Having written on a piece of paper with Stephens' and other fluids, pour over the writing a small quantity of a bleaching solution (chloride of lime), and the effect will be conclusive.

An objection has been made to the writing fluid, that, being more fluid, it necessarily sinks into the paper more than common ink; but I consider this, in a moderate degree, rather a virtue than a defect. It is quite evident that a colour which is intended to endure, should combine with, and in some degree dye, the substance to which it is applied. If it sits upon the surface like varnish, liable to be erased by slight scratching, and almost by friction, it cannot be expected to retain its impression strongly, any more than we should expect our coats, dyed on the outer surface only, to be durable in their colour.

A precipitate of colouring matter is liable to take place from all solutions by long standing, but the precipitate from the writing fluid is perfectly soluble; the inkstand should, therefore, be occasionally shaken, which can very easily be done, if the fountain-ink of Mr. Stephens is employed. It will be perceived, by referring to the drawing, that these stand's are constructed so as to lessen evaporation; to prevent lodgments of dust; to afford an oblique and more convenient access with grooved rests for the pen; it is also particularly adapted for the occasional agitation of the contents.

I have received much personal convenience from the use of Mr. Stephens' writing fluid; and have much pleasure in thus publicly expressing my thanks for the same. Wishing him every

and which do not require to be often moved (as slate is, of course, heavy), may be made of it, decorated in the most elaborate style. The natural texture of the slate, it has been found, is peculiarly ap plicable as a ground for the reception of colours; and Mr. Stirling has some specimens of tables with a wreath of flowers round the edge, and a group in the centre, most beautifully executed-the neutral tint of the slate forming an appropriate back-ground. A very beautiful and appropriate application of the article has been made in the formation of doorpanels. The General Steam Navigation Company has, we understand, given orders for the fitting up of the saloon of one of its new steam-vessels with these panels, painted with groups of fruit, flowers, and designs of a like nature. Amongst the numerous other articles of slate manufactured by Mr. Stirling, we shall merely particularise his door fingerplates and inkstands, which are extremely beautiful.

THE THREE-PRONG PEN.

Sir,-In your No. 667, I observe that Messrs. Mordan and Co.'s last patent for steel-pens is noticed. The public will, no doubt, derive a great benefit from the use of them, and it must be admitted that Mordan and Co are good makers of these articles; but as to their patent right, I fear it will cost a good deal to defend it. It was certainly rather a bold step of Mordan and Co. to speculate upon a patent under the peculiar circumstances stated by your correspondent. However, I wish they may establish their patent, because I think it would prove whether the late act to amend the patent law be of any benefit or not.

For some years past I have formed several ideas about improving steel-pens, and, although not a pen-maker, I thought that I was, and perhaps am, the first inventor of the three-prong pen, for this is the name I gave what is now called the three-nibbed pen-but I think the nib of a pen consists of all its prongs together. About a year ago, after searching almost every place where steel-pens were sold, I could not find any thing approaching my ideas on the subject, which led me to think that I had hit upon something new. I then applied to several of the pen-makers, and examined several speci

fications at the Inrolment-office, without making any further discovery-until October last, when I waited upon Mr. Mordan, in a confidential manner. After exchanging several remarks about steelpens, I showed him a plan and model of my three-prong, or writing point (which I have still by me), and he asked me if I meant to allow all the three prongs to touch the paper when writing. I replied, certainly the third prong was to deposit the ink, when the two main prongs were extended wide, to form large letters, but in small writing it would seldom come in contact with the paper. All that has been said about capillary attraction, &c. I do not think applicable to this subject. Mr. Mordan then said that such a pen, a few months back, would have been worth 1,000l. I naturally desired to know why it had lost its value. He then told me of Mr. Gowland; what he had done; and that he had unfortunately allowed his invention to be published by Mr. Carstairs; and although a patent was now out of the question, he meant to make something of it if he could. He also showed me a pen with a piece punched out of the shank, and bent down the back, to form the third prong. Mr. Gowland's plan I was a separate piece rivetted on. pointed out to Mr. Mordan that my mode of making was different both from Mr. Gowland's and his, and that it could safely hold double the quantity of ink." I then left him, desiring him not to use my plan without my consent, saying I had still another point in store, which would appear in another way; and I have neither seen nor heard from Mr. Mordan since.

I believe Mr. Gowland has not benefitted much by his share in the invention; he told me that several pen-makers to whom he had shown the pen, pretended they had a similar thing. This, I believe, they had not; consequently it appears that Mr. Gowland was jockeyed into the act of publishing his invention, to his own loss and the benefit of others. Your obedient servant, J. DICKSON.

