The Petroleum Centre daily record. [volume] (Petroleum Center, Pa.) 1868-1873, 1870-05-28
ROBERTS PETROLEUM, TORPEDO.
'TORPEDOES.
THE ROBERTS
PETROLEUM TORPEDO co.
Office at the
RED pLANING MILL.
Corner OF Pine and Second streets,
Near the RatlrOad,)
ITUSVILLE, Pa.
ROBERTS PETROLEUM TORPspo.

Owing to the large and Increasing demand for the
| Roberts Torpedoes. and the late decision of the
| Commissioner Of Patents in refusing to VIM. Reed
| a patent and the decision OF judge r. { Grier aus
,alning the Roberts pltent they have LOW Erred
| the price OF their Torpedoes
TWENTY PER CENT.
so that every Operator can afori.to try q Torpedo
before abandoning Wen.
Ihe following is ;hc decision rendered by Judge
Gricr on the twcnv-second t22l day of September,
1859 in the United States Circuit Court at Phladel
nhia The casc was arcned three days by Charles
NJ. Keller If New York. d. r Lucas and : A. Pur-.
viance of Pittsburgh, for defendants, and George
Harding Of Philadelphia, and George Ii. ohTisiy, o
Pittsburgh, for plaintiff.
OPINION OF JUDGE GRIER
As write with difficulty can only state the con
clusion 10 which my mind has come after careful
examination Of this case.
The cOm dammit has exhibited 'aTpatcn. dated
18th Of April, 1855 This Is prma facie cyi'euce of
good title. and puts on.the respondents the bur
l nced not repeat nv remarks in the case Of Good
year Va. Day t2 Wall, c. C. Rep 229,) but now
adopt them as at'ordng rule OF decision which ap-
pics clearly TO the present case.
As the infringement of the patent is admit ted,
the only question will be as to the validity Of COM
plainanis patent of April a5, 1855.
at was after speculation had been reduced to
practice and after repeated experiments. that the
complainant succeeded in oyercomin he prejudice
and ignoranceof the people on the subject and
after he had established its great utility and value,
ard 'when his genius and patient perseverance. in
spite of sncers and SCOTS, were completely sue
ces sful, that Reed, who had before made expert
ments on the same subject and was unsuccessful.
imagined that he had the best tight to the invenon
AID after purchasing one OF more CoInpiMnant's tor
pedoes he applied M on the IT, OF, o. Novnnoer ise'
tons of devices and aChine contained in complain
ants patent. On the 18th Of the same month the
respondents formed Themselves into company or
t;ny,c l.d eha a.d
for the purpose OF pirating the cOnplainant's in
vention, aud supporting the expense % litigation,
and thus defraud him Of the fruits. They have PEI
severed, even after the preliminary Injunction very
properly granted bv the District judge.
Let decree he entered for complainant for per.
petuaI Injunction. ard Master appointed 70 take
an account according to the prayer o, ihs bill:
NorE.-The passage referred TO bv Judge Grier in
his former decision, 3 Wallace, 2. 800 adopted as
applicable to this case was as follows:
at is usually the case when any valuable dscov-
cry is pade or any new machine of great utility la
invented that the tentou of the public has been
turned to that subject previously, and that many
persons have been making Researches and expert.
| menIs. Philosophers anu mechanicians may have
the or on on sh discovery
| invention; many experiments have been successful
ly 'Ied, coming very rear yet falling short OF the
desired result They nave produced noihlns bene Ho
| sid to be the eliminating point OF MANY expert
men :, not only by the inventor, bu, BY many 9TH
ore. He may have protited indirectly bv the un.uc.
ce.sful experiments and failures of others. but it
| gives them 10 right to claim shar; OF the he nor OF
| the profit of the successful inventor 1t Ia when
speculation has been redcced to practice when ex-
| pertinent ha- resulted in discovery and when that
discovery has been perfected by patien, ana contin
| ued experiments when some new compound. art,
manufacture. or machine has been thus produced
which Is sefulto public, that the party making it
becomes apublic benefactor and entitledto patent
| "Aud yet when genius and patient perseverance
| have at length succeeded, in spite of sneers and
| SCOTS, sOme valuable invention or discovery, how
seldom Is il followed by reward Envy robs him
Of the honor, While spectators, swindlels ard pi.
rates ROB him of the profits. Every unsuccessiul
experimenier who did or did or did not come very
near making discovery now claims it. Every ona
| who can invent an Improvement or vary its form,
claims right to pirate the original discovery. We
| need not summons Morse, or Blanchard, or Wood
worth to prove that this Is the usual history Of eve
| ~ great discovery or invention.
| 1.-THE present case ACIDS another chapter to TIM
| long and uniform history."-2 Wallace, c. q. Re-
ports p. 292