The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-12-06

h' ~ bs own aeis 10 change these lawful Investments
INTO unlawful Public policy, as well as private
right requires thai be should be bound by his acts II
,hls decirine il applied MoIses patents they must
fall for including 10 the reissues what belonged 10 the
public hen claimed
Fbuyh. patent void ia part rs yod IN whole, en-
oep when Otherwise provided by statute
"A patent snlreiy, sad II VOID ~ one part a must
be wholly This 70 at common law, and is so by
statute. There are numeTOus detects which viii defeat
patent disclaimer properly made and recorded will
remedy class OF defects IL certain cases But here there
has been disclaimer II tue patent includes what was
not lawfully yateniable II vtates IL Ia Wyeth Us Stone,
Story X 1885, in Moody ps. F,rke, Mason 49, and 10
Woodcock u.s. Parker, Gall 437, Judge Story held
The claim too broad the patent was void. 10 Bowl
Moore, Oh. j. Gibbs held The same. In Evans vs.
Eaton, Wheat. $780, this court sand, III therefore the
patent be Tor the Whole machine. The party can maintain
lille 10 il on5 by establishing tina, il IS substantially new
III lis structure and mode OF operation.
The suggestion that Morse may disclam within rea-
sonabe lime. which had not elapsed when this suit Was
brought. ia easily answered. We have, by statute
right 10 take issue upon that question but as he had no'
dsclamed, we have had no opportunity 10 DO So Inns
court cannot know that Morse will ever dsclam II IS
certain he will not he can succeed here without 40
ing 30. In Wyelb Stone, Judge Story held III the
court should grant perpetual injunction before any
disclaimer is fled il may be that the paeniee may never
afterwards, within reasonable ne PIE any disclaimer,
although the certainly conempales HE neglect or
delay do 10 be good defence upon patent 10 Sc
cure the rights granted thereby AS Morse now has in
his patents what he could lawfully clam, they must
be bad. He has claimed thnss that were public
property, aud others, like the alphabet. which are not
patentabe, well as the exclusive right 10 uso the
motive power Of electromagnetic 10 print letters wren
he was shown no mode by which the printing can be
done For these causes, these patents, and especaHy
that of 1910. must be declared invalid
Fifth. An invention is not complete. so as to De PATENT
able to bar the obtaining patent bv another nVens
or, until il is perfected and adapted to use.
The time when Mose's invention became paten,able
highly Important with reference 10 the question wheth
he the first INVENTOR well AS with regard TO
whether his Invention had bten patented or described
before his application Beiore!wc fix The lime OF lis
hahn natap .h nm
things sufficiently perfected As the paent must be Tor
the machine product, and not Tor The conception or
idea. patent can be grated until such machine or
product is completed so as 10 be described IN spscica
lion. and represented in model and drawings have
shown that Morse had not when he filed his cayst IN
October 1897 lar completed his machine as TO enae
him TO do either. He then had completed machine
And there is evidence in this case OF his making any
further progress until il is shown in his application, IN
April, 1885, which the true date OF the invention
Prior thereto he had nothing that was in condition 10
be patented Ia Reed Us Cater, Story, $780, Judge
Story lays down the true rule in these words ne IS the
frst inventor in the OF the act, and entitled 10
patent for his invention, who has FIRST perfected and
adapted the TO and until the Invention IS SO
perfected and adapted to use IS not patentabe Amin
perfect and incomplete invention, resting m mere theory,
in intellectual notion or IN uncertain experiments, and
not reduced 10 Practice and imbodied in some distinct
machinery apparatus, manufacture, or composlhon Of
matter is not and indeed cannot be- palenabe under the
patent acs." The same doctrine is laid down IN Wash
burn u.s. Could Story r. 1888, and in Allen vs Blunt,
Wood and Min l2l-l4l. Molse's invention not being
condition to be patented before April 1898. it is per-
fectly ceaia that he was preceded BY Seinhe and by
Wheaetone. The former brought his invention into
practical line still existing between Munich and
Bogenfausen, in Bavaria IN 1887 where he recorded by
ink or pencil, Morse did afterwards And Professor
Henry distinctly swears that IN April, 1887 he saw
Whea stones apparatus with the convance OF bringing
jnlo operation second circuit by of the irs BY
The power OF electromagnetic This places beyond
MI doubt that Steinhell and Wheatstone had perfected
Incir inventions before Morse did his. This being
ose was not, either in fact in contemplation OF law
Che first inventor OF what he claims He preceded
in England and in Bavaria
Sirth Where patent is for combination OF differ
ent paris and not for The parts themselves which com
pose it, the raentee did no, invent The whole comblna
lion, but merely made additions to an old one his patent
invalid And where his patent is for combination OF
parts the OF those parts II less than the whole no
infringement.
Morse IN his patents themselves. admits that others
had preceded him the invention OF ieegraphs, whose
motive power eeclro-nagneilsm But he claims that
his The first recording telegraph. From the gsvanc
battery to The eectrc-nagne attracting bar OF iron,
turning upon pivot or moving or us axis, including
wires and the means OF opening and closing the circuit
and the e!eclro-magnet ITSELF which is the simporsani
and vital thing Morse has admitted ~ The historic parts
OF OF his patents, that il existed previously and has
been proved in this that up 10 that poo ihe com
bnaton old and in use before his invention. 80
much OF The recording apparatus consists OF weights
and clock work is also proved be old Notvhhstand
ing all this he has claimed The whole Of these conDbna-
lions in his patent OF 1870 His second claim is Tor the
employment Of the machinery called the register |
or recording instrument" most oil which Is an OLD
combination. In his third claim he says, !" also
claim my invention and Improvement the conol1a-
ton OF the machinery herein described, consisting OF
the generator oil elecnciy the circuit OF conductors,
the connvance for breaking and closing the circuit
the electro magnet, The pen or conluvance Tor marx
ing, and the machinery Tor sustaining aud moving
The paper all together constituting one apparatus, or tel
egraphic machine" This IL combined whole by
bs own recilais his patents, and By the undispued
testimony in this cause, this combinations from the gene
OF electricity and including the eeclro-hagne
and armsture existed and old combination before
Morses invention. The pen, or The armsture and ma
he auer
yet he has claimed the whole. and too conhding public
has been led 10 believe he Invented It la his fourth
claim he says: 81 aro claim my invention or inn
provemen the combination OF two more gavanic or
electric circuits, with independent batteries" &c. This
combination is proved by Professor Henry 10 have been
invented BY hm years ago. and he II IN by Wheat
stone In April, 1897. He has not the merit OF making
even addition To- Il. Claiming combination which
he did wholly invent, vaies his patent So, II he
claimed par, which he did not invent This court in
Evans Eaton, Wheaton, $50, SAID: II bis patent
includes things before known before IN use. as his IN
venhon be IL not entitled 10 Tor his patent IL
broader Than his invention. H. therefore, the patent be
for the whole machine, the party maintain tile 10
only by establishing that ~ substantially in its
construction and mode OF operation. II the COM
binaton exsied before IN machines 0. the nature
up to certain point and the pauy's invention consists
in adding some machinery improved mode
OF operation OF the DID, the patent should be limited TO
such Improvement; for II II includes the whole ma
chnery, il includes than his invention, and there
fore cannot he supported" Unless this court
rules this solemn and well considered adjudication, Il
hold this patent invalid for being broader than the
invention The defendants below used no such comb-
nation a. included in either OF Morses CLAIMS the
proof clearly shows; and II they dad not, they are not
I.Ll- nj har