men, by securing to them the benefit of their inventions."

NEW AMERICAN PATENT LAW.

There seems at the present time to be a general move in the world of Patentees. Our own legislators have hardly passed one bill on the subject, when theyare called upon to pass another, and patent specimens of legislation they both appear likely to be. On these I shall not presume to offer any remarks, as I perceive they are to be commented on in the Mechanics' Magazine by a hand (which is certain to do them justice; but there is another branch of the same extensive subject, on which I must ask permission to occupy your space with a few observations, as I have long waited in vain to see the theme taken up by some more competent correspondent.

In No. 673 of the Mechanics' Magazine, (published in July, 1836.) appears a Report of a Select Committee of the American Congress, appointed to take into consideration the Law of Patents. This report presents, in some points of view, a striking similarity to those of some late Committees of our own House of Commons, and it shows a dissimilarity equally striking. The resemblance consists in this, that the Committee sometimes contradicts in one paragraph that which it asserts in another. While we are assured in one part of the report that

a considerable portion of all the patents granted, are worthless and void;" that "the country is flooded with monopolies of even the most common machinery and long known improvements in the arts;" that the frauds committed by taking out new patents of inventions already patented by their real inventors, are already extensive and serious; and that this branch of roguery is, in fact, become a regular business;" we are told in another, that if all this cheating be put a stop to, the number of patents will only be" somewhat diminished," and the "several thousands of interesting and valuable models now preserved" in the office, (but since destroyed by fire,) are spoken of in the mass, as if they were gems beyond price, the view of which would "tend not a little to elevate the national character." In the same page we learn that "patents even for new and meritorious inventions are so much depreciated in general

estimation, that they are but of little value to the patentee;" and yet that " several hundred thousand dollars, it is estimated, are paid annually" for permission to make use of pirated patents; and that in the first three months of 1836, the very year in which the bill is called for on the ground of this new depreciation, more has been taken out than in the whole ten years from 1790 to 1800, in which they were held in so much higher esteem, and found of so much more value.

'a

So much for the resemblance between transatlantic Committees and our own. The point of unlikeness is a still more glaring one. The members of our House of Commons, industrious as they have lately been in that line, have scarcely, after all, displayed so much eagerness to run down and depreciate the talents of their countrymen, as the members of the American Congress to puff up and exalt the merits of theirs. The subject of the surpassing ingenuity of the Americans, and their vast superiority to any nation whatever on this side of the Atlantic, is one that they are constantly recurring to, and of which they never seem to grow weary. To any one but an American, their language of penegyric seems warm enough at first, when speaking of the rise of American manufactures, they say that “ more rapid advancement in the arts, and a more astonishing development of human ingenuity, have never taken place in any other age or country." But compared to what follows this, is damning with faint praise. "What mechanism or manufacture," they soon after exclaim in a burst of enthusiastic admiration of themselves, "has, for the last twenty years, been brought across the Atlantic, that has not, on being returned, borne the distinguished marks of the superior ingenuity of the American mechanists? Formerly, we borrowed and copied much that was valuable from Europe. Now, Europe is borrowing and copying with no little advantage from us, and she must not be too much surprised, if she shall soon find a formidable balance against her." "It has been justly remarked," they afterwards observe, "that we can go into no mechanic shop-into no manufactory of any description, upon no farm or plantation, or travel a mile on our railroads, or in our steam-boats, without seeing the evidence of our originality,

(in railroads?) and witnessing the fruits of our ingenuity and enterprise." It might be remarked with equal justice, that we cannot take up an American book, or read an American document, even such a one as the present, an official report, which ought, of all things, to be grave and unpretending, without witnessing some ridiculous ebullition of American vanity, and American self-conceit. On the principle that of two evils, the least should be chosen, we, in England, ought certainly rather to wish that our legisla tors should continue, as they now do, to manifest an undue disregard of native talent, which can only ultimately tend to the discredit of themselves, than that by taking the opposite course, and plastering us with panegyric, (it matters little when coming from such a source, whether well or ill deserved,) they should render both themselves and the nation ridiculous. The good old proverb so familiar here, has certainly, some how or other, not found its way across the Atlantic, "Self-praise is no commenda. tion."

