Decisions Relating to Patents

Supreme Court of the United States


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


PEARCE VS. MULFORD et dl. Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. 1. Reissued patent No. 5,774 to Shubael Cottle, February 24, 1874, for improvement in chains for necklace!, declared void, the first claim, if not for want of novelty, for want of patentability, and the second for want of novelty. 2. Neither the tubing, nor the open spiral link formed of tubing, nor the process of making either the open or the closed link, nor the junction of closed and open spiral links in a chain, was invented by the patentee. 3. All improvement is not invention and entitled to protection as such. Thus to entitle it it must be the product of some exercise of the inventive faculties, and it must involve something more than what is obvious to persons skilled in the art to which it relates. The decree of the circuit court is therefore reversed, and it is ordered that the bill be dismissed. By the Commissioner of Patents. DICKSON VS. KINSMAN. --INTERFERENCE.--TELEPHONE. The subject matter of the interference is defined in the preliminary declaration thereof as follows; The combination in one instrument of a. transmitting telephone and a receiving telephone, so arranged that when the mouthpiece of the speaking or transmitting telephone is applied to the mouth of a person, the orifice of the receiving telephone will be applied to his ear. 1. While it is true that the unsupported allegations of an inventor, that he conceived an invention at II certain date, are' not sufficient to establish such fact, the testimony of a party that he constructed and used a device at a certain time is admissible. 2. Abandonment 1s an ill-favored finding, which cannot be presumed, but must be conclusively proven. The decision of the Board of Examiners-in-Chief is reversed, and priority awarded to Dickson. Characteristics of Arctic Winter. Lieutenant Schwatka, whose recent return from a successful expedition in search of the remains of Sir John Fanklin's ill-fated company, combats the prevalent opinion that the Arctic winter, especially in the higher latitudes, is a period of dreary darkness. In latitude 83 20' 20 N., the highest point ever reached by man, there are four hours and forty-two minutes, of twilight on December 22, the shortest day in the year, in the northern hemisphere. In latitude 82 27' N., the highest point where white men have wintered, there are six hours and two minutes in the shortest day; and latitude 84 32' N., 172 geographical miles nearer the North Pole than Markham reached, and 328 geographical miles from that point, must yet be attained before the true Plutonic zone, or that one in which there is no twilight whatsoever, even upon the shortest day of the year, can be said ' to have been entered by man. Of course, about the beginning and ending of this twilight, it is very feeble and easily extinguished by even the slightest mists, but nevertheless it exists, and is quite appreciable on clear cold days, or nights, properly speaking. The North Pole itself is only shrouded in perfect blackness from November 13 to January 29, a period of seventy-seven days. Supposing that the sun has set (supposing a circumpolar sea or body of water unlimited to vision) on September 24, not to rise until March 18, for that particular point, giving a period of about fifty days of uniformly varying twilight, the pole has about 188 days of continuous daylight, 100 days of varying twilight, and 77 of perfect inky darkness (save when the moon has a northern declination) in the period of a typical year. During the period of a little over four days, the sun shines continuously on both the North and South Poles at the same time, . owing to refraction parallax, semi-diameter, and dip of the horizon. The Collins Line of Steamers. The breaking up of the Baltic, the last of the famous Collins line of steamships, calls out a number of interesting facts with regard to the history of the several vessels of that fleet. There were five in all, the Adriatic, Atlantic, Pacific, Arctic, and Baltic. They were built and equipped in New York. Their dimensions were: Length, 290 feet; beam, 45 feet; depth of hold, 31Yz feet; capacity, 2,860 tons; machinery, 1,000 horse power. In size, speed, and appointments they surpassed any steamers then afloat, and they obtained a fa ir share of the passenger traffic. A fortune was expended in decorating the saloons. The entire cost of each steamer was not less than 600,000, and notwithstanding their quick passages, the subsidy received, and the high rates of freight paid. the steamers ran for six years at great loss, and finally the company became bankrupt. The Atlantic was the pioneer steamship of the line. She sailed from New York April 27, 1849, and arrived in the Mersey May 10, thus making the passage in about thirteen days, two of which were lost in repairing the machinery; the speed was reduced in order to prevent the floats from being torn from the paddle-wheels. The average time of the forty-two westward trips in the early days of the line was 11 days 10 hours and 26 minutes, against the average of the then so- called fastest line of steamers, 12 days 19 hours and 26 minutes. In February, 1852, the Arctic made the passage from New York to Liverpool in 9 days and 17 hours. The Arctic was afterward run into by a French vessel at sea and only a feW of her passengers were saved. The Pacific was never heard from after sailing from Liverpool, and all the persons on board were lost. The Atlantic, after rotting and rusting at' her wharf, was deprived of her machinery and converted into a sailing vessel, and was broken up in New York last year. The Adriatic, the queen of the fleet, made less than a half dozen voyages, was sold to the Galway Ice at High Temperatures, The Baltic was in the government service during the war once from the sold state into the state of gas, subliming away as a supply vessel, and was afterward sold at auction; without previous melting. And, having come to this conher machinery was removed and sold as old iron. She was clusion, it was ea"sily foreseen that it would be possible to then converted into a sailing ship, and of late years has been have solid"ice at temperatures far. above the ordinary meltused as a grain carrying vessel between San Francisco and Great Britain. On a recent voyage to Boston she was strained to such an extent as to be made unseaworthy, and for that reason is to be broken up. One cannot but remark in this connection how small has been the advance in steamship building during the quarter century since the Collins line was in its glory.

SA Supplements Vol 10 Issue 259suppThis article was published with the title “Patents” in SA Supplements Vol. 10 No. 259supp (), p. 393
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican12181880-4134dsupp

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe