"not use." If a patent, therefore be granted for an article already known, or communicated to the public, in this country, or already used—whether the prior discovery or use be known to the patentee or not-the grant will be void (). But, on the other hand, it is sufficient that it be new within this realm at the time the patent is granted; and the previous notoriety of the article, in a foreign country, is no objection to the validity of the patent (m). The grant also can be made only to the "true and first inventor;" and here we may observe as to the word inventor, that it implies some exertion of ingenuity, and supposes some difficulty surmounted, so that when the new manufacture is of an obvious character, requiring no skill or contrivance for its production, it is not a fit subject for protection under a patent (n). As to being the true and first inventor, none can claim this character, if it appear that the novelty was first suggested to him by some other person in this country (o). Yet where the secret is acquired abroad by one who afterwards introduces it into the realm, he is considered by the law as the true inventor; for it is immaterial whether the benefit bestowed on the public be the result of a man's travel and observation, or the fruit of his original genius (p). In the case of two simultaneous discoverers, he who first procures à patent, before the matter is made public, is entitled to enjoy the exclusive privilege it confers (q). The grant of a patent right is not ex debito justitiæ, but an act of royal favour; though in a fit case it is never re (1) See 3 Inst. 184; Lewis v. Marling, 10 Barn. & Cress. 22; Morgan v. Seaward, 2 Mee. & W. 544; Cornish v. Keene, ubi sup.; Stead v. Williams, 7 Man. & G. 818; Gamble v. Kurtz, 3 C. B. 425; Carpenter v. Smith, 9 Mee. & W. 300; Sellers v. Dickinson, 5 Exch. 312; Re Adamson's Patent, 25 L. J. (Ch.) 457; Bush v. Fox, 25 L. J. (Exch.) Dom. Proc. 251. (m) Edgeberry v. Stephens. 2 Salk. 447; Beard v. Egerton, 3 C. B. 97. (n) Walker v. Congreve, Godson, 68, (n.), edit. 1832. (0) Lewis v. Marling, ubi sup. (p) Edgeberry v. Stephens, ubi sup. See Nickels v. Ross, 8 C. B. 679. (q) Godson, 31, 2nd edit. fused. The mode of proceeding to obtain it, is regulated by the Acts for amending the law touching letters-patent for inventions, viz. 5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 83; 2 & 3 Vict. c. 67; 7 & 8 Vict. c. 69, ss. 2-7; 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83 (called "The Patent Law Amendment Act, 1852"), and 16 & 17 Vict. c. 5 (r), c. 115 (s),)—and is as follows:--An application for the patent is made by petition to the crown, the allegations of which are to be supported by a declaration in lieu of oath, (made and subscribed by the party under the provisions of the act relating to oaths, 5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 62, s. 11,) that he is the true and first inventor, and that the invention is not in use by any other person to the best of his knowledge and belief. This petition and declaration are to be left at the office of a board lately appointed of "Commissioners of Patents for Inventions," and with them an instrument called "the provisional specification," describing the nature of the invention. The applicant is then referred by the commissioners to one of the law officers of the crown, who is at liberty to call any scientific or other person to his aid; and if the law officer shall be satisfied that the provisional specification describes the nature of the invention, and certifies his allowance of the same, the invention may, during six months from the date of the application, be used and published without prejudice to any letters-patent to be afterwards granted; or the applicant may, if he think fit, file with the petition and declaration a "complete" in lieu of a "provisional' specification, inserting in the declaration an additional statement, that the instrument particularly describes and ascertains the nature of the invention, and in what manner the same is to be performed; and in this case the applicant shall have during the same term of six months the like powers and privileges as might have been conferred (r) By 16 & 17 Vict. c. 5, sects. 17, 44, 45, 46, 53, and part of the schedule of the Patent Law Amendment Act, 1852, are repealed. (s) By 16 & 17 Vict. c. 115, sect. 33 and part of sect. 28 of the Patent Law Amendment Act, 1852, are repealed. upon him by letters-patent on the date of the application, and during the same term the invention may be used and published without prejudice to any letters-patent to be granted. : The next step is for the applicant to give notice at the office of the commissioners of his intention to proceed with his application; which will then be advertised by the commissioners and any person having an interest in opposing the grant of the letters-patent will be at liberty, within a certain period, to lodge particulars in writing of their objections. The period for objection being expired, the specification and the objections (if any) are referred to the law officer, who, after such hearing (if any), as he thinks fit, may cause a warrant to be made for the sealing of the letters-patent; which warrant having been sealed by the commissioners, the Lord Chancellor may thereupon cause letters-patent for