All this, it may be said, is merely a question of opinion and of taste. This report on the law of patents, however, presents a feature to which objections of more serious consequence will apply. Those who have entertained a high notion of the liberality and fair spirit of the citizens and government of the United States, will learn with some surprise, on the authority of this Committee of Congress, that an act which was passed in 1790, extending to aliens and to citizens the same privilege of having their property in discoveries and inventions protected, was three years after repealed, and another act passed, "authorising patents to citizens of the United States only;" or, in other words, making it legal to plunder foreigners of the fruits of invention and discovery. For three-and-forty years afterwards, this system of alienatIng the property of aliens, was allowed, it seems, to go on, while, during that time, the citizens of the United States were taking out innumerable patents in foreign countries, whose institutions did not happen to legalize theft. At length, in 1836, comes this Committee-this glaring instance of national injustice stares the members in the face; and mark the tender language in which they speak of it, and the very adequate remedy

they recommend to be applied. "Heretofore," they observe, "aliens not resident in this country (or who are resident, have not made oath of their intention to become American citizens) have not been admitted to the privileges of our patent laws. But as American citizens are allowed to take out patents in England, and in other countries, a principle of reciprocity would seem to require (it would indeed) that foreigners should have similar privileges here." So far so goodnothing can be more plain; but what follows?" ON PAYING A SIMILAR DUTY

OR AMOUNT OF FEES THAT IS EXACTED OF

OUR CITIZENS ABROAD!!" The fallacy here is so gross, that it is impossible to suppose that the error was committed in good faith. The "meanest capacity" could scarcely be led to believe that a principle of reciprocity would ever require any such thing. Suppose it had been a law in America, that no foreigner should be allowed to purchase land, and it were proposed to amend it, what would be said of the intellects of a person who should remark that the principle of reciprocity would seem to require that land in America should be sold to a British citizen at the same rate per acre that an American citizen could purchase land in Great Britain. Yet this is the identical notion on which this Committee recommends a law to be framed, and on which a law has been framed, which passed the scrutiny and gained the sanction of the House of Representatives and the Senate, and was finally "approved" on July 4th, 1836, by President Jackson, The 9th section of it runs thus (as given in No. 697, of the Mechanics' Magazine, December 17th, 1836):—

"And be it further enacted, That before any application for a patent shall be considered by the Commissioners as aforesaid, the applicant shall pay into the Treasury of the United States, or into the Patent-office, or into any of the deposit banks to the credit of the Treasury, if he be a citizen of the United States, or an alien, and shall have been a resident in the United States for one year next preceding, and shall have made oath of his intention to become a citizen thereof, the sum of 30 dollars; if a subject of the King of Great Britain, the sum of 500 dollars; and all other persons the sum of 300 dollars, &c. &c."

As it seems absolutely impossible that a nation so clear-sighted as the Ameri

cans are usually considered, should really be so stone-blind in one particular, as to regard an enactment like this as just, the inference is, I fear, unavoidable, that they are indifferent what injustice they commit so long as the injury falls on others, and some advantage is derived to themselves. Had the passage, in the report of the Committee, expressed the real sentiments of its authors, it would certainly have run thus:-" Heretofore we have netted no small gain by trespassing on the generosity of foreign nations, who have allowed us to take out patents in their dominions, while we have proclaimed all the inventions they could produce a free prize to the free citizens of America. But as there is reason to think that the patience, if even the most forbearing, would inevitably be exhausted by a longer continuance of this piratical system in all its naked deformity, a principle of self-interest would seem to require that we should relinquish, of ourselves, some portion of its sweets, lest the reteliation which we have provoked should deprive us of the whole. Though thus compelled, however, to give up robbing on the highway, we have a scheme which may properly be deemed by foreign nations too contemptible for active resentment, by which we may for some years longer be able to carry on the war against aliens, in the way of picking pockets."

