The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-02-04

speedy trial by jury the merits OF originality
WHICH Is SOON as understand, 70 be had before Judge Of
After my final decision, the original patent (provision.
ally surrendered now must sbide that decision and
appeal might be taken tut the chiel Judge Of this
District Is sick, there might be much delay
epea that il my final decision In the application az
presented, embracing the originality OF the invention
desired. viii give Il at the earliest practicable convent
Respectfully, &c,
DR.. THos. p. JoNKs, Agent
The board of extensions. be II observed, had already
decided the invention TO be original with the inventor,
now ask, have not eonclusiyey shown that Mi
Ellsworth objected to the form of appicationthat Is,
the application for three patents instead OF one Ana
have not shown with equal cearness that, far iron
suggesting that the original patent was void. be ex-
prcssy RETAINED from expressing any opinion on the SUD
jeci. leaving that point to be decided by the court and
posponng action on the case for that purpose VINO,
then. has made The mlssatementf Have made one for
has " One Who Knows" made tuoi
Upon this him your correspondent says the patent was
withdrawn from the office. The patent uas o. course
Wsthdrapn to be used IN TIE suH % whm 1u, LsDo,m n
refers But the application was neither rgseted nor w
drdn but postponed await the decision OF the COURT
and the party had right to call II up at his convenience
or peasure-and did call il up shortly before the 7h OF
July, ls45 In the time, the court decided the
patent to be paltd-and thus one OF Mr.. Elsworths OBJ
jeclions removed and the parties amended their APP
plicaon, and asked Tor patent instead OF three, and
thus obviaed his other and principal objsetion In a
word, they asked Tor nothing which MIR. Ellsworth had
objected
examiner entirely dsembarrasssd Of all the objections and
doubts wh,eh Mr. Eusworh had expressed in the letter
above quoted and OF all other decision of the office and
it became his duty, therefore, upon the accord
ing his best Judgment aided by such light he could
derive from the library and archives of the Patent Oce.
and from the decisions which the courts had made upon
the original patent, and from the patent law inns ne
did and, though albe like his neghbors his Judgment
has not yet been shown TO be erroneous And even II
ultimately found to be So an error 80 dlcu 70 ae,ee,
that il has hidden itself through many years OF constant
litigation is a crime, but might be pardoned IN the
highest functionary in the land judicial or executive,
and much more in an humble examiner of patents, con-
santly oppressed by the amount and mtricacy of his
duties, and whom every scavenger feels at liberty to pelt
with mud, whenever hue and cry is raised IN the grub
street OF patents or poiics-whenever distinguished
citizen ways an ominous NOODLE, or patent cormoranl
croaks Tor his prey.
The statements Of One Who Knows" in relation to
the facts Immediately attendant upon the reissue OF this
patent obviously intended and calcu to produce
utterly false impression upon the minds OF your read
@ ana % LAY the aGe n % S
when properly stated they neither prove nor have they
any tendency to sustain the mpulaon which your
respondent abors at the sacrifice OF honor and justice,
to convey. The statements as thrown together leave
the impression that after Mr. Ellsworth had decided the
patent 10 be invalid and his had eit the city TO
remove his family Mr. Keller suddenly resigned, leaving
MIR. Fitzgerald acting examner-immedIately became the
agent in the Woodwork case, and by Mr.. Fitzgerald
connivance pushed II through to AVOID scrutiny ins IS
clearly the impression intended to be conveyed and The
statements do not substantially this, they show
nothing to the purpose Nothing follows from the fact
mat commissioner was absent, kelIer was
the agent. that Mr. Fitzgerald the examiner
less the facts connected above Indicated and have
immediate bearing upon each other; and no such con-
nexion did exist | shall now show. The following
the simple facts in the
Mr. Keller had resigned his office OF examiner on the
ground of nadequacy of salary nearly gear before the
reissue OF the patent question: and had openly declared
that he should establish himself patent agent
Mr. Ellsworth, however by giving him salary out of
another appropriation, 6uc hundred dollars greater than
that OF examiner, had induced him remain and
examiner for months. In the time, many had
applied to him for his services patent agent, and he
could not be prevailed upon TO remain the office after
the resignation o: Mr. Ellsworth, but left Immediately
chus Mr. Keller left the Office finally tuo months before
The Woodwork patent called up Tor final action.
and in full practice a patent agent
Mr. Fitzgerald, instead of being acting examiner In
the pretended emergency had after Ue OF service
pointed examiner toeeks before the Woodwork
came up-and this, too, about month before Mr.
Burke absenied himself from the Office Thus there
connexion coincidence between the bringing up of
the and the designations or appointments, and no
hastily Matched acting examiner in the and when IT
added THAI decision in the office by Mr. Ellsworth,
any else, set aside attempted 10 be set aside
by the agent the examiner, the beautiful tissue OF ms
scrupulousness falls into detached shreds having ad
heson to each other, and incapable OF being reunltar
even by the SLAYER of falsehood
One further remark, and have done II reissued pat
ents-Wood worth's among the res-are sustained upon
the principles stated in the concluding part OF your cor
respondents remarks-if the law be that the Com.
missioner, upon the surrender of patent for plough
may patent for harrow and conclude the court
by his acon-l fully concur with your correspondent
that the law this particular should be amend
ed but allow me to suggest that perhaps the same lib
ery has been taken by your correspondent with the Law
with the facts connected with the subject OF his
AN EYEWITNESS