The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-12-08

I
telegraphng is limited mode OF marking IN which he
was preceded BY the learned Bayeran. II so shaping
and susendng The armalure cause TO rub ainst
or strike upon moving paper constitutes an art, then
Morse Invented one the art OF teegsphng, be-
that includes II Morse has invented an art.
II is not the one vaunngly claimed, which includes
numerous arts, Inventions besides that OF recording,
which were perfected 10 his hands The att OF printing
IL referred 10. Did any invent ~ II literally
| comyofe ed OF more than hundred Inventions Neither
the paper maker ink maker type MAKER ball or roller
MAKER not press maker, with The numerous Inventions
applicable to each, invented the art OF printing Even
Hoe with his wonderful press. cannot make clam TO the
art OF printing II the aggregated labor OF numerous
inventors SO OF the art OF navigation the art OF making
iron and steel, cutlery, watchers &C. is equally true
OF telegrapbing
But i Morse had invented the art of telegrsphng, his
claims should be confined his mode OF doing il. and
cannot extend 10 all modes. because he did h invent all
modes BY law he is bound disclose all modes known
10 him. and wrongful Concealment would vltiae the
patent He gives mode, and The presumption Is that
he knew oihef His invention, it is we'll settled, can
cover his own mode The English cases cited cannot
apply. because there is no new principle involved
Electro magnets had attracted amaures beioreweghts
had before moved clockwor 10 produce steady motion.
Pens and penca had previously marked and dots, lines,
and spaces had before been used signify ideas. Cal
vanc batteries had generated currents, and wires had
conducted them Circuits had been broken and closed
BY metallic contact. There Is no reasonable preience
that any new power or principle was involved IN what
Morse invented In truth, he has neither discovered
new principle science mechanics. Invented the
art OF teegaphng and was not the FIRST inventor OF
recording apparatus.
The American authorities repudia,e the idea that any
thing be patented but the means invented TO pro-
duce result In Wyeth Stone, Story X 2S3, Story
says, in relation 10 invention for cutting ice 'The
invention Of this art well The particular method of
the application OF the principle, claimed by Wyeth.
is plain that here the paleiee claims the exclusive art
of cutting ice BY means OF any power other than human
power. Such claim is utterly unmaDtanable point OF
law" In Whitiemore Cutter Gal. ATS, he said:
"a patent in case be for effect only but for
an effect produced in given manner" In Stone vs.
Nfor ha Gard 4. M anFn
that II the patent be construed include all modes OF
COMMIT unicang motion from the reel TO the yarn beam,
and OF OF the with the other general
y, il ia utterly void as being attempt to MAINTAIN
patent Tor abstract principle, or for all possible modes
Whatsoever of communication. although they may be IN
vented by ohefs and substantially dier from the mode
described by The plaintiff in his specification A man
might Just well claim title 10 all possible praclca-
BILE modes OF communicating motion from the steam en-
gine TO steamboat. although he had invented but
mode The English cases OF Burnon us. Hawks, Barn
Boulton and Na. u,, Bell. Hen. 81; 4s7 and l.osk
In the latter case. Heath j. says: "What he Qhe pa
enee) cannot specify he has not invented This pa
tent extends TO all machinery that may be made upon
tins principle that he has taken patent Tor more than
he has spec,hei" Butler j. says: patent must be
for production from those elements, and not
for the elements themselves
When Morse's patents were before Judge Woodbury.
in Smith Us Dowing this question was eaboraiey dis
oussed and most fully considered My oref gives tls
material portions OF the opinion. The court then held
that neither principle, effect, art could be patent
cd The judge said pa,entee can be protected only in
The mode The extent described" Referring to Eng
Ish adges, he says Where any judge speaks OF pat
en,ng an art it is not the art in the abstract, without
specification OF the in which il is 10 operate, as
manufaciuEe. or But il Is The sr thus xPa'n
mode dra sangs, when OF character to be- II is the
reptssaq ID exenphed like the principle thus
Embodied, VIII alone the patent laws were designed TO
protect In the English acts the word art il not used
al all And in ours, well in our constitution, the
word ar. means useful art, or manufacture which
is beneficial, and which by the law Is required
to be described with exactness in its mode OF opera
ton, and which, OF course for the already
laid down. can be protected only IN the mode and TO
the extent thus described" The reasons given in
this learned opinion were strong that no appeal
has been taken TO this court from the decision
Judge ksns an the Philadelphia case on these Morse
patents declare contrary opinion, without doing him
self Jaaxc ry the Justice TO refer 10 the case at
all. though esE .as. Judge Woodbury's argument
is the learned Judge construed Morses patent TO be
SIMPLY Tor the mode which he described, and that 1t was
therefore Tor an ART or the monopoly OF principle,
1 as is here conieaded. Holding il be limited TO the
simple mode which have stated, as all he invented,
and for nothing else he did no, declare Mose's paten,
invalid, but held Houses invention was interference,
because the mode different The patent oil 1870, as
now presented, has claim for printing "signs letters
la the before him il was "ssns Of letters As this
claim is Interpolation upon the Original. and covers
marking printing letters, and there being not even the
preence Of description for producing them, this patent
must be invalid that account Had il appeared in this
form before Judge Woodbury., he doubtless would have
signed for sustaining these patents, so full OF legal faults
is that The pasnsee has benefited mankind by what he
has done, and ought TO be rewarded. Ii the evidence
/ did not show ,nat benefit to himself the ruling
passion | might answer that Thousands benefit man
knd by their inventions and discoveries where no law
coniers them pecnDiary reward, Did Franklin
patent bis discoveries, or Lieutenant Maury hs Pro-
lessor Henry, who invented the heart the very soul OF
has neither asked received pc
cuaiary reward, while Morse freely he does
his own which would be utterly useless without II. My
great objection 10 Moses patents that he attempts 10
monopolze one OF Natures elements long known and
used Hs seeks 10 withdraw ii from common use, not
because he 6rs dscoveed IT. but berause he has used II
in particular way. He tells the inventive world TO be-
ware this power mine have secured in my ressned
paens aud you at your peril Suits at law, suits
in chancety njunclons ltgatons threat
ened against those who dare to use power which
Others used long years ago. IL the record shall be made
by the action o gavanm upon paper sauIaied with cer-
tain salts where motive power 10 used at all Morse
claims that violates his monopoly, and Judge Kane
sustansed him 10 the claim In the present the use
OF the power OF permanent magae,ism - alleged TO be
m invasion OF hs patent, and the Judge below sus-
sons not limited in practice 10 the uss OF the
motive power OF electro magnetism to mark but II used
/ for any purpose whatever, however remote IRON his
manner-if a mark s made, even BY one who invented
the mode--the cry Of Infringement s heard. and the
srappes OF the Law fas,en upon him. Let new invcn
ton appear surrender and reissue enables Morse 10
include IT, The inventions OF Barnes and Zook involved
in this case. OF Bains in the Philadelphia and OF
Honses, in the one at Boston, were all sought to he
brought within Norses expansive and growing patents
by The egcrdemain OF reissues House was prosecuted
for using his own improvements which Morse never
invented Rogers, assignee OF BAN, was enloned from
u&ng Ban's Improvement, Of which he was The frstn-