Summary

John McLean Le Roy v. Tatham (63 U.S. 132)…

Alderson B. Webster's Patent Cases, 342, says: 'The distinction between a patent for a principle and a patent which can be supported is, that you must have an embodiment of the principle in some practical mode described in the specification of carrying into actual effect; and then you take out your patent, not for the principle, but for the mode of carrying the principle into effect.'
'It is quite true, that a patent cannot be taken out solely for an abstract philosophical principle-for instance, for any law of nature or any property of matter, apart from any mode of turning it to account.
Source: Wikisource

John McLean Le Roy v. Tatham (63 U.S. 132)…

Principle is often applied to a machine to describe its movements and effect; and we are told that the originality of this invention did not 'consist in the novelty of the machinery, but in bringing a newly-discovered principle into practical effect.' Whether the new manufacture was the result of frequent experiments or of accident, it will be admitted that the process has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of all observers; and this has been done in the mode described.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature