PROFESSIONAL PATENTS. 
HV w. STOKER HOW, D.D.R., PHILADELPHIA, PA. 
Iteud before the Mississippi Valley Dental Association at Cincinnati, Ohio, 
March 7, 1888. 
The discussion of any subject is usually clarified by a definition 
of the title or terms by which it is designated. In the United 
States of America a patent is an official document which imports 
that the patentee is the legal owner of the property therein de- 
scribed, and the inventor is thereby legally constituted for a speci- 
fied term of years the absolute owner of that property, subject in- 
deed to any claimant who can prove himself to be the original and 
first inventor of the property aforesaid. Contingent upon this risk, 
or “ bar,” as it is termed, and the further personal bar of abandon- 
ment by neglecting to make application for a patent within two 
years from the public use of the invention, the right of an inventor 
to his patented property is the clearest and most unassailable right 
to property on earth, and is so maintainable in law and equity 
through the highest courts of this country. It is therefore impor- 
tant to keep in mind these two fundamental facts : First, that a new 
and useful invention originates in the inventor; second, that the 
invention is property, the legal title to which is originally vested in 
the inventor. 
The term dental patents is applied to such patents as relate to 
inventions connected with the practice of dentistry. It is important 
to notice that these inventions are not designed for the use of the 
laity, but are for use as improvements in practice by members of 
the dental profession, and now that dentists are formally included 
in the general designation of members of the medical profession, it 
is pertinent to our purpose to consider the subject of professional 
patents in general. The distinction just made is therefore of conse- 
quence as limiting the discussion to inventions intended for profes- 
sional uses; leaving in abeyance without prejudice the subject of 
devices designed for use directly by the laity. 
It has been commonly assumed by medical men that the primary 
purpose and function of a member of the medical profession should 
bo the relief of such suffering, or diseased, or disabled members of 
the human family as should have need of and require his profes- 
sional services. This assumption might have been permissible in 
part in the days when the priests were also physicians by the 2 
assumed right of a divine calling, and this, as well as many other 
subjects, is greatly befogged through such antique assumptions of 
authority, etc., by divine right. Modern thought and action are even 
now adverse to all such assumptions, and the primary principle is 
becoming recognized that every man is a king under God, and that 
no man has, or can rightly have, other than humanly delegated 
authority over his fellow-man. Government by consent of the 
governed, is the only just rule for the ruler and the ruled. Profes- 
sional pretensions to peculiar privileges, practices, and prerogatives 
by virtue of an assumed superiority of vocation, that places its 
laborers above any pecuniary compensation commensurate with the 
real value of their services, form the fundamental fallacies which 
underlie the delusions so prevalent in the minds of both professional 
men and laymen on the subject of professional patents. It is cer- 
tainly not true that the professional services of the physician, or 
surgeon, or dentist are beyond price because they are preservative 
of human life; for so also are the services of the food-raiser, because 
food is essential to the preservation of human life,—ergo, food is of 
inestimable value! Nor is it true of the doctor any more than of 
the farmer that he works without expectation of payment or hard 
cash for his work. Such assumptions are the veriest stuff and non- 
sense ; for whenever and wherever men of any calling work for a 
living they work for pay,—honorable pay, if the work is honestly 
done. On the other hand, men who do not work for a living are 
either gratuitous laborers or lawless loafers; and to this latter class 
belong the whole group of pretenders from kings to beggars. 
Gratuitous service of any kind, under any circumstances, implies 
the possession of superior abilities by the servant, and a correspond- 
ing inability on the part of the served, or, the willingness of the 
latter to receive service which he is himself able to perform. The 
inherent degradation of this last disposition it is difficult adequately 
to describe; and to this subtle debasement of the real manhood of 
man is owing the inability of the present generation to rise to the 
true nobility of manliness that must always, in all times and all 
places, refuse to receive something for nothing if one be able to 
make any return. Helplessness is, of course, a bar to all self-pre- 
servative action, and a man is then simply compelled to receive 
what is given. A work of love is always and only rewardable by 
love, and we are not unmindful of the Christian faith that works 
by love as the highest form of a divinely inspired activity. But 
the present considerations are based upon and strictly relative to 
the working fact that men are not yet generally doing business on 
pentecostal principles, and until the legal fences are all down and 
the debris cleared away,—the law having vacated its tutorship after 
bringing all men to Christ,—we should aim to do all things law- 
fully, with strict regard to all the rights of our neighbors. 
