The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1908-02-03

I 70 send them. MIS-. r.. "a. C1uA0cga5 ~
Erie Place, Roxbury, Mass.
independent effect no one Of them gives
any additional efficiency to the Others
or changes in any way the mode OF re-
suit Of its action. In pateatable COM
bination Of old elements, all the constit (
uents must 30 enter into il a. that each
qualities every ether. 10 draw an illus
tration from another branch Of the law,
they must BE- Joint tenants of the domain
I Of inyension, seized each Of every part
per mi 1t PER tout, and not mere tenants
in common with separate interests and
estates
II was said by Judge Aldrich in Perry
vs. Hoskins, Ill Fed. 1902. relative to
a design monument;
All the features ia detail must be
treated as Old, for the stone cutters art,
as known and praeticed from very
early period, has covered all conceivable
shapes and forms in monuments and
statuary. and the combination does not,
as II seems 70 me, amount to q new and
original design.
The lines 81 a draught~man and the
ehisd work 81 sculptor OF this day
and generation are practically an iua
tation d old lines and Old works
somewhat question whether Congress BY
is legislation on patents, intended TO
include monuments as works Of manu-
fzctnre. but assuming that such was is
intent. there was but a small field open
TO the genius Of invention in monn-
mental designs.
It Is claimed by this assignee OF the
patert in question that the ornamental
ton Of the uncut rockwork oyerhanging
the tablature on the die i q special
featslre and noyelty Evidently. FROM
the comments and decision Of the learned
and experienced Judge Who tried fA1l
Daley case. the Patertee established thar
fact from the evidence in that case, hnt
Iii does not TO appear IN the case that
Us before me. The same idea Is found
ia the die AZ several al the defendants
exhibits, the only difference being In the
shape and proportions az tie aie and
the good taste manifested III tile general
cgnfgnration IA tile whole monument
Ii q mere change III shape and nrop0r-
tions is CO W. construed AZ d pateRtabla
novelty. then the defendants have not
n.
infringed. for the monuments 0f t1p8F
construction "a whieh the complainant
bases this action. differ from the patent
"a design in both shape and sixes but
ia the design tins special feature ST the
die. as set out in the letters patent. IS
not the basis IL the patent The patent
is a design ii complete monument and,
from the evidence IN this case, il appears
that it Is composed entirely 81 ideas that
are old The only new thing about the
complainans's design that I am able To
discover, from all tie evidence iii tie
ease. its shape and form S. tse result
81 the assembling I'll old PARKS and Cd
ideas
In Thompson vs. Boisseiier. ia Z.
s., |, the court holds that while Con.
gTess has power to promote the progress
Of Science in useful arts By securing to
inventors the exclusive right Of their
respective discoveries, vet
The Beneficiary must he an inventor
and he must have made discovery
The statute has ALWAYS carried out this
idea. So, it i not enough
that thing shall be new ia the sense
that n the shape and form in which ii
Is produced il shall not have been before
known. and that II shall be useful. but
Il must. under the constitution and the 4
statute, amount TO an invention Or dis
eoyery"
See also Hill v. Wooster, 1S2 z. s.,
sas
II i claimed that II design presents
j different impression upon the eve from
anything which precede II and proves
Il 10 pleasing attractive and popular.
II Il creates 4 demand for The goods 81 I
les originator, even though il be simple
ana does not show wide departure
from a her designs. its Wse would be
That Is. IN substance, the
language Of Judge strong speaking for
he court. in Gorham Mfg. Co. vs. White.
"a Wall, 5ll.
This expression is found in thar
opinion;
"The law manifestly contentplates that
irving certain new and original appear
lnces 10 3 manufactured article may en-
lance its salable value, may enlarge the
demand for It. and NAV be meritorioas
ervice to the public II, therefore. pro-
,oses to secure for limited time to the
ingenious producer OF those appearances
Nt NlNttNtAEc- tfNlN& tfNti l.tfH- ataft~
testify the mode IN which those appear
nees are produced has very little. if
nythiug. 20 DO with giving increased
aisbleness to the article Il IS the an
learance itself which attracts attention
nd calls out favor or dislike Il is the
ppearance itself, therefore no matter hv
that agency caused that CON isutes
mainly, II not entirely. the contribution
o the public which the law deems wor-
BY Of recompense
But it win b. observed in smith "
Whitman Saddle Co, l4S Il. s. ga.
be supreme court, speaking through
hief Justice Fuller, evidently purposely
notes the language ii Mr. Justice Strong
/ Gorham Mig 60. vs. White. supra.
nd then adds +.
"But a. remarked hy Mr. Justice
rown, then district judge Tot the east
n district 81 Michigan. ii Norshrop
s Adams, II o. a.. 4S0 q Bann. 4 I