The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-06-17

my original poposnon-why should moi the party resort
10 this very patent which is the object Of this bill il is
known that immense fortunes have not only been m the
grasp OF the patentee, but is already touched by HIM
mmense fortunes are within his grasp without ask
ing anything further from Congress Now, when so
simple process will secure TO this person all the rights
he desires ask u prudent Tor US 70 legslae IN tins
way upon this matter! With so many articles thus
thrown upon the market, ask ii II is proper for
open the door here 10 suits against every who may
deal In these articles them have any thing 10 do
with them In my opinion, the remedies now open TO
paenees are sufficient Tor their protection. II seems 10
me so, in this al least from all The information that
have been able TO obtain. il seems TO me that this biz
viii lead to liugatons, and great difficulties and enbar-
easements will be thrown around all the business trans.
actions connected with these matters The simplest FRO
IN this case as in most others It seems 10 me, is the
best and the remedy Afforded Is The remedy which
the parties ought 10 resort ii they desire 10 obtain
elusive right 10 the manufacture Of these articles.
Mr. HALE 1t seems TO be admitted by the senator
from Maine, mfr BRADBuRY,] 10 answer TO some re-
marks OF the senator from Virginia, Mr. HUNTER that
there is a difficulty in this bill which should be done
away with There 10 be great deal OF doubt in
the minds OF some senators 10 the laws OF the prov
inces in relation 10 tins matter was originally opposed
the introduction of the word use" in this bill, and
thought il was liable to the objection which has been
urged against it. But have always had great defer
for the opinion Of my friend here from Kentucky,
EMr. UNDERwoop,l consented 10 vote for the bill with
that word in IT, But think that, all things considered.
had better let this bill lie over I'LL tomorrow. am
the anxious 10 have this done for this reason-we
very much pressed with these patentees, patent
rights, and patent laws And by looking at law which
we passed last THURSDAY find that we passed N act
voted for had they read IL first; and want to move 10
reconsider the vote by which that bill was passed and
this is the last day upon which | can make that mo-
ton move 10 lay this bill the table for thai purpose.
Mr. MILLER. VIII the honorable senator withdraw
that motion for moments
Mr.. HALE. will withdraw it,
Mr.. MILLER. | merely wish to say that hope the
question will be taken upon this bill to-day 1t passed
through the ordeal of the Senate at the last session. and
was then ordered 10 be engrossed. We have been two
three days upon now, and it is important that il be
passed at all, il should be passed now
Mr. BAYARD. Was the bill OF last session precisely
The same this did il contain this word "use''
Mr. MILLER. No, sir it is not exactly the
The passed at the last session But the senator from
Delaware mir. BAYARDl has asked to have the word
s'use" stricken out, and am willing to have the ques-
lion taken upon that amendment now.
wish also to ask the senator from Virginia Mr. Hun
TERI whether he understood that patent could be
newed in Canada or the provinces by any other person
Mr. HUNTER understand that patent could not
be renewed in that or the mother country.
Mr. MILLER. Well, sir, this is renewed patent,
and thus that remedy is no. open to the paenee.
Mr.. HUNTER understand that patent could be
obtained for new thing.
Mr. MILLER But that is no, the case here. hope
the question will be taken upon this bill to-day.
Mr. UNDERWOOD. l wish to say one word in re-
gard TO the argument started by the gentleman from
Virginia Mr.. HUNTER] and the gentleman from Michi-
gan, [Mr FELcH They seem 10 think that if person
can obtain patent for an American invention 10 for
egn country that ought to be esorted before adequate
protection is given 10 the inventor by Congress here
sent 10 send American inventor to England, France
Russia Africa Asia, and all over the world, 10 get pa
tent before giving him the proper protection for his con
stutiona rights here. Why, sir, II you impose this OBJ
legation upon inventors in many instances you absolutely
deprive them OF the rights which the constitution of the
United States intended to them and put them TO
more trouble and expense IN running all over the world
after patents than their inventions would be worth. Now,
think is not right for the national legislature of this
country impose any such duty obligation upon the
American inventor before he shall be projected home
As understand the law 10 be now, if an invention is
made here, and patent for il is not taken in Eng
land, France, and elsewhere, foreigner may II
much as be chooses. Now, what wish is TO prevent
their productions from being brought here in competition
with the patentee in this country, and that, under the
constitution of the United States, you will protect him
al home therefore object totally to the ground taken
that he should all The world and take out
patents before we extend him this protection.
Now if you strike out the word ''use" this bill all
along the lines will not be worth pcayune; il will not
go over with his carTyal, and pack ii full with pro-
ducons upon the other side OF the line and bring them
here, and them in violation OF the rights OF prop
ery which this inventor possesses, aud should have
guaranteed to him. Now, by this bill, il he does know
ing that il is infringement you must bring the seend
home 10 him. lie has committed a fraud, and | am
willing 10 have him punished II he does not do know
ingly he does not have that SeeRtd-you affect
him by this bill. The only conceivable injury that you
can bring upon any citizen who nnocenuy uses this art
Gle is that may charge him with doing know
ingy but he cannot be made to suffer any penalty until
that is proven on him Now, are all liable TO be
sued without cause. "A may bring a suit against
any OF for debt trespass anything else without
having shadow of a right 10 do So and that is the
only objection which be brought against this bill as
IL now s But that is not likely take place Often be-
cause the cost and expense will ultimately fall upon the
palontee who brings the suit and il is al all likely
that he viii bring groundless action against anybody
think that If the word "use" is stricken out The bill will
not be worth a picayune and hardly think should
for il then, because It will not give the protection
which should be given, but rather be doing injustice
10 the patentee.
Mr. BORLAND Practically, have very little knowl
edge oil patents and really have very little knowledge
OF patent laws in detail but | think understand
enough OF patents and patent laws TO that there is
very important principle involved in this bil-perhaps
geher upon what | consider the principles involved,
without any regard to the details OF its practical opera.
ton.
But, fst 10 what is complained OF here as The hard
ships 10 which The owners OF this patent have been
posed learn upon inquiry, that this patent origi.
naIiy obtained lar back 1872 both in Eos and and
the United States that it has been renewed in the Uni
ted States in tie Patent Office and then when our gen
eTa laws refused TO still further extend the protection
OF the patent right, the owners OF the patent came to
Congress and obtained, in lS4s, special extending
the patent for fourteen years longer which leaves them
this time right for ten years TO Now il seems
10 that II any persons upon earth, claiming the bene
III o the exclusive oil their invention, have had
occasion be satisfied with the legislation OF Congress-
these very persons the They had the beneii,
OF the patent in England for fourteen years; they have
bad The full benefit for twice that time oil patent in the
United States and are now enjoying the third term OF
10 the exclusion OF everybody else here Now it is no
hope Il is not TO be conended here, as an argument in
their favor. that we hnund