The New York herald., 1851-11-06

House. And this re nedy should be granted, II 1t
appears on the whole evidence, that Morse was the
original or first inventor of what he really claims in
bus patent, and that the machine by House Is not
dinerens in principle, but the same In substance Is
These two ques lions, with some incidental cons-
derations under each, will be found to cover the
whole case.
In order to ascertain whether Morse was the ORR
ginal inventor OF all which he Claims it will be ne
cessary first to examine and settle much he does
elsim-that is, how much is embraced in his spsc-
fcation.
This inquiry is made somewhat complicated by
his having taken out two different patents on the
subject Of electro magnetism and It's use in tele-
graphs, and having renewed one of them twice and
the other once, and having preceded the first patent
by careat, describing its character and extent
But what he claims does not seem material in
this case, except as set forth in the first patent and
its various renewals.
| shall, therefore, con6ne my inquiry to that
though the others must be at times adverted to,
the better to understand what was meant in that.
AS represented in his letter to the Treasury De-
partmen. in 1887, Morse says he had been attempt
ing since 1882 to make electricity visible at dis
tance by. signs, ineligible and certain, 80 as to
1922 And in his caveat Of Oct. 6th 1887, he claims
to have "invented o new method of transmitting
and receiving intelligence by means of electro mag
netism" Or, in other words in the same ins.ru;
ment, ga method Of recording permanently electrical
signs at distance His specification filed in 1888,
April 7th, is much the same in substance,
Following up like idea in lS4O, in his first pa
tent he claims in that to have invented only ssnew
and useful improvement in the mode Of communi.
eating information by signals" and by the power
Of electro magnetism (See first patent, June 10th,
Such is in substance, the title of this pktent in
its original form and under all its renewals.
In lis last specifications in lSiS, hef cllims to
have invented merely ga new method" or "a
new and useful apparatus for system of trans
mitting" intelligence, which puts In motion ma
chinery for producing signs. and at distance re-
eording said signs. (See last renewal, 18th June,
ls4s)
From all these, standing by themselves, it would
seem manifest that ne makes no pretension to have
invented or ordiscoveredan new principles in physics,
or to have discovered the old principles of cleo
tricty or galvanism. Nor does he claim to have
chanics-like new power, resembling the lever or
screw. AS little would any one have supposed, that
he meant TO claim as his invention and as new-the
application at all, Of electro magnetism to the pur-
poses OF tele graphing at . distance, whether by
making Ineligible marks or signs there, or in
some other mode-if it had not been for some re-
marks in one of his letters in 1887 and some words
in the eighth clause of his last specification, and the
ground taken in the argument, recently, by his
counsel.
Thus, in his letter in September, 1897, to Jack
son, he seems TO have believed he had some claim
to this discovery, viz AS he describes it-"The
original suggestion of conveying intelligence by
electricity"-as well as to the invention, which he
calls "the devised mode Of doing t."-(79. Ev)
Yet nothing Of this is believed to be inserted in
any Of his official documents, till 1913.
In lis last renewal in 1913, there are introduced
for the first time, some changes Of language and
some tendencies In part of them, as well as I'm
some OF the arguments, to make the claim bro
and, as in the letter just quoted-to cover all
cation of electro magnetism, if not of electr S.
to convey intelligence, to telegraph to di &C.
But as late as 1876, SO far from claiming the dis
coveIy or invention OF any new general principle
art, and asking patent to protest himself in the
teleQraDls
electro magnetism-he asks for protection Of only
his own improvement-his own method his own
apparatus. And he seems in his last specification,
in lsis, to regard as the great excellence
and novelty Of his invention, that it i'm
prints the signals at one end, which were
tent at the other, and in such characters as
to be Ineligible, without an observer to note them
and easily translated into English by means of his
stenoeraphic alphabet-and hence be there styles
ita"recording or printing telegraph" When there,
for the first time be speaks also Of the of
my invention being the use Of the motive power of
the electric or gayanic current" " ho wever deve-
lopez :" Tor marking or printing ineligible cha
racters," " at any distance" being new applica-
tien OF that power Of which claim to be the first
aud done, be considered claiming i: in the form
of his application-accordingt to hi, machinery-and
in the modes be had described in 1887, ISIS, $50,
and lSi6-rather than in this succeeding clause of
le4S, and by 1t intending to cover the application
itself Of electro magnetism to teegraphic purposes,
in every posi- ole form Otherwise, his renewed pa
tent Of 1878 must be egarded as void for claiming
too much, and for wishing to protec. mere princi
pie, or effect "however developed" and without
reference to any method described by him, and TO
cover IA a principle, also, before known -(HEvey
But, limiting the patent to what is described as
his method, or mode, and considering that in his
=" first claim" in 1913, he dsclaims such broad
views as appear in the "eiQhth claim Of that
date, and EXPIRE ,sly says, wish to be understood
that do not claim the use of the gavanic current
q Of fnr nff faI.
egraphc communications generally, but a new mode
OF using it, to move machinery to print signs, &c.,
as described" all is consistent and confined suo-
stantialy to the mode he sets out in his specifca
tons, and in his own testimony in the record,
Up; iD.
What is to be protested Is not an abstract or
isolated principle, but the embodiment OF princ-
pie into a machine or manufacture, as described in
the specification; and it is the invention, Ia con-
formty to that embodiment representation OF its
working, which the act of Congress will protect,
D. & T.. g5. Web. Ca. POS; Web. on Pat. I,
81, l2es; Stor. r. il2, lOS: Curtis on Pa.
s., g6 x li5S ! Stor K 27i Godson on Pat.
u; Phil. Pa. 80; I Calls, AS; Hindmarsh,
I57 Because by those laws, the inventor is not
to be protected, unless he describes plainly and
fully what he has done, so that the publ; may
copy or initiate, and use it after his term expires
hat is the consideration for the exclusive use
during the period Of the Patent, and having this,
prevents the patentee from claiming afterwards
more than he had invented when his patent issued
(Web. case 7l9, ! 4 z, and Il. & Il. 100, 2 Curtis
Slzs 200 And what he does not, or certainly what
In the misty future he cannot describe he must be
presumed not to have invented. 2Hen. Bl. 4,3)
AS this broader claim goes far beyond what We
have already seen that made In the caveat, and
in the FIRST specification, and in the original patent
as well as in all the subsequent renewals-asi /. con.
hicts with much Of the language in this very last
renewal looking only to a new method aud a mere
Improvement on what existed before, and as he
seems to disavow it in his own evidence, (i9 record)
and as, on everything in the case IL is az least ques
toBable whether he could have intended to paten.
anything, except an improvement on what before
existed, 20 not think il just 10 place q bloaier
construction on ms language, ,ean ,ss Whole sub
jett mater, and description, and nature OF the case
seem TO indicate as designed.
These are al to be looked TO; asa no saac'ed
construction, travelling too far, on a new and
doubtful ground, Is to be adopted but rather
what is iatural and clear, considering what al