such invention to be sealed with the great seal of the united kingdom, granting to the applicant the exclusive right of using the invention within the united kingdom, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, and (if the warrant so direct) within the colonies, for the full term of fourteen years (t). But the letters-patent always contain a proviso to the effect, that, if the "complete specification" already filed does not particularly describe the nature of the invention and in what way the same is to be performed, or, supposing none to have been yet filed, then, if the applicant does not within a limited period file such a specification in the Court of Chancery,—the grant in the letters-patent contained shall be void (u). The object of the specification thus required, as the condition of the letters (t) By 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83, s. 34, a book, called a "Register of "Patents," is directed to be kept at the specification office for the public use; and as to the substitution of stamp duties for fees in passing letters-patent for inventions, see 16 & 17 Vict. c. 5; Hill v. Mount, 25 L. J., C. P. 190. (u) By 16 & 17 Vict. c. 115, s. 6, the Lord Chancellor has power, in certain cases, to seal letters-patent after the expiration of the provisional protection; and also power in certain cases to extend the time for filing the specification. patent, is to put the public in full possession of the inventor's secret, so that any person may be in a condition to avail himself of it, when the period of exclusive privilege has expired (v). To prevent this object from being defeated by an evasive or careless description, the proviso is construed with great strictness by the courts of law; and it is held to be infringed, and the letters-patent to be consequently. void, not only in case of failure to file any such specification as the letters-patent refer to, but whenever that which is filed is in any part of it materially false or defective. The principal rules on this subject are as follows: in describing the nature of the invention, the specification must in the first place correspond with the title of the patent; for its office is to set forth, with more particularity, the subject already indicated in the patent itself; and if one thing be claimed by the patent, and another by the specification, the grant is void (w). It is also an objection to the specification, if it should cover too much, that is, include in its claim of new invention any thing which in fact has been already known and practised (x); and therefore if the entire article for which the patent has been taken out comprise some matter of this description, in connection with others that are new, the claim should be made in such form as to apply to the latter only; or if the combination of several known things happen to be the only novelty, it is to the combination only that the claim should be pointed. As to the description of the manner of (v) As to indexes of specifications for the public use, see 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83, and 16 & 17 Vict. c. 5, s. 8. (w) See Rex v. Wheeler, 2 Barn. & Ald. 345; De Rosne r. Fairie, 5 Tyr. 393. As to the specification, see Neilson v. Harford, 8 Mee. & W. 823; Elliott v, Turner, 2 C. B. 446; Gamble v. Kurtz, 3 C. B. 425; Beard v. Egerton, 8 C. B. 165; Sellers v. Dickinson, 5 Exch. 312; Tetley v. Easton, 2 Ell. & Bl. 956. (x) See Harman v. Playne, 11 East, 101; Bovill v. Moore, 2 Marsh, 211; Brunten v. Hawkes, 4 Barn. & Ald. 541; Campion v. Benyon, 6 Moore, 71; Bloxam v. Elsee, 6 Barn, & Cress. 169; Saunders v. Aston, 3 B. & Ad. 881; Morgan v. Seaward, 2 Mee. & W. 544; Minter v. Mower, 6 Ad. & El. 735; Heath v. Smith, 3 Ell. & Bl. 256; Bateman v. Gray, & Exch. 906. performance or production, the general rule is, that it should be such as to enable persons of ordinary skill to make the patent article, by simply following the directions, given, without resorting to contrivances of their own (y). In addition to which, we may remark, that no circumstance, can be safely passed over in this description which is advantageous, whether absolutely essential or not, in the conduct of the process; and that if several methods are stated, the specification will be defective if either of them be found to fail in effecting the promised result (z). A patent right is assignable; and the assignment of it. should be in writing under hand and seal (a), a circumstance not essential in regard to the sale of moveables. It is also competent to the patentee, without any entire alienation of his interest, to grant deeds of licence, to any one or more persons, to manufacture the article (b). In favour of a patentee who has not yet reaped the full benefit of his invention, the legislature has frequently interfered, by passing a private act of parliament to secure him the continuance of the privilege for a further term of years, in addition to that first limited by the letters-patent. But a less costly mode of relief is now provided. For, by the above mentioned law touching letters-patent for inventions, a patentee under such circumstances may apply by petition to her majesty in council for a prolongation of the existing term (his intention to do so being first duly advertised in such manner as the acts direct (c), and |