This language may be thought strong, but it is certainly not too strong for the occasion. This act, and this clause of the act, have evidently been the subject of sufficient consideration; for the price of applying for a patent has been limited from forty dollars, as originally proposed, to thirty, as it now stands, for an American citizen; while subjects of the King of Great Britain have sull been considered but too fortunate to be admitted to the "privilege" of protecting the most sacred of all property, for somewhat more than sixteen times the sum. It is clear that the act of injustice has been done deliberately, and with malice aforethought. It was intended, I suppose, to throw dust in the eyes of the people of England; to set up a reputation for liberality" among patentees on this side the Atlantic, on the ground of voluntarily withdrawing an obnoxious law; but if this be really the case, it is only adding fresh injury to the old one, by showing contempt for our understandings. It is not

trying, in fact, to throw dust in our eyes, but to throw blocks of granite.

I know, Mr. Editor, that your columns will be open to both sides, if the appearance of this letter in your pages, which are extensively circulated in America, should lead any American citizen, who thinks the new Patent-law susceptible of defence, to take up the cudgels in its favour. I hope, however, better things from our brethren over the water. I hope that when they are fully aware of the act of scandalous injustice their Legislature has been committing, their indignation will, as it ought to do, for they are involved in the dishonour, far surpass any that an Englishman can feel on the subject. If such be the case, the iniquitous law will, of course, be swept from the statute-book in less time than it takes a Kentuckian to dash through a churchyard of milestones.

I am, Sir, yours, &c. A SUBJECT OF THE KING OF GREAT BRITAIN. March 21, 1837.

ASTRONOMICAL RULES WANTED.

Sir,-Will you permit a constant reader of your useful and widely-circulating Magazine to put a question or two to some of your scientific friends, the solution of which will, I have no doubt, be acceptable to many of your astronomical readers, whose knowledge, like my own, is more practical than theoretic. It is universally acknowledged, that the first object of the practical astronomer is the obtaining the correct time. Indeed, in almost every observation this is indispensable. Hence, many different means of obtaining it have been proposed, and among others, one was some time ago published in the "Astronomical Society's Memoirs," founded on the appearance of two stars in the same vertical line. I am accustomed to travel with a small transit instrument, which, however, I can seldom use, owing to the difficulty of getting it accurately in the meridiau in any reasonable time. But I find that with this instrument, the time when a star at some distance from the pole star is passing under it, or, in other words, is in the same vertical line, may be observed in a few minutes only. It is evident that this time must differ from that at which the lower star passes the

meridian, in proportion to the pole star's distance from the meridian at that instant; and the paper in the Memoirs above-mentioned gives a formula by which that may be found. But, unfortunately for me, I do not understand formulas; and what I have now to request is, that some of your scientific readers who do, would have the kindness to put it in the shape of a rule, such as we find in books of navigation, so that a plain sailor like myself might under stand it; or what would be still better, would give us at length the answer to the following example:-Feb. 1st, in lat. 510 30', y Draconis was observed to be directly under, or in the same vertical line with Polaris, required the time.

Again, can any of your readers inform me if there is any astronomical work which gives rules for calculating the librations of the moon? Our excellent "Nautical Ephemeris," it is true, gives us the time when the librations arrive at a maximum, but, I must own, I do not see the utility of this, or how I am to find from it the situation of any spot at any particular time; yet this, I suppose, is what is most generally required. For example:-The latitude and longitude of the spot, Plato, in a mean state of libration, is 9° 12′ E. and 51° 14′ N., respectively, and I can from them lay down its exact apparent place on the lunar disc. But what will be its position on the 20th of next month, for instance, at the time of the total eclipse? If there are any rules for finding this, I shall be much obliged by being informed where they are to be found.

Notwithstanding the rigid mathemati cal demonstration given by Kinclaven (No. 680), showing the ridiculous ab surdity of our earth having been at one period attended by five moons (and which demonstration Mr. Mackintosh wisely forbore to grapple with), still Mr. Thorne wishes to revive this most foolish part of the electrical theory. "We see (he says, No. 707,) in various parts of the world, extensive chains of mountains of great altitude, corresponding in number to the satellites which this theory supposes to have existed." (That chain of mountains in Africa which extend between Abyssinia. and Monomatapa, called the Mountains of the Moon, is undoubtedly one of the chain of mountains Mr. Thorne alludes to.) "Why may not these several chains of mountains have been the places of deposit of particular satellites," &c. Well, Mr. Editor, with your permission I shall endeavour to show some of the consequences that would result to our planet in the event of a collision with the moon. If that event should take place, it is certain that the poor moon would be smashed in pieces after the collision takes place; we shall first suppose that the whole matter in the moon is equally scattered over the whole surface of our globe. Then to determine how far the present surface of our planet would be buried under that covering produced by the matter in the moon.

