Southern standard. (McMinnville, Tenn.) 1879-current, 1891-10-10
PROTECTION FOR CRANKS
NO MORE PERPETUAL MOTION
PATENTS.

why the Government stopped Taking
the T. 3 OF Certain Persons It No
Longer Allows ranks to Waste Their
Money.
The United States Patent Office is
liberal institution, and will grant patents
for almost any thing or idea that can be
conceived of, if the applicant can show
originality of inventions but it will no
longer grant patents on claims or specih-
cations for perpetual motion machines
The Patent Office until recently has
issued yearly grist Of patents for per.
petual motion machines. 1t has finally
come to the conclusion that there is some.
thing more in this than taking the money
of cranlSs-in fact, that credulous per-
sons were being Systematically robbed by
alleged inventors of perpetual motion,
who got out their patents only to deceive
innocent persons. Until three years ago
it was customary to take first fees" $50
from the perpetual motion cranks as well
as from all other would be inventors.
Then in course of time letter was sent
to the perpetual motion applicant telling
him that his claim was based upon an IT.
rational principle sud that he must fur
nish working Ii odel. OF course that
was the end of the application. The
model never came, and the fee remained
in the treasury.
About three years ago Principal Ex-
aminer William L. Auginbaugh went to
the Commissioner and suggested that, as
rejection of the perpetual motion claim
was inevitable, it would be fairer to re-
fuse the first fees nf the claimants and
to send them acircular Immediately upon
the filing of the applications telling
them that no consideration would be
given their paper ntil working model
was filed. This rise has been pursued
ever since. But II eatedly has the dis
coverer of perpetu motion been indig-
nant at the rejection of his rendered fee.
One way that has been adopted by the
cranks to get around the rule intended
for their benefit is to drop the claim Of
perpetual motion and put in the drawings
for motor" Notwithstanding the
policy of the Patent Office to save time
and money for people, at least two or
three claims of this character are put in
every month.
Not long ago Kansas man claimed to
have set up the perpetual motion ma
chine, and to ha e it in operation at his
home. He wrote TO the Patent Office to
know if the affidavit of Senator Plumb
would be accepted instead of the working
model as the basis for a patent. The ex-
aminer felt obliged to refuse.
Sometimes the perpetual motion in
ventor appears with pocketful of bear-
ings and connec ons which he asks the
examiner to accept as evidence that he
has solved the problem; but the exami-
ner insists that he must see the perpetual
motion before he grants the patent.
Last summer a New York lawyer
named Todd came all the way to WASH
ington with parts of machine and lad
quite controversy with the Office ue-
cause the patent was refused. He i-
sisted that he had seen the rac,.n. 4
operation: that it was runnin., Gi,, az r
day, and keeping a cider press gcir 0
boot There was no deviating fronI =. .
rule.
The lawyer went back 10 New YORK,
eaying that he would produce tbn IN :
chine. He was not seen again u.,Jii he
patent centennial celebration, when ne
reminded the examiner of the case, amt
told how he had been fooled. At tile
time of making application the law, Ell
lea''Y believe ed chat his client had rrl =
q. "red the long soug"5 prrrci d.
aen he got back to New York AL
i'. ,4iat the patent had been refused tho
tu"nr confessed. The perpetual motion
vs. 40 motion at all. Power was c,a-
c" .'j in the cider press. Itran the press
az ne press made the perpetual motion
ti,.ago, too. TIE inventor had b en-
ci,arl pg 10 cents admission to see perpet-
uaI motion. He had fooled the public
ana his lawyer, and he hoped to slip
Trough a claim.-[St. Louis Globe-Dem.
Corat.