Among these rights we have shown that patent rights are of the 3 
first order as initiating clear titles to property in inventions. We 
have also shown that when the inventor is a professional man his 
property may be of value to other professional men, who may buy 
it to aid them in their professional work. It has furthermore been 
seen that professional men properly and primarily work for a 
living,—i.e., for money in return for services,—as it is eminently 
right and fit that they should do. The claim that professional ser- 
vices are essentially different from other services for pay is erro- 
neous, as has likewise been shown. 
A clear conclusion is, therefore, that the professional man has no 
more right to the free use of the patented property of his fellow- 
practitioner than to his other property,—as, for instance, his house, 
or his horse, or his case of instruments. He might in an emergency 
borrow anything that is his neighbor’s, but to claim the right to 
use in the practice of his profession a professional invention, on 
the ground that individual professional property is, per se, common 
professional property, is, assuredly, an untenable proposition. 
Equally so is the commonly received doctrine that it is unpro- 
fessional to patent inventions designed for professional use. 
To secure a copyright on a book which is designed for profes- 
sional use is not now deemed unprofessional, as indeed it ought not 
to be; but will any right-minded person pretend that copyright 
property is essentially different from patent-right property? They 
are certainly identical so far as they are original creations of inventive 
minds, and as such, when secured to the inventive authors by due 
process of law, are indubitably property in the highest and strongest 
and clearest titular significance of that term. It follows, therefore, 
that a book, an instrument, or an appliance originated and designed 
for use by a physician, surgeon, or dentist professionally may be 
copyrighted or patented by its inventor without in any manner or 
degree derogating from his standing as a professional man. The 
instrument, as well as the book, is intended to facilitate professional 
practice, and there is no valid reason why the professional inventor 
should give his invention to his fellow practitioners any more than 
that the professional writer should send every fellow a copy of his 
book with the “compliments of the author.” I f the book is designed 
and adapted to promote professional practice, and so alleviate suf- 
fering and prolong life, then, on every premise and by every argu- 
ment used in opposition to professional patents, the book belongs to 
the profession, and to copyright it or publish it for the personal 
profit of the author is,—well, all the delusive and deceitful and 
debasing drivel that has been poured out on inventors by copy- 
righting authors, and other inconsiderate or pecuniarily interested 
members of the medical profession. Possibly some introspection is 
necessary to disclose to many minds the motives which really 
actuate them when they raise such an outcry against professional 
patents. They want the best instrument or medicament obtainable, 4 
and they want such at the least cost, or without cost if possible. 
Success in practice depends upon their superiority of repute as pro- 
fessional men. Hence they want the best aids to practice within 
their reach; and if those aids are only to be had by paying a sum, 
a part of which goes into the pocket of an inventive fellow-practi- 
tioner, a part to the retail dealer, a part to the wholesale dealer, 
and a part to the manufacturer (or publisher), then they have a 
grievance against the inventor, who, as a professional brother (?), 
ought to give away his part of the profits arising from the sale of 
his own original property! Why? Well,—because the invention 
enables the practitioner to do more for suffering humanity, and get 
more money from suffering humanity, than he could do or get 
without the invention! The inventor may get any amount of 
honor (?), but must get no cash for his invention, which belongs to 
everybody else because the inventor is a professional man; and in 
the professions, every brother-practitioner has tli«e right to take for 
his own professional use and profit anything which his brother has, 
or can invent, that is worth taking! 
The notion that a professional man has gratuitously received his 
equipment, and therefore is in honor bound to give all he has and 
knows to his professional brethren, has no foundation in fact; for 
the office tuition, the copyrighted books, the college expenses, etc., 
at every point of his preliminary progress have cost him cash (or its 
equivalent), which in great measure went into the pockets of the 
most prominent professors, who are the loudest in professing the 
greatest concern for the protection of the profession from dishonor, 
by the patenting of professional inventions. The fact is patent 
that every medical or dental graduate has been called upon for cash 
in payment for the professional instruction he has received, and he 
in turn expects to receive cash for his outlay, just as any other 
business man expects a return for his investments in knowledge or 
the products of knowledge. 
