On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
Machine for Treating Poles With Preservatives IT is at, or near, the ground line that a 1 pole is most subject to decay, for here it is exposed to the moisture of the ground and to the air as well and hence provides an excellent breeding place for destructive insect life. In order to preserve the pole against decay, it is unneeessary to treat more than a limited zone in the neighborhood of the ground line. Recently a machine has been perfected by which the pole may be thus eeonomically and expeditiously impregnated with ereosoted oil, or other preservatives. The oil is forced into the wood by means of air pressure. The machine, as shown in the accompanying illustrations, is provided with a boiler for generating steam with which the air compressor is operated, and with which steam coils are heated to warm the oil that is stored in a reservoir in the middle of the machine. A pair of iron skids will be observed extending crosswise of the machine, and upon these the pole is supported. Two iron rings, shown in the illustration, may be opened to admit the pole, after which they are closed by operating a hand wheel. A spool, bearing a canvas band three feet wide, is then revolved by a hand wheel so as to wrap the cloth tightly about the pole. The edges of the band are reinforced to make a snug fit and they are subjected to air pressure, so that the band will form an airtight annular bag about the pole. This done, the heated oil is introduced into the bag through a pipe under a pressure of -about five pounds to the inch. It has been found under test that a 10-minute treatment is sufficient to force about a gallon of oil into the pole. The oil is forced into the wood to an initial depth of three-sixteenths of an inch, but it continues to penetrate the wood after the pressure is relieved, and at the end of a few days reaches a depth of about one-half inch. After the pole has been treated, the spool is revolved to unwrap the cloth band from the pole, the rings are opened and the pole is rolled off the opposite end of the skids. A pan is located under the band to catch any oil that may drip from the cloth, or that might ooze out through checks in the wood during the treatment. The machine shown in the illustration handles poles from seven to twenty-four inches in diameter. The Heany Tungsten Lamp Cases /^NE of the most interesting decisions ^^in the history of the United States Patent Office has recently been handed down by Hon. Cornelius C. Billings, the First Assistant Commissioner, culminating a long and arduous series of hearings and examinations before him, the taking of testimony of many witnesses and the delivery of arguments by many noted counsel. The investigation of the Heany applications was altogether unique so far as precedent in the Patent Office was concerned. It was the direct outcome of the famous Heany criminal trial, in whieh John Allen Heany, Ned W. Barton and Henry E. Everding were tried for fraudulent manipulation of records in the Patent Office. The applications involved the alleged invention of tungsten filaments for incandescent lamps, and for the process of making filaments from metals in a collodial form. Certain specific charges made by Principal Examiner A. F. Kinnan, of Division 37 of the Patent Office, were the basis of the investigation, concerning applications serial numbers 238,769, 332,786 and 344,068, filed by John Allen Heany; of charges relating to the said Heany application No. 238,769, and its alleged divisional application No. 344,068, set forth in the petition of Hans Kuzel, who is involved with Heany in interference No. 27,073, and of charges concerning said Heany's application, No. 238,769, and its alleged divisional application, No. 332,786, set forth in the petition of Kuzel, Just and Hanaman, and von Bolton, who are involved with Heany in interference No. 27,074, It was charged that Everding, a patent attorney, and Barton, an assistant examiner, in the year 1906 removed from the parent Ileany application, certain sheets of the original specification and substituted other sheets, containing matter not in the original specification, when filed in 1904, and the matter contained in these substituted pages, it was alleged, was compiled by Barton, from information gained through his position in the Patent Office. It was charged that Heany aided, abiltted and connived at the acts of Everding and Barton in this fraudulent substitution. It having been shown that Barton and Everding were guilty of fraud, and they having been punished therefor, Barton having confessed before the criminal trial, and Everding being convicted, and, although Heany himself was acquitted, the charges made in 1909 by Examiner Kinnan led to the institution of the very exhaustive investigation which has just been finished, and which occupied a period of about one year. The investigation had for its purpose to decide whether, in view of these substitutions and changes, valid patents could be granted, or whether the applications should be expunged from the files on the ground that they were fraudulent. The taking of testimony was commenced before the First Assistant Commissioner of Patents on July 25th, 1910, all parties being represented, and was continued from time to time, and finally concluded April 21st, 1911. Respondents were given ample opportunity to cross-examine the wit- nesses produced in support of the charges and to rebut their testimony, and