patent. An act of parliament was very seldom indeed obtained A. D. 1843. by an inventor, great as his merits might be, and small as his gains might have been. It is by no means the course of their lordships-as has been frequently said, and by myself lately, in giving the judgment of the court in a recent case-it is by no means their course to put themselves precisely in the situation. of the legislature, and never to grant an extension in a case where an act of parliament could not have been obtained. At the same time there are some limits to this. They are to look to a certain degree at the position in which they are placed, and to consider that they here represent the legislature, and that they are invested with somewhat similar powers of discretion to those exercised formerly by the whole three branches of parliaAnd therefore, they by no means intend to have it understood (as has been repeatedly said in these cases), that it is any thing like a matter of course, that upon a case being produced of small merit, and proportionably small consequence, especially in the circumstances of its being the assignee that makes the application, that it is any thing like a matter of course, that they shall grant the application; and upon the whole, their lordships see no reason for granting this application for an extension. ment. Other Cases.-The following cases of application to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, for an extension of the term of letters patent have occurred: BATE'S PATENT. This was an application (9th of March, 1836,) by the patentee for an extension of the term of letters patent, granted 21st of March, 1822, to Robert Bate, for "certain improvements on hydrometers and saccharometers." The petition stated the expenditure of a large sum of money in experiments, carried on during many years, upon the expansion of liquids at different temperatures. That the experiments upon the infusion of malt, or wort, alone amounted to 346, the results of many of which were calculated to a unit in the fifth place of decimals. That the improved instruments were essential to the Excise, and at the time of the petitioner's invention five different instruments were employed for the purposes to which the new instrument is applicable. That the petitioner's instrument was more correct, and would supersede the old instruments, but could only be introduced generally by the assistance of the Commissioners of Excise, which assistance the petitioner was on the point of obtaining. Application granted. MACINTOSH'S PATENT. This was an application in respect of the several letters patent, granted in 1823, to Charles Macintosh, for "rendering certain substances impervious to water and air." (See ante 582, n. b.) The petition was lodged 16th January, 1836, and on the usual application being made shortly afterwards for an early day to be fixed for the hearing, their lordships intimated, that as the English patent did not expire till the 17th of June, 1837, the profits accruing in the mean time might materially affect the question of extension, and the application had better stand over for the present. (Feb. 1837.) W. H. Watson renewed the application for a day to be fixed for the hearing, and suggested to the committee the difficulty in which the postponement of the former application had placed the petitioner as to the notices on the caveats of the opposing parties; whether the old notices would be sufficient. Hindmarsh objected that the old notices could not be sufficient, as fresh parties had become interested in opposing the patent since the date of the previous application. Special leave had been given to one of these parties to enter a caveat. Their lordships declined giving any opinion on the question of the notices, but intimated that the best plan would be to fix as late a day as convenient for the hearing, and the petitioner to act as he should be advised as to proceeding on the old notices or giving fresh notices. The hearing was fixed for the 22d day of April. (June 24, 1837.) The petitioner having abandoned the above petition, Corrie, on an affidavit of facts, applied on behalf of one of the opposing parties for the costs which he had been occasioned in the matter of the above petition. Their lordships granted the application for costs. BODMER'S PATENT. This was an application to extend the several terms of the letters patent granted to J. G. Bodmer, for "certain improvements in machinery for cleaning, carding, drawing, roving, and spinning of cotton and wool;" the letters patent for Scotland, Ireland, and England, bore date the 18th of August, the 7th and 14th of October, 1824, respectively. The petition was duly presented (31st of May, 1838), and notices of intention to apply on the 26th of June, for a day to be fixed for the hearing, duly given by advertisement. On that day two caveats were entered, under which the parties being respectively entitled to four weeks' notice, the ordinary sitting of the Judicial Committee would have terminated before the petition could be heard, and the letters patent would have expired before the sittings could be renewed after Michaelmas Term. Under these circumstances their lordships appointed the 17th of August, for the hearing, but a sufficient number of members could not be obtained to form a council. The 29th day of November was then appointed for the hearing. (Nov. 29, 1838.) The above petition came on for the hearing, the caveats having been withdrawn. Sir J. Campbell, A.G., on the part of the crown, objected that their lordships had not power to entertain the application after the letters patent had expired, the statute 5 & 6 W. 4, c. 83, s. 4, requiring that the application should be prosecuted with effect before the expiration of the term originally granted by the letters patent. Their lordships were of opinion that the above objection was fatal; that the words "prosecuted with effect," meant that something more than the application by presenting the petition, and obtaining a day to be fixed for the hearing, must have taken place to satisfy the proviso of the statute. It may be suggested, whether the terms "prosecuted with effect" in the statute, do not mean, or would not be satisfied by, obtaining the report of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. (May 20, 1840.) The act 2 & 3 Vict. c. 67, having been passed to obviate the hardship of the above case, the application for an extension of the terms of the above patents was renewed. Proof having been given of the insertion of the advertisements, as in the case of an application under the statute 5 & 6 W. 4, c. 83, and of the merit of the invention, and that no remuneration had been received till within the last three years, and that only of a moderate kind, their lordships recommended the extension of the term for seven years. The new letters patent were accordingly