9 Charlotte-street, Blackfriars-road, June 27, 1836.

DRAFTSMAN'S SCREW-PIN. Sir,-Presuming that the simplicity of the following contrivance is no objection,

I have to beg a corner for it in your valuable Magazine.

I have often found, in using a draw ing-board, when I had a sheet of paper laid on each side at the same time, and had occasion to draw on both before taking either from it, that they became woolly (from being rubbed), and, consequently, unpleasant to work upon. I therefore adopted the following method of preventing this evil, and thus now use one board, where I otherwise should have been obliged to have two.

Near each corner of the board a small brass tube was fixed, with a screw tapped in it, so as to take a screw-pin, placed either above or below. One of these pins was fitted into each tube, and the head left rather rough, to take a better hold on the table on which the board might be placed when used.

The engraving, in which AB shows a section of part of the board, and a the pin screwed in its place, will supersede the necessity of a further description. If preferred, pins without being screwed, but fitting nicely, would do.

I remain, Sir,
Yours very obediently,

C. E. B., a Subscriber.

AMERICAN LAW OF PATENTS. Report of a Select Committee of Congress appointed to take into consideration the State and Condition of the Patent-Office, and the Laws relating to the issuing of Patents for New and Useful Inventions and Discoveries.

The promotion of the arts and the improvement of manufactures are the objects aimed at in granting patents for inventions. All civilised nations have provided in some form for the encouragement of inventive genius. England, from whom we derived, originally, most of our notions of national polity, and who has hitherto been considered the queen of arts," is in no small degree indebted for the distinction to the liberality with which she has always rewarded genius

and science for their inventions and discoveries. Individual munificence and the patronage of wealthy associations, have there, as in France and Germany, done much to supply whatever was wanting in the liberality of the Government. But such patronage is necessarily partial in its operation. It is limited to particular objects, if not to particular individuals. There appears to be no better way of measuring out appropriate rewards for useful inventions than by a general law, to secure to all descriptions of persons, without discrimination, the exclusive use and sale, for a given period, of the thing invented. In this way they will generally derive a just and appropriate encouragement proportioned to the value of their respective inventions. It is not at this day to be doubted that the evil of the temporary monopoly is greatly overbalanced by the good the community ultimately derives from its toleration.

The granting of exclusive privileges was in England originally assumed as a preroga tive of the Crown, from which it derived a revenue. It was at first limited to the introduction of manufactures from other countries. Afterwards like privileges were granted for new inventions made within the realm. Like all other regal prerogatives, it was subject to abuse, and Parliament found it necessary to limit and restrain it. This was done by the famous statute of monopolies, passed in the reign of James I. which defined the king's prerogative in respect to the description of grants which might legally be made, and among them were patents for inventions and new manufactures. The very brief reservation of right in the Crown contained in that statute, and the judicial decisions in cases arising under the grants of privileges made pursuant to it, constituted the whole of the English law on the subject up to 1835, when a law was passed by Parliament giving the right to file a disclaimer in certain cases, and containing some other less material provisions.

It is from those judicial decisions that we have derived most of the principles on which our laws on the subject are founded, and which have entered into and influenced the judicial expositions given to them. But the decisions of our courts have been characterised by a more enlightened and liberal appli. cation of equitable principles to cases of this description, in a just endeavour to sustain patents for meritorious inventions, instead of seeking to find, in the technicalities of law, a pretext for setting them aside.

Prior to the adoption of the federal constitution, the States, within their narrow limits, could give very little encouragement to inventors by grants of exclusive privileges; and up to that time the arts had made very

little progress on this side of the Atlantic. By the constitution of the United States that power was wisely vested in Congress.

The first act of Congress on the subject was passed in 1790. It authorised the Secretary of State, Secretary of War, and the Attorney-General, or any two of them, on application, to grant patents for such new inventions and discoveries as they should deem " sufficiently useful and important."

Under that act the board so constituted exercised the power of refusing patents for want of novelty in the invention, or of sufficient utility and importance. This act extended the same privilege to aliens as to citi.

zens.

In 1793, it was repealed, and nother act passed, authorising patents to citizens of the United States only, to be granted by the Secretary of State, subject to the revision of the Attorney-General. In 1800, the privilege to take out patents was extended to aliens who have resided two years in this country, and made oath of their intention of becoming citizens of the United States.