In the light of to-day, and in the United States of America, it is 
absurd to assume that the professions are other than departments 
of business, and distinguishable simply by name from the depart- 
ments of agriculture, mechanics, merchantry, banking, etc. The 
other assumption, of the priceless value of medical knowledge as a 
ground of superiority over the priceless knowledge of the farmer, 
we have seen to be baseless. 
An incidental demonstration of the fallacy of these assumptions 
has been wrought out in the practice of dentistry, which has by a 
process of synthesis started from the basis of a business, and by the 
application of business methods worked its way into the medical 
profession. 
It seems capable of demonstration that the great advances made 
by modern dentistry in the United States are largely due to the 
patented inventions of dentists. The writer is free to admit that 5 
his own slight participation in this line of progress may unwittingly 
warp his judgment in this regard, but he is nevertheless firm in his 
conviction that the opinion is sustained by the facts. In this con- 
nection it appears proper to be still further personal in an allusion 
to the writer’s later opportunities for becoming conversant with 
some correlative phases of the subject. 
It is well known to members of this society that the writer was 
a practitioner of dentistry in this city for nearly thirty years,—less 
the interval of the war period. The last five years have been 
passed in Philadelphia, in professional connection with the principal 
dental manufacturing company of this country,—or, he may add, of 
the world. Opportunity has been thus afforded for the considera- 
tion of dental patents in many aspects unfamiliar to the ordinary 
practitioner; indeed, the services rendered by the writer have been 
frequently in the line of a patent expert for the determination of 
questions concerning inventions of that class. Under those circum- 
stances, and under the present circumstances, when surrounded by 
old friends and neighbors, a freedom of expression is permissible 
that might otherwise be deemed inappropriate. Your essayist, 
therefore, feels at liberty to say that, in five years of confidential 
and intimate relationship with the heads of the great manufacturing 
house referred to, he has seen in the conduct of their business not 
only nothing to condemn, but contrariwise, the most commendable 
consideration of the interests of dentists, dealers in dental goods, 
clerks, salesmen, workmen, workwomen and employees of every 
kind; combined with a general business conduct based upon the 
highest principles of commercial honor and probity. There need 
be no hesitation in the use of superlatives when speaking of the 
sterling qualities of the men who control this great concern. They 
reflect honor upon the profession which they—following in the 
footsteps of the revered founder of the house which bears his 
name—have sedulously sought to promote, and have been largely 
instrumental in advancing to its present proud position among the 
noble and learned professions. Doubtless it is due to the writer’s 
experience in the service of this company that he has reached the 
firm conclusion that honorable motives and conduct are not confined 
within the limits of the so-called honorable professions, but that the 
merchants, the mechanics, and the workmen of every class and 
degree are honorable, and to be honored whenever and wherever 
they acquit themselves like true and faithful men. 
It is furthermore to be said that the president of the White house, 
as editor of the Dental Cosmos, has rendered inestimable service to 
dentists and the dental profession during his connection with and 
conduct of that journal from its beginning, thirty years ago. What 
is implied in the personal supervision of three hundred and sixty 
monthly issues of a journal whose every page was to be and has 
been resolutely kept free of matter not related to dentistry, nor 6 
expressed in good, clean English, no one can know but the inflexi- 
bly faithful and thoroughly competent editor. What the profession 
and the world knows is that the Dental Cosmos is an honor to den- 
tistry, to journalism, and to the professional business men who have 
made and kept it foremost and highest. 
The elevating nature of dental patents was primarily recognized 
by this house, and large sums were spent in acquiring and develop- 
ing them. Few persons are aware of the rapidity with which 
inventions have followed one another under the stimulus of a rea- 
sonable expectation of reward for such extraordinary exercise of 
thought and skill. Yet fewer persons know what a costly thing it 
is for the manufacturer to change or discard devices which, when 
just ready for the market, become improved, or superseded, so that 
the new stock is rendered comparatively valueless. Just at this 
point the nerve, and sagacity, and determination of this company 
to put forth the very best goods, that could be made, have time after 
time been made manifest, and thousands of dollars’ worth of super- 
seded things have been destroyed, or shelved without the slightest 
hesitation, or attempt to realize by holding back the new until the 
old have been sold. The “monopoly ” against which such thought- 
less outcries have been made is of untold benefit to dentists because 
both able and willing to discard the old good things immediately upon 
the advent of the new and better ones. So, too, have the foremost 
dentists always done, and that is the secret of success,—the best, at 
whatever cost. That is also at once the inspiration and hope of the 
inventor. 
