33d CONGRESS, 1st Session.

No. 70.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.

JANUARY 30, 1854.-Ordered to be printed.

Mr. SEWARD made the following

REPORT.

[To accompany Bill S. 171.]

The Committee on Patents and the Patent Office, to whom was referred the memorial of William R. Nevins, a citizen of the United States, praying for the extension of a patent granted to him for a certain useful improvement for rolling and cutting crackers and biscuits, report:

That letters patent for the said invention were granted to the petitioner, on the second day of March, 1836, which letters would have expired on the second day of March, 1850; that the validity of the said letters patent was disputed, as is so often the case, and in the course of the litigation it was decided by the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of New York that the letters patent were void, by reason of defects in the specification and claim. This discovery was made in 1847. The petitioner, with due diligence, applied to the Commissioner of Patents, according to law, for a reissue of the said letters patent upon an amended specification and claim, and that the said letters patent were, upon a full examination at the Patent Office of the merits of the question, reissued on the ninth day of May, 1848, to continue in effect only till the day limited in the original letters patent, viz: the second day of March, 1850.

On the seventeenth day of March, 1850, the patentee applied to Congress for an extension of his patent for fourteen years. The original disputants of his invention remonstrated, and the question was then in litigation. The Committee on Patents reported adversely on the petition.

But on the 6th day of November, 1851, the question thus litigated was brought to a trial in the same circuit court, which resulted in a verdict and judgment, establishing the petitioner's title to the invention, the validity of the patent and the usefulness of the invention also; since that time all these points have remained unquestioned.

The case submitted also shows, that while the petitioner has expended in and about perfecting and establishing his invention four thousand six hundred and sixteen dollars and eighty-four cents, ($4,616 84,) he has received from it only two thousand and fifty-five dollars, ($2,055,) and so that he has actually suffered a loss, from causes involving no fault or misconduct on his part, of two thousand five hundred and sixty-one

dollars and eighty-four cents, ($2,561 84,) instead of having received an adequate remuneration for the time and labor and money expended in perfecting his invention.

On these grounds, the Committee on Patents, at the session of 1852'53, reported in favor of an extension of the patent, and a bill for that purpose passed the Senate, but it is understood that it failed to obtain a consideration in the House.

The case falls within the policy of extension, well established in this country and in Europe, and so the committee ask leave to introduce a bill for the relief of the petitioner.

The Committee on Public Lands, to whom was referred the petition of William Rees, praying to be allowed to locate 10,000 acres of land in one tract, for a normal settlement, have considered the same, and report the following resolution:

Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioner be rejected.

1st Session.

No. 72.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.

JANUARY 30, 1854.-Ordered to be printed.

Mr. ALLEN made the following

REPORT.

The Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred the petition of Mrs. Elizabeth R. Drane, praying a pension, beg leave to report:

The petitioner is the widow of Anthony Drane, who was appointed 2d lieutenant in the army, in July, 1824, and captain in 1846. It appears from a letter of Roger Jones, adjutant general, of date November 28, 1851, that Captain Drane was dismissed the service by the sentence of a court martial, approved by the President, on the 16th July, 1846.

The evidence presented with the petition shows that Captain Drane suffered from a paralytic disease, in 1846, which was caused, in part, by the march from Corpus Christi to the Rio Grande.

The Commissioner of Pensions, under date of June 21, 1852, states that to entitle the widow to a pension, it is necessary to prove that the disease of which Captain Drane died should have been incurred after the 1st of March, 1846, and while in the line of his duty as an officer. This, in his opinion, the papers do not establish, and no new proofs are furnished the committee. At the time of his death, Captain Drane was not an officer of the army; and in the opinion of the committee, the sentence of a court martial dismissing an officer from the service, ought of itself to be a barrier to any claim upon the bounty of the government through him.

This case was before the committee at the last session, and on the 19th January, 1853, they were discharged from its further consideration. In view of all the circumstances of the case, the committee recommended that the prayer of the petitioner be denied.