
uron third parties -, ~. -,
have read The frst letters and sPsehcson OF NJ Coed
wear ard cannot from hem hist ueJ are nopefhse
or Invalid rom = defective specification or DESCRIPTION
They appear ke both operative and valid, n using
ID relying UPON them, between i've AND SIX years y
srurg II rot conclusive. evidence, Of Mr. Ooodyesrs
nrseucsl construction the sane eject de may have
arfied hinge hs frst SPECIFICATION, but nat orsson
AID rot re-dsr bis letters imperative, or invalid, saeh
omission viii not authorize Surrender and reissue IRIS
bo,e Invention ncluSe3 bis hrsi etLeTs tnsre
NE other lawful modes Of securing the residue There
nav have been mistakes snd accidental inadverani errors
u hem but hey did not render The Psieat inopersn's
invzd the Statute does rot s1ihofize SURRENDER