The act of 1793, which is still in force, gives, according to the practical construction it has received, no power to the Secretary to refuse a patent for want of either novelty or usefulness. The only inquiry is, whether the terms and forms pres ribed are complied with. The granting of patents, therefore, is but a ministerial duty. Every one who makes application is entitled to receive a patent by paying the duty required, and making his application and specification in conformity, with the law. The necessary consequence is, that patents have, under the act of 1793, been daily granted, without regard to the question of novelty, or even utility in the ordinary sense; for it has been settled that the term useful, as used in this statute, is only in contradistinction to hurtful, injurious, or pernicious. This construction (that no right is conferred to refuse a patent) has been given to the law by the department charged with the duty of granting patents, not so much probably from any necessary and unavoidable import of the terms of it, as from a disinclination to exercise a power of so much importance, in cases where it is not clearly and distinctly granted. And it may be reasonably doubted whether it was the intention of Congress to confer such a power on the Secretary of State alone, since no provision is made for an appeal or other remedy for an incorrect decision adverse to the applicant. Besides, any person occupying that station might be supposed as little qualified by an acquaintance with the appropriate branches of science or of the arts, to decide such questions, as any other officer of the Government. And were he to undertake the task of such an examination as would be necessary to a decision in each case, he

234

I would have little time for other official duties.

Under the act referred to, the Department of State has been going on for more than forty years, issuing patents on every application, without any examination into the merit or novelty of the invention. And the evils which necessarily result from the law as it now exists, must continue to increase and multiply daily, till Congress shall put a stop to them. Some of them are as follows:

1. A considerable portion of all the pa tents granted are worthless and void, as conflicting with, and infringing upon one another, or upon public rights not subject to patent privileges; arising either from a want of due attention to the specifications of claim, or from the ignorance of the patentees of the state of the arts and manufactures, and of the inventions made in other countries, or even in our own.

2. The country becomes flooded with patent monopolies, embarrassing to bona fide paten, tees, whose rights are thus invaded on all sides; and not less embarrassing to the community generally, in the use of even the most common machinery and long-known improvements in the arts and common manufactures of the country.

3. Out of this interference and collision of patents and privileges, a great number of lawsuits arise, which are daily increasing in an alarming degree, onerous to the courts, ruinous to the parties, and injurious to society.

4. It opens the door to frauds, which have already become extensive and serious. It is represented to the Committee that it is not uncommon for persons to copy patented machines in the model-room; and, having made some slight immaterial alterations, they apply in the next room for patents. There being no power given to refuse them, patents are issued of course. Thus prepared, they go forth on a retailing expedition, selling out their patent rights for States, counties, and townships, to those who have no means at hand of detecting the imposition, and who find, when it is too late, that they have purchased what the venders had no right to sell, and which they obtain thereby no right to use. This speculation in patent rights has become a regular business, and several hundred thousand dollars, it is estimated, are paid annually for void patents, many of which are thus fraudulently obtained.

In this collision and interference of patents, the original and meritorious inventor sees his invention, to the perfection of which he has devoted much time and expense, pirated from him, and he must forego the reward which the law was intended to secure to him in the exclusive right it grants; or he must

become involved in numerous and expensive lawsuits in distant and various sections of the country, to protect and confirm his rights. If he be wise, he will generally avoid the latter, and submit to the former alternative of injustice, to which the Government, as the law now is, makes itself accessary.. The practice is scarcely less reprehensible, of taking out patents for what has been long in public use, and what every one has therefore a right to use. The patentee in such cases being armed with the apparent authority of the Government, having the sanction of its highest officers the seal of State, scours the country, and by threats of prosecution, compels those who are found using the thing patented, to pay the patent price or commutation tribute. This exaction, unjust and iniquitous as it is, is usually submitted to.

The extent of the evils resulting from the unrestrained and promiscuous grants of privileges, may be imagined, when is considered that there are now issued, since this year commenced, at the rate of more than a thousand a year; a considerable portion of which are doubtless void for want of originality in the inventions patented, either in whole or in some of the parts claimed as new.

A necessary consequence is, that patents even for new and meritorious inventions are so much depreciated in general estimation, that they are of but little value to the patentees, and the object of the patent laws, that of promoting the arts by encouragement, is in a great measure defeated.

To prevent these evils in future is the first and most desirable object of a revision and alteration of the existing laws on this subject. The most obvious, if not the only means of affecting it, appears to be to establish a check upon the granting of patents, allowing them to issue only for such inventions as are in fact new and entitled, by the merit of originality and utility, to be protected by law. The difficulty encountered in effecting this, is in determining what that check shall be; in whom the power to judge of inventions before granting a patent can safely be reposed, and how its exercise can be regulated and guarded, to prevent injustice through mistake of judgment or otherwise, by which honest and meritorious inventors might suffer wrong.

It is obvious that the power must, in the first instance, be exercised by the department charged with this branch of the public service. But as it may not be thought proper to intrust its final exercise to the department, it is deemed advisable to provide for an occasional tribunal to which an appeal may be taken. And as a further security against any possible injustice, it is thought proper to give the applicant, in certain cases, where there may be an adverse party to contest his