By the best authority, the quantity of matter in the moon is to that in the earth, as 1 to 71, or the quantity of matter in both is to that in the earth, as 72 to 71; also, let the radius of the earth be 3971 (a) miles, and x equal to the depth of the external crust. Then, by similar solids, we have 71 : 72 :: a3 : (a+x)3, or 71 72 :: a : a + x, or 714 724-714 :: a: x, or 4.140818 01935: 3971: x. Hence,

catastrophe is to happen. If they do know, and that the period is not very remote, I would advise them to say nothing about it; for it would play the very deuce in railway speculations.

I know it may be urged, that no positive reason could be assigned why the whole matter in the moon should be equally scattered over the whole surface of the globe. Well, we may suppose the moon to come bump upon the centre of Africa, and that its whole matter is equally scattered over only that quarter of the globe. It would raise the surface of Africa more than 200 miles above its present level, and then the London cockneys might have a view of the northern parts of Africa from the top of St. Paul's! But I am somewhat afraid that St. Paul's and every other building on the earth would be hurled to the ground by the terrible shock.

Again, it may be stated, that the near approach of the moon to the earth would produce a second deluge before the collision took effect; then, of course, we would be all drowned before the shock

took place. But, Mr. Editor, to enter fully upon all the probable calamities that would take place from such an event, would more than fill a volume.

I am, Mr. Editor,

Your obedient servant,
A COUNTRY TEACHER.

March 14, 1837.

EFFECT OF HIGHLY-HEATED METALS ON THE GENERATION OF STEAM-COLOURED WATER.

Sir,-My attention having been drawn to the very curious inquiry, which is detailed by Mr. Tomlinson, of Salisbury, in your Number of January 28th, I would beg to make a few remarks thereon.

It appears from the results of Mr. T.'s experiments, as also from his extracts from Pouillet, Baudremont, and Laurent, that a globule of water, when contained in a metallic vessel, evaporates in a shorter time, if the vessel be at or about 212 degrees, than if it have a higher temperature. This is very remarkable, and far removed from the common ideas on the subject; but I cannot assent to Mr. T.'s explanation, so far as regards the existence of a stratum or bed of steam between the vessel and the water.

We all know that the specific gravity of steam is less than that of air, and infinitely less than that of water. On what principle, then, can a portion of steam exist beneath the water? Let us take the analogy of any fluid whatever, and see how far it will bear out the objection.

If we have a vessel of water in process of heating over a common fire, the first formation of steam takes place at the bottom. This ascends to a higher stratum of water, and is then condensed and imparts its caloric to the watery parti cles with which it is immediately surrounded. It is this which so rapidly heats water, for the conducting power of water is exceedingly limited.

We constantly observe that the rapidity with which the bubbles of vapour rise to the surface is proportionate to the heat of the water. Now, let us apply this to the case of the heated crucible. Mr. Tomlinson supposes the existence of a stratum of steam under the globule of water, which retards the transmission of heat from the metal to the water; but why should not the law of specific gravity remain in force at high temperature? Why should not the steam-its expansive tendency being still more increased by its high tension-why should it not have the power of darting upwards through the watery globule, in order to gain the level of a lighter atmosphere? We must recollect that the steam is formed from the globule itself, at the lower part of it; and ought, if it exist at all, to ascend to the upper part of the globule, just as the steam-bubbles in a common kettle of ter do.

I feel more inclined, of the two opinions, to choose that which attributes the slow evaporation of the globules of water to the rapid passage of heat through it. Extraordinary as such a hypothesis may at first appear, yet we have analogies in physical science which aid such a conception.

A pane of glass, broken by a pistol bullet, is not so much shattered as when broken by a stone moving with perhaps not one-tenth the velocity. If a card be balanced horizontally on the end of the finger, and a shilling placed on it, and if the card be struck sharply on the edge, it will slide away from under the shilling, leaving the latter on the finger; but if it