I will commence by stating briefly that a patent was granted and four re-issues of the same made to Alfred Nobel and his assignees, for the use of Nitro-Glycerin for blasting purposes, when “confined,“ and for a process of manufacturing the same, by running the glycerin and mixed acids together rapidly, in suitable proportions, into a tank of water. Now, it has never been denied that Sobrero was the discoverer of Nitro-Glycerin, and that it was competent for any one to manufacture that article. The only point, therefore, on which a patent could be obtained was for some improved method of making it. Accordingly, in the course of experiments, I discovered that by passing a current of cold, compressed air through the mixing glycerin and acids, a very valuable improvement was effected, economizing time and material, and rendering the process of manufacturing safer; and for this I obtained a patent on April 7, 1868.
That my readers may see how far I was correct in my estimate of the patentable value of my invention, I give below the opinion of eminent counsel:
New York, July 10, 1869.
Geo. M. Mowbray, Esq.:
Dear Sir:—Pursuant to your request, I have examined your Letters Patent of the United States for inventions in the manufacture of Nitro-Glycerin, dated the 7th April, 1868. I recollect of aiding you in preparing the application for that patent, and of examining it immediately after it was issued. I believed then that that patent was good and valid, and nothing since has occurred that has changed my opinion or shaken my confidence concerning its validity.
I have recently examined copies of the five re-issued patents to assignees of Alfred Nobel, and I find nothing in them, or any of them, which impairs the validity of your patent.
I further say, that it is my opinion, and clearly so, that the manufacture and sale of Nitro-Glycerin made according to the process described in your patent, does not infringe upon any of the five re-issued patents granted to the assignees of Nobel; and that so far as any of those re-issued patents are concerned, or anything else that I know of, you have a clear right to manufacture and sell Nitro-Glycerin according to your patent.
Very respectfully,
Geo. Gifford, Counsellor at Law.
This discovery was not allowed to pass unchallenged, for Mr. Tal. P. Shaffner, having learnt that I had obtained a patent, came forward with a claim that he had conceived the idea (!) in 1865; and in January, 1869, nearly a year after the application for the patent which was granted to me, he applied for a patent for the same thing. This brought our respective rights before the Patent Office in a matter of interference. However, the following remarks by Mr. John W. Thacher, Examiner of Interferences, in giving his decision on the case, will show pretty clearly to whom the right to a patent justly belongs. He says: