ent from those which have hitherto been used for that object, shall be held an invention.

(c) Every addition of a preparation, arrangement, or method of working, to a process, already known or privileged, by which more complete success, or greater economy shall be attained in the result of that process, or in its mode of operation and application, shall be held an improvement.

(d) Every discovery, invention, improvement, or change, shall be held as new, if it is not known in the monarchy, either in practice, or by a description of it contained in a work publicly printed. But the novelty of a discovery, invention or improvement, shall not be called in question, on account of its being described in a work publicly printed, unless that description is so accurate and clear, that any person acquainted with the subject, can, by means of that description, manufacture the object, or practise the process for which the privilege has been granted.

SPECIFICATION.

To all persons whom it may concern.

Be it known that I, the undersigned, S. C. of V. in the county of H. in the state of M. have invented [or discovered], a new and useful machine [invention or improvement, or composition of matter,] called [here give the title of the invention] of which the following is a full and exact description :

[Description of the invention.] <

In testimony whereof, I the said S. C. hereto subscribe my name in the presence of the witnesses whose names are hereto subscribed, on the A. D. 18.

day of

Signed in our presence,

A. B.

C. D.

S. C.

ATTESTATION TO THE DRAWINGS.

The above is the drawing of [description of the invention] referred to in my specification, of the said improvement [machine or invention] dated at V. on the

A. D. 18.

day of

In testimony whereof, I hereto subscribe my name on said day and year

Signed in presence of

A. B.
C. D.

S. C.

On the

FORM OF THE OATH.

State of M. County of H. ss.

day of A. D. 18 before the subscriber, a justice of the peace in and for said county, and authorized by

law to administer oaths, personally appeared S. C. and made oath [or affirmation] that he verily believes that he is the first and original inventor of the [improvement, machine, or composition of matter, &c.] above mentioned and described in the specification by him subscribed, and that he does not know or believe that the same was ever before known or used, and that he is a citizen of the United States.'

FORM OF THE PETITION.

To the Honorable Henry L. Ellsworth, Commissioner of Patents of the United States.

The petition of S. C. of V. in the county of H. and state of M. engineer, respectfully represents

That your petitioner has invented a new and useful [machine, improvement, composition of matter,] which he verily believes was not known or used prior to his invention thereof; which has not heretofore been and is not now in public use or on sale with his consent or allowance as inventor thereof, an exclusive property wherein he is desirous of securing to himself and his legal representatives. He therefore prays that letters patent of the United States may be granted to him therefor, vesting in him and his legal representatives the exclusive right to the same upon the terms and conditions expressed in the act [or acts] of congress in such case made and provided; the petitioner being a citizen of the United States, and having paid thirty dollars into the treasury of the United States, and having otherwise complied with the provisions of said act [or acts.] S. C.

V. Dec. 18

If he is an alien resident in the United States, who has made his declaration, &c. it should be so stated; or if an alien not domiciled in the United States, the country of which he is a subject should be stated.

DECLARATION IN CASE FOR THE INFRINGEMENT OF A PATENT.

To answer to A. of B. in the county of S. in the district of , manufacturer, in a plea of trespass on the case, for that the plaintiff was the original and first inventor [or discoverer] of a certain new and useful art [machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or improvement on any art, machine, &c. taking the words of the statute most applicable to the subject of the invention] in the letters-patent hereinafter mentioned and fully described, the same being a new and useful [here, insert the title or description given in the letterspatent] which was not known or used before his said invention [or discovery], and which was not, at the time of his application for a patent as herein after mentioned, in public use or on sale with his consent or allowance; and the plaintiff being so, as aforesaid, the inventor [or discoverer] thereof, and being also a citizen of the United States [if the fact is so],' on the day of [here, insert the date of the patent] upon due application therefor did obtain certain letters-patent therefor in due form of law under the seal of the patent office of the United States, signed by the secretary of state and counter

1 It has been suggested, in a preceding part of this work, p. 408, that the citizenship of the patentee need not be proved by the plaintiff, and, if so, it need not be averred. This will, however, depend upon the construction that shall be given to the 15th section of the act of 1836, c. 357, by which, if the patentee be an alien, the defendant is permitted to give matter in evidence tending to show that the patentee has "failed and neglected for the space of eighteen months from the date of the patent to put and continue on sale to the public, on reasonable terms, the invention or discovery." The position referred to in p. 408 assumes that the burthen on this point is, in conformity to the language of the statute, in the first instance on the defendant. But to go on the safer side, the above form of declaring assumes the burden to be on the plaintiff to aver and prove, in the first instance, that the patentee is a citizen of the United States, or, if an alien, and the eighteen months have expired before the date of the writ, that he has put and continued the invention on sale in the United States on reasonable terms.

3

signed by the commissioner of patents of the United States, bearing date the day and year aforesaid, whereby there was secured to him, his heirs, administrators, executors or assigns,' for the term of fourteen years from and after the date of the patent, the full and exclusive right and liberty of making, using and vending to others to be used, the said invention [machine, improvement or discovery] as by the said letterspatent, in court to be produced,' will fully appear. And the plaintiff further says that from the time of the granting to him of the said letters-patent, hitherto, he has made, used and vended to others to be used, [or he has made, or has used, or has vended to others to be used, as the case may be] the said invention [machine, improvement or discovery,] to his great advantage and profit [or if he has not made, used or vended, then, instead of the above averments, may be substituted after the word "hitherto," "the said exclusive right has been and now is of great value to him, to wit of the value of ."]

1 Act of 4th of July, 1836, ch. 357, s. 5.

2 Which the plaintiff brings here into court. Chit. Pl. v. 2, p. 765, 5th ed.

3 The English precedents here state the making and filing of the specification, the assignment of the patent and the recording of the assignment, if the action be in the name of an assignee, or if an assignee of a part of the right is joined.

If the patentee is an alien and the counsel chooses to declare very cautiously, if eighteen months have expired from the date of the patent, he may here introduce the averment that within eighteen months from the date of the patent, viz. on, &c. at, &c. he (or his assignees, or he and his assignees,) put the invention on sale in the United States, on reasonable terms, and from that time always afterwards to the time of purchasing the writ, he (or they, or he and they) had continued the same on public sale in the United States, on reasonable terms.

4 The principle upon which these averments are made is the same as that upon which, in an action for trespass upon personal property, the value of the property is alleged, by way of showing that it was a thing in respect to which the plaintiff might sustain damage. Mr. Gould says of this averment, "As he [the plaintiff] is not obliged to state the true value, the rule requiring it to be stated would seem to be of no great practical use." Gould's Pl. c. 4, s. 37, p. 187. Mr. Chitty says the above averments as to profit, by making, using and vending, are sometimes omitted.