availed themselves of that opportunity. Voluminous testimony was taken by both sides which was supplemented by stipulation into the record of certain testimony previously taken in the criminal trial. This proceeding grew out of a condition of affairs in the Patent Office which has occurred for the first time in its history. So free from fraud or allegations of fraud has the Patent Office been, that no statute or rule of practice is found to cover specifically such a case. The effort of the First Assistant Commissioner was to learn by due process of law, the truths surrounding the case and to render a judgment based upon those truths in accordance with the law. Jurisdiction of the case was acquired by virtue of the general supervisory authority of the Commissioner of Patents over affairs in the Patent Office, its records and papers, which empowers him to grant valid patents upon legally effective applications therefor, or else to refuse to grant patents upon applications therefor, which are shown to have no foundation in law, and which patents, if granted, would, in his opinion, be null and void. The gravity of the charges preferred against the Heany applications by Examiner Kinnan, and the tremendous commercial value of the inventions involved, the control of which, upon the granting of patents would undoubtedly cause millions of dollars annually to accrue to the profit. of the owners thereof, led to the absolute necessity for the discovery of priority of invention, and, if possible, to decide without a vestige of a doubt, which of the contending parties was entitled to status in the interference. In his decision in this proceeding, Mr. Billings said: "It would be a travesty, indeed, and against all legal principles to permit a party to an interference to remain a party thereto, should it be found that the very applications of that party involved in the interference are fraudulent to such a degree that no valid patent could be granted based upon such applications, or, in other words, that any patent or patents granted upon such applications would be invalid and void on the ground of fraud. A fraudulent application is in law no such application as to justify the grant of a patent thereon, and the same is true when an application contains an incomplete and inoperative disclosure." During the progress .of the investigation it was urged on behalf of the respondents that the question as to whether or not John Allen Heany was privy to the fraudulent practices concerning his applications, was res adjudicate because of Heany's acquittal in the criminal court of the District. The Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, which is the court of final resort in patent jurisdiction, and is also the court which hears and determines appeals in patent cases from the decisions of the Commissioner of Patents, held that the power of the Commissioner to declare that the altered application is not “the application contemplated by the statutes as the foundation of the patent,” was not “barred by the adjudication in the criminal case,” and said : "If he (the Commissioner) finds the alterations to have been made, but without knowledge and consent of the applicant, he will permit it to be corrected so as to restore it to its condition as originally filed." And also: "If, on the other hand, he finds that it was tampered with by the connivance and approval of the applicant, he will probably enter an order rejecting the application, leaving the applicant his right to appeal therefrom." After fully and exhaustively considering the citations offered by the respondents, the First Assistant Commissioner held that the question of Heany's complicity in the frauds charged is not res adjudicate in the proceeding. Mr. Billings touches briefly in his decision upon the introduction during the investigation of a mass of evidence by Heany, which was subsequently found to be manufactured under Heany's direction, for the purpose of proving that he (Heany) had invented a pure tungsten filament incandescent lamp prior to December 29th, 1904, the date of filing of his application, No. 238,769, and to substantiate the contention that he had no motive whatever in perpetrating the frauds specified in the charges and admitted by respondents in their answers, to have been made in said application. During the investigation it was largely due to the efforts of the First Assistant Commissioner that the spurious nature of this so-called evidence was discovered, in which efforts he was greatly aided by the counsel for the respondents, who were unaware of the character of the evidence, and who demanded that the witnesses 394 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN October 28, 1911 whom they had presented should tell the entire truth, no matter how damaging in effect it might be for their clients. It, therefore, transpired that instead of showing that Heany could have no motive to perpetrate the frauds alleged, the evidence introduced, on the contrary, shows that Heany did not have a conception of the invention of the issues within the meaning of the patent law, prior to the filing of his application on December 29th, 1904, and that he did have a decided motive in attempting to obtain the benefit of that date for knowledge subsequently acquired. The decision of the First Assistant Commissioner, therefore, in effect orders the dissolution of the interferences Nos. 27,074 and 27,073, as to the party Heany, and directs that