146 REPORT 4, UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. 
Five patents have been issued for different combinations with Paris 
green. In 1868 Mr. J. P. Wilson, of Illinois, took out a patent (No. 
82468) for one part of Paris green and two of mineral paint to be used 
to kill potato-bugs. In 1871 Mr. Lemuel Pagin, of Niles, Mich., claimed 
a mixture (patent No. 112732: Paris green, 2 pounds; rosin, 2^ pounds; 
gum arabic or slippery -elm, J pound; wheat-flour, 5 pounds; middlings, 
1 bushel) for the same purpose. In 1873 Mr. G. F. Whisenant, of Chapel 
Hill, Texas, obtained a patent (No. 134959: Paris green, J pound; arsenic, 
1 pound; lime, 26 pounds, and flour 5 pounds) for destroying caterpillars 
on cotton. In the same year Mr. William B. Royall, of Brenham, Tex., 
obtained patent for the same purpose (No. 140079, June 17, 1873), the 
•ingredients being Paris green, 1 pound; cobalt, 2 ounces; flour, 17 
pounds; powdered gum tragacanth, 3 ounces; powdered licorice root, 6 
ounces; and subsequently still another (No. 151439, May 26, 1874: Paris 
.green, 1 pound ; flour, 4 pounds; cotton-seed meal, 16 pounds) for the 
substitution in part of cotton-seed meal for ordinary flour. 
Regarding these patent mixtures it must be borne in mind that the 
value of Paris green with some diluent as an insecticide had been widely 
made public before any of them were issued, and we can but repeat our 
previously expressed opinion* that "it is to be regretted that patents 
•can be obtained at all for remedies of this nature after they have become 
generally known and rightfully belong to the public. When the dis- 
coverer of such a remedy does not see fit to patent it, no one subse- 
sequently has a moral right to, whatever speculative right he may pos- 
t-ess. Fortunately, in this case the patentees cannot interfere with the 
public rights, and it is be to hoped that no planter, either of potatoes 
•or cotton, will be induced by flaming circulars and threats to pay even 
■one cent per thousand acres, much less the demanded $20 per 100 acres, 
for the privilege of using these patented mixtures. The very fact that 
•so many patents have been granted for the same purpose, all of them 
having Paris green as a base, shows clearly that the patent covers only 
the particular combination. By ringing the changes on the different 
proportions of the several ingredients, a thousand of these patent rem- 
edies may be obtained; and any one who diverges but a fraction from 
the particular patented combination ceases to infringe upon it. It will 
therefore be utterly impossible for the patentees to enforce the penalty 
for infringement without proof that precisely the same ingredients and 
combination as patented were used; and to get such proof will, I take 
it, be no easy matter; for were it, we should hear of hundreds of thou- 
sands, of prosecutions where now we hear not of a single one." 
Experience has justified this advice; for, while immense sums have 
been paid by planters to some parties for the right to use Paris green 
mixtures, the patentees have been unable to get protection from the 
courts whenever they have sued for infringement in the independent 
* Sixth Rep. Ins. Mo., 1873, p. 21. 
