Patents^ 443 . 
vious to such application for a patent, shall be utterly void. [See 
antea l.J 
11. Sect. II. Where any person hath made, or shall have 
made, any new invention, discovery or improvement, on account of 
which a patent might, by virtbe of this or the abovementioned actj 
be granted to such person, and shall die before any patent shall be 
granted therefor, the right of applying for and obtaining such pa« 
tent, shall devolve on the legal representatives of such person in 
trust for the heirs at law of the deceased, in case he shall have 
died intestate ; but if otherwise, then in trust for his devisees, in 
as full and ample manner, and under the same conditions, limita- 
tions and restrictions, as the same was held or might have been 
claimed or enjoyed by such person, in his or her lifetime ; and 
when application for a patent shall be made by such legal repre- 
sentatives, the oath or affirmation, provided in the third section of 
the beforementioned act, shall be so varied as to be applicable to 
them. [See antea 3.] 
12. Sect. III. Where any patent shall be, or shall hkve been 
granted pursuant to this or the abovementioned act, and any per- 
son without the consent of the patentee, his or her executors, ad- 
ministrators or assigns first obtained in writing, shall make, devise, 
use, or sell the thing whereof the exclusive right is secured to 
the said patentee by such patent, such person so offending shall 
forfeit and pay to the said patentee, his executors, administrators 
qr assigns, a sum equal to three times the actual damage sus- 
tained by such patentee, his executors, administrators or assigns., 
from or by reason of such offence, which sum shall and may be 
recovered, by action on the case founded on this and the above- 
mentioned act, in the circuit court of the United States,' having 
jurisdiction thereof. 
Sect. IV. is a repealing clause, 
So far the acts of our country. 
In the case of Parsons v. Barnard and Parsons v. Wigton, T 
lohnsoiPs Rep. 144, it was determined that the state courts have 
no jurisdiction in suits on patents : a determination clearly right in 
point of law, but pregnant with many inconveniences, and a source 
of numerous and vexatious impositions: for manufacturers at a 
distance from the metropolis of a state, are strongly deterred by 
calculations of prudence, from contesting a right at quadruple 
the expence they can compromise the demand. I ani fully aware 
on the other hand, of the hardship of dragging a patentee and hie 
