The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-02-15


My next propositions is. that the testimony shows that
Hayward the applicant in this case abandoned his inve
ton before he applied Tor patent and therefore, the
patent itself is invalid II is the Commissioners duty
TO examine whether under the law OF 154s the invention
pateniable when patented ii not, the extension
cannot be granted. IL will not be denied by the learned
gentleman who follows me, and the proofs before the
Commissioners will show, that Mr.. Hayward sold goods
manufactured by him. according 10 the specification an
nexed 10 this patent for years before the 10Th of October
1888 | suppose that will not be denied The patent
bears date Feb a. 1899 The act OF 1889 did go in
to effect I'LL March Sd following Consequently the eff
feet OF Haywads sales must be determined by tie law OF
1885 The act OF 1889 specifies in the effect OF
sales prior TO application for patent Bat would
submit to the Commissioner that this be ad-
Judged under the act OF 1885 rather than that of 1899,
because the rights OF parties using and OF parties buying
vested before the act OF 1889 took effect Abandonment,
in my understanding OF the phrase means the sale Of the
patented article or the OF before the public with the
knowledge OF the paentee before application for
patent whether II sale gift or whatever way il
may have been in public with the consent
Every act OF that kind the law presumed TO be aban
donment cite Pennock Us Dialogue I'd OF Peters. LIST
page and Malus Sllsbee, ath OF Mason l0sth page
Curtis patents p. 340 The exposure OF this article
for SALE may please yonr honor, is entirely within the
evil that the law OF abandonment attempted 10 remedy
that is to is an exposure OF the invention TO the
public license to them 10 use, temptation TO them TO
apply it, without a caveat and without a warning That
this is an exposure OF the whole invention to the pub
lie, ] think will appear from two circumstances The
passing away before the public OF an article made ac
cording 10 the specification of Haywards patent would
expose AT once 1at IL was made oil sui hur and rubber
The solution OF rubber discovery entitled
10 patent than that sugar will dissolve in water
After the article had passed out OF Haywards hands,
have The same evidence that sulphur is in il that
have that Hayward used sulphur, viz by the smell
The only other article used is common 10 the publicthe
soventof rubber the article that will dsso rubber
Sulphur is known by the smell, and the solution of rub
Der known before. There the invention stands
vealed before the public Any man may analyse it Now
let me test that by the old rule OF law When man in
machine, and passes it into possession of the
public, Possession before taking out paient-that is
holden as an abandonment OF the invention Why :
Because through the eye man can detect the principle
upon which il is operated. | will present fifteen
chimes here before the Patent Oce, and also fifteen OF
the most commonly -used articles OF India rubber, and
more people tell Of what they composed than will
tell me upon what principles the machines contruc
ed The SALE lhen OF these goods 10 the public betrayed
the secret and your honor will find that they scat
tered from eight to eft-on stony ground, by the way
SIDE and in pu,lc places. through commission erchants
aud pedefs all over the land In all this even by the
rule that would be within The statute OF 1899, must we
moi find an abandonment OF this inveaton
Again: Hay ward Id ms goods years before he ap.
plies for his patent. Now, II the sale OF his goods to-
day would not We an exposure of their composition and
be All abandonment, would not the sale of the goods tor
TWO or three years expose to the public the Ingredients
Does not lead the public into Their use, and tempt
TO go INTO their manufacture, when done without cavea
without PATENT and without warning 10 prevent them Is
not that clearly within the spirit and object oil the
recognising an abandonment defence paentl II
IS not without It's application IN this present trial Sup
pose Mr. Hayward and Mr.. Ericsson side by side Tor
an inveniion. Mr. Hayward goes TO sleep night and
dreams OF composition, consummates his discovery in
the morning. Mr. Ericsson pods along in systematic
course OF scenlc research, and after twenty years OF
labor and expense completes his discovery Hayward
commences selling his machines tomorrow, keeps his
secret as well as he Tor four years from the time
discovery first dawned upon his mind and then takes
PATENT and fourteen years from the date of his patent he
has already had eighteen Years OF the invention. In
most OF invention the first years
ducng the public TO adopt and them Aud here Mr.
Hayward, not contened with his eighteen years, comes
forward and asks Tor an extension which will make up
10 him twenty live Yeats monopoly OF his invention In
the time Mr. Ericsson after an expenditure of more
money than he can hereafter realize from his labor The
year 1893 first makes an application for patent Mr.
Ericsson now has fourteen years monopoly of
ton be has expended eighteen years per Getting. Mr.
Hayward has already had eighteen years monopoly OF
invention conceived and perfected in night The
comparison shows clear against the extension
Does 1t not also present case Directly within the mis-
chiefs which the law of dedication or abandonment
intended 10 remedy
There is piece OF testimony which now present 10
the Commissioned, and do 1t with very great confidence
that will prove fatal 10 this application | refer TO
hlb b. vol 4, p 5O4, where you will lind the contract
da I'd IN 1895, between MIR Hayward on one side and
lour persons on the other, by which Mr Hayward con.
tracts to work iorth Eagle Company Woburn. he
Ieye that employment BY Hayward, and that agreement
on his part 10 use ms discovery Tor the benefit and profit
OF hat COMPANY, and his actual OF il, shown BY
this exhibit and by his own testimony, is abandon
ment that destroys his patent within the rules OF law
tMcCurg ps. kngslaud, Howard, 2o2)
next say that this Improvement Itself is OF no value
or importance 10 the public Under the law, the pet
valuable TO the public Much might be SAID upon tina,
subject II time permitted IL is important feature of
tue case Tor The Commissioner OF Patents to investigate
ihs, under the decision of the and fair consruc
ton OF It's language believe has reference to It's value
TO The public. That then, must It's absolute
value, not Its value TO the patentee inventor The
distinction will be found OF consequence This value is
one OF the conditions to the grant of the extension and
as such u must refer 10 It's public value inasmuch lis
value to the inventor il OF interest to the public We
say, them that the act refers TO absolute value not s
value 10 The inventor weapon with which TO extorl
money IRON the public. The public have interest
aud can attach valae 10 the support this patent may
give to any other patent This patent used, and q con.
tend the evidence shows tbs) TO be used for no other
purpose than as outpost sentinel TO the patent OF
ls44 That is matter which does not touch the public
interest
There have been granted from this Office since 1899
SIX or eight PATENTS IN all OF which the oil sulphur
and RUBBER IN combination with other articles is de-
scubed, yHG To Messrs Tyer & Heme David MCurdy,
hoiace II. Day, DR.. Pndham, DR., Thomas, WIN +. Ely,
Messrs Gilbert Gay, and perhaps Others These pat
ens are IN measure excluded from public by this
patent now before you The interest Of the public clearly
demands that the barrier should now be thrown down,
and the way made clear for The introduction OF these later
and useful Improvements Extend this patent, and hold
back these enlerprslng and Beftoous sbores and The
pubic interest IS touched, the progress oil useful ART"
emphaleHly u,pedsd Tatner than " promoted"
Has the patrnee failed, without any fault his part
TO obtain from the and sale OF his invention reason
able remuneration Tor the lime and expense bestowed up
Ga the same, anu the introduction thereof into use r. la
ssmuch as Hayward has placed ii out OF bis power 10
bring THIS invention into say that The fail