NEW YORK CITY, JAN. 25, 1879. 
PRICE FIVE CENTS. 
82.00 PER YEAR. 
[Entered according 1 to Act of Congress, In the year 1878, by the Bural Publishing Company, in the office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington.] 
cjfarm 
A PATENT GATE IN COMMON USE. 
PROFESSOR R. C. CARPENTER. 
FORM OF A COMMON GATE ON WHICH ROYALTY 
18 CLAIMED. 
Throughout the whole of Michigan and pro¬ 
bably a great, portion of the United States, a 
gate is in common use, which is opened by 
sliding back until it reaches a balanced posi¬ 
tion, and then by swinging one-quarter around. 
One form of this gate is shown in Fig. 1 and 
other forms at Figs. 4 and 6. From these dia¬ 
grams it is seen that the gate is exceedingly 
simple in const ruction, being little more than 
a fenee panel supported by strips, so as to al¬ 
low both sliding and rotary motions. Fig. 1 
is a copy of a drawing published in the Ameri¬ 
can Agriculturist for November 1804. In this 
case the posts A, A' are set so nearly in a line 
with the gate, that the strips d and d, when 
nailed to the posts, as shown in the drawing, 
Fig. a. 
are made parallel with the gate. If the strips 
d, d' are but a trifle thicker than the boards 
from which the gate is made, the gate may be 
readily pushed back in a direct line, and then 
rotated by swinging the gate to the right (see 
Fig. 1). The posts are usually set as C and 
D' in Fig. 6. or as A and B in Fig.7: but in all 
these cases, except that shown by Fig. 7, 
whether the posts are in a parallel, perpendicu¬ 
lar, or oblique line to the gate, and whether 
one or two slats connect them, the method of 
opening remains the same—first sliding to a 
balanced position and then turning one-quarter 
around. From this method of opening, the 
gate received the name of the "slide” or "slip” 
gate, to distinguish it from the ordinary swing¬ 
ing gate. 
Fig. 4.—I,ee’s Gate from his Model. 
The slide, gate possesses many advantages 
over the ordinary gate, which, concisely stated, 
are as follows : First, it is cheaper and more 
easily constructed ; second, it is less liable to 
get out of order, as its method of swinging 
when in a balanced position, throws very little 
strain on any of its parts ; third, it is less lia¬ 
ble to he obstructed by snow, and, on the whole, 
works easier than the ordinary swing gate. 
The details by means of which the gate is 
held in a closed position arc by no means uni¬ 
form. Fig. 1 shows the gate held by a single 
mortised post; Fig. 2 shows the method in 
common use, which is a combination of a post 
(A), slats (a, b, c.) nailed to the post and a 
strip or piece of board (B) nailed to the slats 
(a, b, e), the cuds of tbe gate slip into the open 
spaces between the post A and the board or 
strip B. Fig. 4 shows the use of a double mor¬ 
tised post fB) which holds the gate by receiv¬ 
ing the ends ol two of its strips. Fig. 6 shows 
tire use of two posts which hold the gate in es¬ 
sentially the same manner as shown in Fig. 2. 
There arc still other methods of holding the 
gate closed ; but to these it is not necessary to 
call attention. This gate iu some form is to be 
found on the farm of almost every farmer iu 
the State of Michigan, and before the begin¬ 
ning of 1878, it was generally supposed to be 
free from any patented device and even to he 
unpatentable. 
THE LEE PATENT. 
During the early portion of the year 1878, 
the farmers of Wayne aud Washtenaw coun¬ 
ties were considerably surprised by being 
called on to pay royalty on the gate. A party 
of men banded together at Ypsilauti, bought 
the State-right of a patent granted to John 
the use of a strip perpendicular with the post 
aud slats running parallel with the gate ; and 
further saith that the two-post gate was in 
common use in this county at the time my 
patent was issued to ine : and further, this affi¬ 
davit saith that the facts stated in this affidavit 
are true, as he verily believes. 
John C. Lee. 
'Sworn to by the said John C. Lee before me 
Fig. 4— Post. 
and subscribed by him iu my presence ; and I 
further certify that the said John C. Lee is 
well known to me to be tbe person lie repre¬ 
sents himself to be. Cuaunoey Spear. 
Justice of the Peace for said county of Medina, 
October 31, 1878. 
Mr. Lee further claimed that lie informed 
the parties to whom he sold his patent, that it 
did not cover the ordinary two-post slide gate 
as shown in Fig. 7 or in Fig. 0. Mr. Lee made 
a ino iei for Mr. Phut which he claimed to bo 
like the original one sent to his agent when he 
applied for a patent. The structure of this 
model is shown in Fig. 4. from which it is seen 
to be in every particular feature like the gate 
shown in Fig. 1, except that in place of one 
post (A or A ) is a strip d’. The patent granted 
Mr. Lee is different in many essential features 
from this model, and it is extremely doubtful 
Fig. l.—S lide Gate. 
C. Lee, of Seville. Ohio. This they claimed 
covered the ordinary slide gate. They estab¬ 
lished headquarters in Ypsilanti, employed 
agents to whom they paid handsome salaries, 
and sent them forth over the State to collect 
royalties. 
Their method of operating was as follows: 
They called on a farmer using the gate, claim¬ 
ed to own the right, and made their demands; 
if they could.frighten the farmer sufficiently, 
they collected the following amounts: Fora 
farm not exceeding 60 acres, $3; not exceed¬ 
ing 100 acres, $5 ; not exceeding 160 acres. £8: 
240 acres and over. 810. In order to intimidate 
him they also resorted to the device of serving 
oirhim a notification of suit, but until very re¬ 
cently they have actually commenced no pros¬ 
ecution. 
