[ 70 ]
judgment ſeat in this country, reſpecting this ſubject.
I remember attending in the King’s Bench Court, before Lord Mansfield, a very long trial, Meſſrs. Adams, Architects, againſt Johnſon, for infringement on their patent, for compoſition or ſtucco for covering the fronts of houſes, &c. I was in Court, my Lord, during the whole of this trial, which laſted fourteen or fifteen hours; and I then heard Earl Mansfield ſay, that the law relative to patents required, as a price the individual ſhould pay the people for his monopoly, that he ſhould enrol to the very beſt of his knowledge and judgment, the fulleſt and moſt ſufficient deſcription of all the particulars on which the effect depended, that he was at the time able to do. And it was farther remarked by the defendant’s advocate, and to which his Lordſhip aſſented, that even more was required in ſome inſtances; for as the patent was ſecured to the patentee four months before he was obliged to enrol his ſpecification, this allowance was purely for the purpoſe of giving the inventor the full opportunity of making experiments for his information; and alſo, that he might have an opportunity of calling in to his aſſiſt-
ance