the amendment present to the parent application of Heany, No. 238,769, filed December 29th, 1904, be refused entry and the application finally rejected, and a patent on that application finally refused on the ground that any parent granted thereon in view of the established facts would be held in the courts to be null and void and of no effect, on the ground of fraud. The amendments presented in the “tungsten division” application, serial No. 332,786, filed August 31st, 1906, are refused entry and the application is finally rejected and a patent thereon is finally refused, on the ground that any patent granted thereon in view of the established facts would be held in the courts to be null and void and of no effect, on the ground of fraud. Similar action is taken with regard to the “colloidal division” application, No. 344,068, filed November 19th, 1906, and the amendment thereto. The First Assistant Commissioner further ordered that upon the termination of the proceeding, each of the three Heany applications shall be endorsed with the words “Patent refused on the ground of fraud,” and each of them shall hereafter be kept in the archives of the Patent Office, separate from the other applications for patent. The inventions involved in the issues not only of the Heany applications, but in those of the interfering parties, are perhaps among those which claim the greatest public interest. The tungsten lamp, which is being universally adopted and which combines a higher efficiency with a lesser cost than the ordinary carbon filament incandescent lamps, is a possession the control of which is well worth the terrific legal struggle which has taken place both within and outside of the United States Patent Office. Notes for Inventors Some New Gayley Steel Process Patents. —James Gayley of New York city has secured a patent, No. 1,002,576, for apparatus for drying air by refrigeration, and patents, No. 1,002,577 and No. 1,002,578, for methods of drying air, both of which include the refrigerating idea. Short Claims in a Patent.—Patent No. 1,002,648, to Fred B. Corey of Schenectady, N. Y., assignor to General Electric Company, for a relay contact, is interesting because of the brevity qf its claims. It has two claims, the first containing only six words and the second only seven words, the second claim being identical with the first except for the addition of the word “malleable." An Alarm for Cash Box of Pay Tele-phones.—In patent No. 1,002,232, to William E. Davison and Robert McAlpine of Detroit, Mich., is shown a telephone instrument and a cash box for the telephone and having a lock with an electric alarm which operates when the lock is unlocked or when the telephone instrument is detached. A Cool “Bite” for Infants.—Women with teething babies will be interested in a patent, No. 1,002,364, to Josiah H. Bridges, which shows a cooling receptacle and a hollow, imperforate mouth-piece whose interior communicates with that of the cooling receptacle so that the mouthpiece which the infant bites will be kept cool, and the receptacle has a non-conducting jacket which prevents the infants hands from coming in contact with the cold body portion. Women in the Patent Office Examining Corps.—One woman represents her sex on the examining corps of the Patent Office. For some years Mrs. Noyes and Mrs. Lybrand were assistant examiners and became well known to most practitioners before they resigned their positions some years ago. Now the only woman on the force is Miss Marie K. Saunders, a native of Missouri. She was assigned to the Patent Office August 3rd, 1901, as a copyist at a salary of $900 per annum, being appointed from Guthrie, Okla. January 11th, 1907, after passing the rigid Civil Service examination for the position, she was appointed a fourth assistant examiner at $1,200 per annum, her salary being increased by operation of law on January 1st, 1908, to $1,500. On November 1st, 1909, she was promoted to be a third assistant examiner at an annual salary of $1,800 and still holds the position-Helping the Dentist.—A number of dentists have spoken to us about the desirability of. an improved cement for certain classes of dental work, such, for instance, as setting inlays. It should be transparent, strongly .adhesive, insoluble in the liquids of the mouth, quick setting, and be non-irritant to the pulp of the tooth. They also referred to the need of a gold preparation which can be worked with the same speed and facility and under the same conditions as the ordinary silver base alloys, or amalgam. Another thing desired by dentists is an abscess syringe, so constructed that it may be used in any position in the mouth for injecting fluid medicaments through the roots of teeth into abscess tracts. It should be so formed that the needle can be packed in position in the desired root with the barrel in such relation to th(;l needle that pressure can be made in the barrel at a distance from the mouth and without force or strain upon the needle. Ancient Inventors and their Secrecy.— It is an interesting fact that the inventors of ancient times, while appreciating public patronage, described the uses and merits of their inventions instead of explaining the operations and principles thereof. In other words, while they enlarged upon the great things that could be accomplished by their inventions, they carefully concealed the means and modes of operation by which the results were to be accomplished. In the early days patents were often regarded as unrighteous monopolies and the patentees were held in great contempt. This prejudice would probably never have existed if patents had been confined to new inventions, but in those days exclusive grants were obtainable to control the manufacture and sale of the commonest articles in daily use. So objectionable did this practice become that the wrongful monopolies were held up to public ridicule and an old writer, Maitland, says in the “Anti-masque of Projectors rode a fellow upon a little horse with a great bit in his mouth, and upon the man's head was a bit, with ! headstall and reins fastened, and signified a projector who begged a patent that none in their kingdom might ride their horses but with such bits as they should buy of him. Then came another fellow with a bunch of carrots upon his head, and a capon upon his fist, describing (representing) a projector who begged the patent of monopoly as the first inventor of the art to feed capons with carrots, and that none but himself should make use of that invention; and have the privilege for fourteen years, according to the statute." Inventions Ahead of the Times.—Frequently inventions are made before the time is ripe for them to go into general use. This is illustrated in the so-called tireless cooker which has recently come into popularity and is now used to a great extent. The fundamental idea of this cooker is not at all new, the apparatus in its main features being described in Ganot's physics as a Norwegian stove, no illustration, however, accompanying the description, at least in the edition we examined. Patents were also granted many years ago, both in the United States and England, for fireless cookers. In the English patent, No. 778, of the year 1857, a Frenchman, Joseph Francois Maires of Paris, describes the invention as consisting in putting the food to be prepared for eating with water and suitable condiments, in a cooking vessel of the digester kind, which vessel is placed on the fire and the temperature is raised as high as two atmospheres or about 121 deg. C., indicated by a suitable valve, fitted on the lid of the vessel. When the valve is raised and steam escapes, the vessel is taken from the fire and put in a double wrapper case which is packed with suitable insulating material, and the cooking keeps on until it is completed by the confined heat, sometimes five or six hours or more. In this form of cooker, the food is brought to a cooking heat in the vessel before the latter is placed in the insulating casing. In a United States patent, No. 59,441, of 1866, expired long since, the cooking vessel is placed in the insulating casing with a chamber around the vessel and in which chamber hot or boiling water is placed so the heat from the water will slowly cook or stew the meat or vegetables placed in the vessel. This old idea is somewhat similar to that pursued in some of the modern cookers in which radiators in the form of plates are heated and placed in the casing adjacent to the vessel containing the food to be cooked. Most of the earlier patented cookers describe the apparatus as adapted for use as a refrigerator as well as a cooker. A Swinging Emery Wheel.—A very interesting and novel feature to be seen in a few of the most advanced machine shops is a swinging emery wheel. The wheel and the motor which drives it are mounted together and are suspended from the ceiling and the lower part of the wheel is exposed while the upper portion is shielded by a hood for the protection of the workmen. The outfit is suspended by means of a bar, on one side of which is the motor which balances the emery wheel secured at the end of a four-foot shaft. The apparatus may be raised or lowered to any desired height to suit the character of the work, and as it is thus suspended, the operator manipulating the wheel by two arms extending from the hood, it is possible to move the wheel over an area of eight feet. This installation is designed principally for the purpose of finishing heavy pieces of work which cannot be readily moved back and forth over the stone. The connection between the motor and the wheel is direct, and as there are no belts or chains, this advantage is great. The device is intended to withstand hard usage. By this arrangement delays due to belt failure are entirely avoided. A New Automobile Fire Engine.—The Springfield fire department has displaced a team of three horses, formerly attached to one of the water towers, and this piece of apparatus is now drawn to and from fires under power without any further alteration or change than the removal of the front wheels. For this purpose a “tractor” is made use of which is a sturdy little motor, mounted on a truck, adapted to support the front end of the water tower, and equipped with a motor of sufficient power to draw it rapidly to the scene of action. In order to permit of its making very short turns and of winding through narrow thoroughfares, the front wheels of the tractor are mounted so close to each other that it has the appearance of a single large wheel. Automatic Gas Cocks.—Although we frequently read of deaths from accidental gas suffocation, it is found that many patents, probably several hundred, have been granted for devices for automatically shutting off a gas cock if the gas be blown out or accidentally extinguished. An early, if not the first, patent for this subject is the patent, No. 74,440, to Smith, issued February 11th, 1868, and long since expired.