The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-10-16

DO gun ~ svideses. and by inducing igssrast and
innocent men to swear to it, Now. hope geatle-
men are satisAed Al this exhibition Of Mr. Garter,
gun and il is beautiful contriyanoe The opera
tion Of it is fourfold. First, you draw the bolt
with your left hand-thusi then you pull the back
trigger with your right-thus then you release the
bolt by your left hand-thus and, finally, you take
hold Of tho cylinder and turn it by hand, to ascer-
tain whether it is is not looked in place, there
Is means of ascertaining that except by expert
ment. "What conyaynient thing this u.s." says
Pat, when hs spuffed the candle with his fingers,
END put the chsrred wick into the box Of pair OF
shutters. 80 is this gun. This gun has no locking
and unlocking, but by hand bolt, and no caps at
all and of course, dces not touch the second third
claims Of the patent 10 any view Of it. Ba.. what
ever il might have been, /. was not made till 1888,
and Mr. Colts was two years before It, at least aud
when it was made it failed, and was abandoned.
This is the last Of the fossiIs exhibited here;
and each one bias its own answer in itself Besides
all that, there is another answer which 10 conclusive
in tbis Court oil these were before the jury, aud
all the witnesses who have proved them now, were
then sworn, and the jury found Mr.. Colt to DO the
first inventor
But these gentlemen are hard to suit We have
tried our cau,e to the jury, and come hear With q
verdict, and they say nay, bat try it again. When
We como into equity they say go to law; when We
beat them at ia~, 0bey say go aud try again. Gentle
min now argue that they should have jury trial
before itjuDc ion and he insists it with great
fatal to Dir Colts CAGE. i am astohished at that
gentleman. l am surprised that no, who has spent
go long and SO boI0Iable life, in maintaining the
great principles winch the rights of inventors
stand, should be found in one single cause, 70
pu0istiDg ibem all, and coDteDdIDg for their very
reverse. I never yet have been placed in the posi-
tion to advocate one day what denounced the day
before and do not intend ever to be so placed
cannot, therefore, imagine the feelings which such
o situation would elcite but whatever they are,
the counsel on the ether side nov must experience
them. This very week he and went to Trenton to
receive Judgment in favor on these very prin.
cpes, and had it too in the great case Of Goodyear
and Day. in which We commended for tho equity
power Of the Court, and had to combat any guam
tity Of such evidence ths-evidenoe Of abandoned
experiments and failures set up TO rob the inventor
of his just reward That decision could be applied
to this with but little alteration in its terms,
and mono in its principles and that decision will
carry with it tho weight Of authority from this time
forth forever Having thus given quietus to the
questions Of fact in this case, will address myself
to the question Of law
Is the patent Of Col Colt we'll extended take
three points that question. First, the certificate
OF extension, being The recorded judgment Of the
court authorized by law to make it, is conclusive,
and cannot be inquired into incidentally, except for
actual fraud. Second if it be not conclusive,
yet it is At least aviaa facie and the defend ants
have shown 10 evidence which mpairs its effect.
Third, take al that IL said by the defendants
to have happened, in procuring the extension to DO
trae, ana yet the proceeding was legal, and tho
patent we'll extended.
First. the certificate is conclusive. IT is the judy
nent Of court This is decided by this court IN
Wilson and Rousseau Il Blatchford 23), and that
case went to w ashiDeten ard was affirmed In that
honOrs say that the board is court, hear
ing and deciding with the latitude of Judicial dis
erection. But the learned counsel says, that al
though this DO true, yet that, ss this Is court of
limited jurisdiction, it's jurisdiction is not to be con-
cusively presumed from its Judgment, unless the
fpcs giving such juTi dc.'on appear on the face of
the record What u strange conclusion is this to
draw from the principle that the maxim, omsno
p,esnnunter ytc CT SOlenner dctG, does nos ap
ply 10 give jur1sdie ton and | not little sur
p:ise3 TO SEQ that some courts havo drawn tho
DEDUCTION. ! conceive this TO be utter nonsense.
Will ADMIT the true principle, which is much more
favorable to the defendants than the they have
thus stated 1t is this: that tho jurisdiction Of
courts Of limited jurisdiction is not 10 be presumed
from the judgment rendered by Thorn at aH bat
must DC shO*n, il denied by proper evidence, Gl.wde
by matter, dthorS the record IL this were not so
the court might usurp jurisdiction the subject
on which IL acted by merely making false state
ment Of facts on the record. by caiing it ia their
judgment ana thus take advantage of their own
wrong Now, j conceive that If any facts pro-
ceoept 70 jurisdiction, they must be proved at,Vmte
wbeihtr they appear recited Oh the record or not
The facts must exist the etatement that they do
lat ia not enough. Or course, however the reoiiai
Of facts unoer seal sufficient 20 give jurisdiction is
Puma f0cic evidence OF tho truth Of such facts;
and the mere denial by the defendant that they
listed will not be enough to throw tho burden of
cple, let us examine the nature Of the under
whose judgment we claim title | shall treat tno
legal entiis-tbat power or authority which exists
ia the contemplation ofia"-without ut present
ti0eripg the individuals who may be appointed to
exercise its functions The court exists and is
eleated by the eighteenth section of the act of 1856
sno 70 that statute we must 90 fer dedntiop OF the
and jurisdiction of that court There 10 the
stal.p poili-dehoss, the record Of Judgment The
eehtsenth section declares that whenever any paten
tee shall desire an extension of his patent, he may
mako application IN writing to the Commissi oner of
Patents, setting forth the grounds thereof and tho
Secretary of State, Commissioner Of Patonts, and
Solicitor of the Treasury, shall constitute BOARD
to hear and decide upon the evidence All that the
law requires to give that board or court jurisdic
ton Is, that there should be patentee and patent,
and that there should be application made by
the petentee for extension thereupou, that court
shall hesr and decide upon the evidence offered
Now, these facts all appear here-the patensee aud
the application for extension OF the patent. Upon
these facts the court might proceed, with the iaSi
tuce OF judicial discretion, to pronounce its judg-
ment ana all its acts in that proceeding would be
the exercise If jurisdiction, not acts precedent TO
jurisdiction Jurisdiction is the power to hear ami
determine a cause; that power TINS statute has
ferrod on this court IN very comprehensive terms.
But there intervene, in tho eighteenth section bo
tween the frs. sentence end tho sentence creating
the court, directions TO tho Commissioner, qua c0m-
missioner, 10 perform certain ministerial aotsto ad
ver!ise and the like. Now, | agree with counsel |
that these acts are purely ministerial and that they
cd to perform them is afterwards judge on the |
bench to decide their sufioienoy when performed;
but do agree that such acts must be per
formed before she jurisdiction Of the court arises
over the subject matter That point is settled by
case which runs OBJ all tours with this case, and |
which is found in How GrignoG "a the Lessses Of |
Astor That is n much stronger case than this ono,
CT eminentiy contains 1t It rather entertain
ing TO see counsel deal with that CASE There |
il lay right in tho path, end there was no pro-
crossing 8 step further till it was removed.
Well, my brother Staples marched up to IL with |
great courage, and it seemed as if he would demo
lish It at ouco I began to tremble for my ease;
when behold, be slipped quietly around it, and We
find him on the other aide All he did with it was
t. rtsd one paragraph which is most harmless
eli n entsry definition Of the distinction between
courts whose judgments corclusive and those
whose judgments not. Ho did not even attempt /
TO npply that herr book knowledge TO this case;
fer IL BIO bad, no would have found that THIS court
coales within the former category. The Distinction
Ia Lid down To be- hat the is cnnaLi.