The Petroleum Centre daily record. [volume] (Petroleum Center, Pa.) 1868-1873, 1871-05-19
OPINION OF JUDGE GREER.

As I write with difficulty l can only state the co,
clusions to which my mind has come after a careful
examination of this case.
The complainant has exhibited a patent datet
18th Of April, 1865. This is prima facie evidence o
a good title, and puts on the respondents the bur
den of proof that the patent is void or worthless.
j need not repeat m. remarks 1.-THE case Of Good
year ". Day e Wall, G. c. Rep; 229,) but now
adopt them rs ailording a rule of decision which an
plies 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
plainanls patent of April IS, 1858.
at was after speculation had been reduced to
practice, y and after repeated experiments, that the
complainant succeeded in overcoming he prejudice
persuadiug the public that his invention was useful;
after he had established its e utility and value,
and "when ms genius and patient perseverance,, In
spite OF sncers and sco'ts,' were completely sac
cessful, tiat Reed, who had before made expert.
ments on the same subject, and was unsuccessful,
imagined that he had the best right to tLeinven,iop,,
and after purchasing one OF more complainant s tor
pedOes. he applied on the LIST of November, 1867,
for a patent for substantially the same cOmbina
tons Of devices and 'achinc contained in complain.
ants patent. On the 18th of the same month the
respondents formed themselves into u company or
corporation called '.rhe Reed Torpedo Company"
for the purpose of pirating the cUmplainani's In.
vcntion, and supporting the expense of litigation,
ard thus dsffaud him of the fruits. They have per
severed, even after the preliminary Injunction very
properly granted by the District Judge. :
Let a decree he entered for complainant for a per.
petnal injunction. and II Master appointed TO take
All account according To the prayer Of the bill.
X. Z. GRIER, Judge.
NorE.-The passage referred to bv Judge Grier in
his former decision, 3 Wallace, p. 800. adopted a.
app icable to this case was as follows:
SIT IL usually the case, when any valuable discoy.
cry is wade, or any new machine of great ui ity Is
invented that the attention of The pubic has been
turned to thar subject previously, and that many
persons have been making researches and experi
meuts. Philosophers ana mechnnicians may have
III some MEASURE anticipated in their sprculatiOns
..ie pos-iDitity or probability of such discovery or
inventions; many experiments have beer successful.
ly tiled, coming very near. yet failing short Of the
desired result. They have produced nothing bene.
iicial. The Invention whel perfected may truly he
said to be the eliminating point OF manv expert
Men ., not un'y by the inventor, bur by many 9th.
ors. he may lave rroiited indirectly by the insuc.
cessful experiments und failures of others, but II
gives them no right 10 ella m Il share OF the nc nor of
the profit of tue successful inventor 1t il when
speculation has been reduced to practice. when ok.
discovery has been perfected by patient ana contin.
ued experiments, when some new compound, art.
manufacture, or machine has been ,hu- produced
which 10 usetultO the public, that the party making II
a public bencfactor and entitled to Q patent.
sand yet when genius and patient perseverance,
have at length succeeded, in spite Of sneers and
some valuable invention or discovery, how
seldom is ii followed by reward Envy robs him
Of the honor, while spectators, swindlcis, and ri.
rates rob him of the profits. Every unsuccessful
near making II discovery now claims 1t. Every one
can invent an Improvement or vary its form.
claims ~ right to pirate the original discovery. We
need not summons morse, or Blanchard, or Wood.
ry great discovery or invention. "
1.-THE present case aods another chapter to this
long and uniform history."-2 Wallace, &. & Ike.
ports p. 20?