338 



GLEANINGS IN liEE CULTRUE. 



May 1. 



Nov. 20 till April 5, the average loss for each 

 colony was 9 pounds, or 3 pounds per month, but 

 he could not delect by frequent weighing that 

 there was any difference as to loss of weight 

 between one month and another. I suspect 

 that's as it should be. and the cases of variation 

 reported have been outdoors with varying 

 weather. 



Wkong conclusions are sometimes reached 

 from not taking all the facts in the case. A 

 writer in C. B. J. cites the two facts that I am 

 an advocate of artificial heat in cellars, and 

 that my losses were heavy the previous winter, 

 1891-93, and takes that as proof that artificial 

 heat is a bad thing. But he leaves out of ac- 

 count the third fact that that was the only win- 

 ter for years that I kept no fire in cellars, the 

 loss being really due to lock of artificial heat. 



LANGSTROTH'S REMINISCENCES. 



THE INVENTION OF THE COMB-GUIDE. 



The examiner had referred him to a cut from 

 which he inferred that Huber had used a sharp- 

 edged guide; but in this he was evidently mis- 

 taken. There is, however, a note in the Eng- 

 lish translation of Huber, to the effect that 

 bees like to commence their combs from a sali- 

 ent angle. If this suggestion had been propiM-ly 

 appreciated by me I might have utilized it when 

 I first began to use a bar hive— especially if I 

 could have read an article on bees, published in 

 1793. in which the celebrated John Hunter pays 

 that, by the use of a salient angle, bees can be 

 induced to build their combs in any direction 

 desired. As iny acquaintance with bee-liiera- 

 ture increased, I found that even Hunter had 

 been anticipated in this matter by Delia Rocca. 

 and that such a device had been fully described, 

 over and over again, long before any attempt 

 had been made to patent it in this country. I 

 must ever regard it as a very fortunate thing 

 that no patent was granted to me on this comb- 

 guide. I had already incniTed many vexations, 

 great loss of time, and heavy expenses, but was 

 spared the pain which has come to so many 

 honest inventors when apparent success gives 

 way to the bitter mortification of finding their 

 patent absolutely worthless. 



Much has been done of late years for the 

 wide dissemination, through our public libra- 

 ries, of the drawings, specifications, and claims 

 of thousands upon thousands of United States 

 patents which have been granted; hut in the 

 very nature of the case there mtist always be a 

 great waste of time by honest inventors who 

 have no means of learning what has been al- 

 ready accomplished before them. Let me give, 

 in this connection, an anecdote told me by a 

 friend who had been an examiner in our Patent 

 Office. 



An application had been received for a patent 

 on a machine for pumping or raising water, and 

 the party making it was informed that there 

 was nothing new, and, of course, nothing pat- 

 entable, in his invention, as it involved the 

 very same principle which Archimedes had 

 used for that purpose in his water-screw. It 

 never occurred to the examiner that any one 

 with brains enough to be an original inventor 

 of this famous device could fail to understand 

 the meaning of his reference, until there burst 

 into his room a man who had come a long dis- 

 tance on the very wings of steam to see him 

 about his invention. As soon as his excitement 

 and want of breath allowed him to speak, he 

 demanded to know where the rival claimant 

 lived, and who he was, for he was very sure 



that this " cussed scamp, Arky-meeds," was 

 trying to cheat him out of his patent, that he 

 might get one for himself, though he could not 

 conceive how he had stolen his information 

 about it. My readers can imagine the aston- 

 ishment and dismay of this evidently honest 

 but ignorant man when informed that the Ar- 

 chimedes to whom he had been referred was not 

 a rival claimant for a patent on the screw, and 

 that, although the place of his residence could 

 not be given, he might learn, from the encyclo- 

 pedia handed him, that he was a celebrated 

 mathematician who was born more than 3100 

 years ago! 



As the Commissioner had decided that the 

 sharp-edged comb-guide was not patentable, I 

 might well take it for granted that this ended 

 the matter. This was very far from being so. 

 It seems that the first of the three interfering 

 parties, after a considerable lapse of time, made 

 an application to have his case taken up again. 

 As nearly as I can now remember, his claims 

 were slightly modified, but they covered essen- 

 tially the same device; and the first intimation 

 T had about any reversal of the Commissioner's 

 previous decision was the isisue of a patent to 

 my opponent. This patent was sold for a small 

 consideration 'to a party who at once began to 

 use it for our annoyance. Instead of suing Mr. 

 Otis or myself, who were the principal owners 

 of the Langstroth patent, he proceeded against 

 an owner of only^n individual right; and in- 

 stead of a suit at equity, which would oblige 

 each party to give notice to the other of all tes- 

 timony to be taken, so that full opportunity 

 might he given for cross-examinations, and the 

 case decided by a United States judge, upon ex- 

 amination of ail the depositions taken, he made 

 it a jury trial, and we never heard a word about 

 it until it was decided in his favorl It would 

 be too long a story to give a connected account 

 of the vexations and expenses to which we were 

 now exposed. Fortunately for us. our oppo- 

 nent, emboldened by the success of his schemes, 

 brought a suit against Mr. Otis and myself; 

 but hy this time we had learned what Delia Roc- 

 ca. Hunter, and others had done, and were well 

 prepared for defense. The late Col. S. S. Fish- 

 er, so eminent as an attorney in patent matters, 

 was employed by us; and in his answer to the 

 charge of infringement, he so fully set forth the 

 proof in our possession, showing how long that 

 comb-guide had been known, that further pro- 

 ceedings against us were abandoned. 



If all the money — counting time as money — 

 wasted upon that comb-guide could be set down 

 in black and white, the sum total would sur- 

 prise most of my readers; and to think that it 

 might all have been saved, if I had only known 

 what a single one of many persons had previ- 

 ously written about it! While this ignorance 

 was my misfortune and not my fault, I desire, 

 before dismissing the matter, to refer to one im- 

 portant fact which, if it had not been entirely 

 overlooked, would very early in the controversy 

 have settled the whole matter. 



An inventor is allowed by law to apply for a 

 patent on any device which he has used public- 

 ly for less than two years; but if he takes -no 

 steps to protect himself, his invention, at the 

 end of two years, becomes public property. 

 Now, the testimony of my opponent showed 

 that he used his guide only in secret. It was 

 impossible, therefore, for me to have got my 

 ideas from him. The proof on my side was 

 complete, that I had publicly used and sold that 

 guide more than two years before he applied for 

 a patent; and it was, therefore, public proper- 

 ty. How strange that so decisive a point as 

 this should have escaped the notice of the Com- 

 missioner, of myself, and the able attorneys in 

 my employ! L. L. Langstroth. 