granted, bearing date the 18th of July, 1840. QUARRILL'S PATENT. This was an application (June 30, 1840) by the assignee, under an assignment from the executrix, the widow of the patentee of letters patent, granted the 20th of December, 1826, to Thomas Quarrill, for "improvements in the manufacture of lamps." It appeared that between 600 and 700 lamps had been sold during Mr. Quarrill's life-time, at a profit of about 10s. a lamp, the selling price being about 30s.; that the petitioner had pur chased the stock in trade at a fair value, and had been no loser by the transaction. Their lordships refused the application. Their lordships also intimated, that with regard to the question of remuneration, the actual expenses must be shown; that it was not sufficient to state there had been neither loss nor profit. WOODCROFT'S PATENT. This was an application (Feb. 11, 1841) for an extension of the terms of the letters patent, granted (A.D. 1827-8) to Bennet Woodcroft, for "certain processes and apparatus for printing and preparing for manufacture yarns of linen, cotton, silk, woollen, or any other fibrous material." The subject of the above patent was printing yarns, which, after they were printed, were to be woven into cloth, the yarns so printed being the warp. The cloth made of such yarns had a peculiarly clouded or shaded appearance, and the above invention gave rise to the clouded or chenie silks and fabrics, recently brought to so much perfection (see account of these fabrics by G.T. Kemp, Esq., in the 54th volume of the Transactions of the Society of Arts). It appeared that during the first four years printed cotton yarns, and goods manufactured from them, were in great demand, and that a considerable profit (£7000) was realized, but that from the removal of the duty on printed calicos (the printed yarns not being subject to duty) and other causes, a large capital invested in working the patent ceased to be profitable, and the invention to be little used, so much so, that in 1835 the patent right, on a certain valuation of partnership effects, was not estimated at more than £600. In 1839, in conse quence of the importation of certain French silks, manufactured of printed yarns, the invention under a somewhat improved form became very valuable, and led to the introduction of the new class of silk goods above referred to. It appeared that the method described in the specification of the above patent answered perfectly well for simple patterns, but that it failed for the more elaborate patterns and the brighter colours, which required the yarns to be washed after printing. The application was opposed on the ground (among others), that the invention in its present improved form was introduced from France in 1839 by other persons than the petitioner. Application refused. INDEX. ABANDONMENT. The abandonment or uselessness of a part of the invention not described or suggested as essential, will not vitiate the letters patent. Lewis v. Marling, 490. As where before plaintiff's invention some kind of brush had been used in shearing the cloth, and the specification described a brush for that purpose, but it was ascertained not to be necessary to use such brush in shearing according to the plaintiff's invention. Ibid. 490, 495. The abandonment of a mode raises a strong presumption, either that it failed or was merely an experiment. Ibid. 492, n. x. If an alleged invention be not pursued the presumption is, that it was not made in a useful form. Minter v. Mower, 139. The abandonment is an important question for determining, whether what took place was experiment or perfected and complete invention. The Househill Company v. Neilson, 692, n. p. The abandonment is almost decisive, as showing that an invention was not complete and perfected, though in point of law it is immaterial. Ibid. It must rest either on experiment or invention; if the former, the continuance down to the time of the patent will not invalidate the patent; if the latter, the invention will be good, and the abandonment will not affect it. Ibid. The test is, was the invention perfected or not; was it invention or no invention? Ibid. 704. See EXPERIMENT. The notorious use of an invention, though abandoned, will vitiate subsequent patent. Ibid. 710 & 716. Semble, That the prior use of an invention, abandoned and wholly lost sight of by the public, will not vitiate subsequent letters patent for the same invention. Ibid. 717. ACCOUNT. An account decreed to be taken of the profits derived from the piratical use of an invention. Crossley v. The Derby Gas Company, 119. The defendant ordered to pay money due up to a certain period into court, and to keep an account of moneys subsequently due. Neilson v. Fothergill, 290. Ample justice may be done to the plaintiff without prejudice to the defendant, by an account of all engines made and sold. Morgan v. Seaward, 168. See INJUNCTION. ACTS OF PARLIAMENT. parliament, 37 & 40. Letters patent extended by act of See EXTENSION. ACTION AT LAW. A party against whom an injunction has been granted will be permitted to have the validity of the patent tried at law. Russell v. Barnsley, 473. The pendency of one action to try the validity of a patent no ground for continuing an injunction, and refusing to permit another defendant to have the right also tried. Ibid. The letters patent must be altered An enrolment cannot be permitted to The statute permitting the enrolment An order to that effect discharged, and The letters patent will only be amend- Letters patent amended, and then re- By Statute. Where a patent is originally voidable, AMENDMENT. At Common Law. The authority of the Master of the Instances of amendment and records A clerical error having been committed, APPLICATION. The application of plates of metal to Also the application of detonating Also the application of gas to singeing Also the application of hot water or The use of known things, and acting As, the substitution of a tube for a The application or use of an old arti- Semble, the application of any article See SUBJECT-MATTER. APPRENTICES. Grantee of exclusive privileges re- ARRANGEMENT. A particular arrangement or combina- See COMBINATION & SUBJECT-MATTER. An arrangement of float-boards ac- ASSIGNEE. In an action by an assignee for an in- In an action by the assignee of letters In an action by the assignees of letters See ESTOPPEL. The legal interests of an assignee and Assignment of a share in letters pa- An assignee of letters patent, in which Semble, That the grantee, though hav- The assignee is the party to whom the The assignee is taken to represent the BILL. Amendment of without prejudice to n. c. CAVEAT AT THE GREAT SEAL. Caveat may be entered with the Lord The Chancellor refused to withhold The Chancellor refused to seal letters A party alleging the invention, for Matter of petition referred to the At- On petition to the Lord Chancellor to |