It is needless to say that they obtained a 
The Teel Gate, No. 40777. 
would that a gate made after his model would even 
nd the be an infringement on his patent (Mr. Lee lays 
q how- this discrepancy to his patent agents) ; for his 
st. and patent is based entirely on a combination 
clubs which exists in part only in his model, 
if roy- Fig. 3 is an accurate copy of the drawing of 
H. D. Lee’s patent gate, us published in vol. Ill of 
ti. has the report of the United States Commissioner 
part in of Patents for 1865. 
f. He The following is an exact copy of ilie des- 
ic, and eription of the patent granted to Lee : 
lg that No. 50.605—John C. Lee. Seville. Ohio, 
prove- Field Fence and Gale Combined, October 24, 
:ans of 1865.—This invention consists in the combina- 
id that tion of the gate with the posts and fence, one 
ement. of the said posts being slotted to receive the 
ends of the panels of the gate when closed. 
■Slide Gate Modified. 
Claims .—The arrangement of the panel or 
gate F, in combination with the mortised post 
B, post A. strips d , slats d, as and for the pur¬ 
pose set forth. 
In the construction of this gate the slats d—d 
are fastened to the posts (see Fig. 3). On the 
end of each set of these slats is nailed a strip 
(d* in Fig.), which is not connected with the 
ground. The gate is opened by sliding partially 
The State of Ohio, ( 
Medina County. ) hb ’ 
John C. Lee, of Seville, iu said county of Me¬ 
dina, being first duly sworn, says that letters 
patents were issued to him numbered 50,605, 
dated October 24, A. D. 1865, for an improve¬ 
ment iu a gate, known as the two-post gate, aud 
that my improvement consisted in the dispens¬ 
ing with one post aud the cross slats, and in 
back over tbe slats fastened to post A, and then 
turning. Finally the jiost B is mortised, or 
slotted, to receive the end of the gate when 
closed. 
There is no infringement on this patent un¬ 
less a mortised post is combined with a fenee 
panel, constructed with the strips d' and slats 
d, as arranged in the figure. 
Iu the figure from Lee’s model (Fig. 4), the 
strip d' aud slats d\ d, near post B, especially 
mentioned in the combination ami shown in 
the drawing of the Patent Office (Fig. 3), do not 
exist, and hence it is doubtful if a gate made 
after Fig 4 would be considered an infringe¬ 
ment on Lee’s patent. Lee’s patent is on an 
arrangement or combination, and there can be 
no infringement on tills patent unless every 
essential portion of this arrangement or com¬ 
bination is copied, as shown iu Fig. 8. Accor¬ 
ding to Eaton S. Drone in American Cyclopae¬ 
dia, “A eombinatiou is not infringed by the use 
of one or more of its parts, if those parts are 
not specially patented, and if they do not sub¬ 
stantially constitute the combination.” 
In order to be patented a eombinatiou “must 
be new and must produce a new and useful re¬ 
sult, not due to the separate action of any one 
of the devices used, but to the co-operative ac¬ 
tion of all. In tiiis case the patent protects 
only the combination aud the new elements; 
anyone may use the old devices, either sepa¬ 
rately or in a new combination.” 
It is evident from this that there, would be no 
infringement on Lee’s patent unless this same 
combination ot strips, slats and mortised post 
were used. No royalty could lie collected 
from any person for using the slats d. d, with 
the strip d fastened to them, provided lie did 
not also use the mortised post B to receive the 
ends of the gate when closed- So far as I can 
learn, this improvement has never been infring¬ 
ed, for it is evident by comparing Fig. 1 and 
Fig. 3 or 4, that the old method of using two 
posts (no matter how frail) with slats nailed on 
them, affords better means of holding the gate 
than the improved method of dispensing with 
one post and using the strip d unconnected 
with the ground. It is seen from the forego¬ 
ing that the manufacture and use of the slide 
gate is uot an infringement on the patent 
granted J. C. Lee. 
No patent on the slide gate would have been 
valid, for it can he proved that the gate was in 
eomtuou use earlier than October, 1863. and 
again the gate was figured and described in the 
American Agriculturist of November, 1864, in 
an article from G. W. Taylor, of Ogle County, 
Ill. (See Fig. 1.) 
_ e. _ 1 
Ihi " ^—Hrfl ffi- 
“ <% . A* — Jt 
jj 
'Plan ah Tea t J F’a.-tcn.-t e. 
Fig. 5. 
It is seen from section 24 of the United 
States Patent Laws, which is given in full, that 
either of the above conditions would prevent 
the issue of a valid patent. 
WHAT MAY BE PATENTED — UNITED STATES 
PATENT LAWS. 
“Section 24. And be it further enacted, that 
any person who has invented or discovered any 
new and useful art. machine, manufacture or 
composition of matter, or any new and useful 
improvement thereof, not known or used by others 
in this country, and not patented or described in 
any printed publication in tills or any foreign 
country before his invention or discovery there¬ 
of. and not in public use or on sale for more 
than two years prior to his application, unless 
the same is proved to have been abandoned, 
may. upon payment of the duty required by 
law. and other due proceedings had, obtain a 
patent therefor.” 
After information regarding Lee’s patent had 
been generally circulated, the business of col- 