To summarize our conclusions, it may be confidently declared that: 
First.—An original and first inventor has absolutely produced the 
property to which he is entitled by bis patent. 
Second.—It is strictly right, equitable, ethical, just, and proper 
for an inventor who is either a clergyman, lawyer, physician, sur- 
geon, dentist, chemist, author, composer, or worker in any of the 
departments of business termed professions, to patent his invention, 
whatever its object, if, and if only, it be useful to such of his fellow- 
men as may properly desire to use it lawfully. 
Third.—The outcry against professional men who do, or counte- 
nance those who do, obtain patents for human life-saving or life- 
promoting inventions comes in every instance from men who either 
do not understand the subject, or are directly or remotely interested 
in obtaining tbe use of the invention gratuitously, or without due 
process of law. 
As products of thought, the movable types, the cotton gin, the 
steam engine, and the electro-magnetic telegraph have been directly 
and indirectly instrumental in saving and promoting life in possibly 
far greater degree than all the medical prescriptions of the contem- 
poraneous physicians whose diplomas invested them with exclusive 
rights and privileges as a means of making money; yet these same 7 
professional diplomatists would proscribe a fellow-prescriber if he 
were to obtain a Patent Office diploma as the originator of a life- 
saving invention. 
If, therefore, common sense, reason, argument, logic, demonstra- 
tion, humanity, beneficence, lawfulness, and righteousness are not 
all on the side of the professional inventor and patentee, then his 
case only needs restatement in embossed letters that may enable 
the wilfully blind to mentally see the affirmative facts that are 
indubitably clear to the mind of an unprejudiced investigator. The 
great number of persons to whom such an invention should prove a 
priceless possession might be a stimulus to productive ingenuity, 
were it not for the amazing probability that nearly every one of 
them would bring forward either his professional brotherhood or his 
great need of the professional equipment as an unanswerable plea for 
the gratuitous bestowinent of the property upon himself; the honor 
of being the inventor of so useful a device sufficing (of course) as 
an ample reward for the inventor in lieu of the filthy lucre fees 
which would bo what the practicing professor would obtain from 
its use. 
The phrase “empty honors” is certainly a significant one, and 
must have been devised for a professional inventor, because he, of 
all other men, would have been, as in modern times, sure to have 
received neither cash nor substantial gratitude, however valuable 
his invention might have proved to his fee-earning brethren. His- 
tory is full of examples uniformly tending to show that, if the 
inventor could not compel the recognition of his property rights in 
his invention, he has not only been denied compensation, but has 
often suffered persecution, and even martyrdom. 
In these later years, when every other department of practical 
knowledge and labor is making such progress by means of patented 
inventions that the Old world stands amazed and almost awe-struck 
at sight of the marvels wrought in the New, is it not time for the 
old professions to fall into line with the new, and declare that 
henceforward every incentive shall be held out to the ingenious 
and skillful professional man to invent or discover human life-saving 
and health-promoting means and devices, with the assurance that 
his patent rights shall be respected, and due honors be paid with 
the cash for the privilege of professionally using his invention? 
Will it not be an ascent to a higher plane of thought and action for 
“ doctors ” (teachers) to teach that professional honor is not a cloudy 
abstraction, nor a clannish distinction, nor an exclusive assumption; 
and that, in particular, a doctor of medicine or surgery is a person 
called to and trained in the professional business of the readjust- 
ment and repair of disordered human bodies for a cash consideration, 
due and to be paid upon the completion of the service? 
If it be objected that this view degrades the practice of a profes- 
sion to the merely mercantile prosecution of a business, it is at once 8 
to be said that the objector begs the question by the false assump- 
tion that a business is beneath a profession, whereas an honest 
business honorably conducted puts the business man above beggary 
of every kind. He never begs, but buys and sells with the most 
scrupulous regard to the property rights of everybody ; and, to his 
great credit, it is to be said that there is among men no higher 
working standard of honor than that of the business man whose 
simple statement or working formula is, “ I will sell this to-day for 
so muchand when his fellow-merchant at hand, or a thousand 
miles away, replies, “ I will take it at your price,” that practically 
completes the transaction, and the property will be transferred, 
although only their words of honor will have passed between them, 
and although, also, prior to the transfer of the property in fact, its 
value should change to the amount of many thousands of dollars: 
the business man’s word is actually as good as his bond. 
There is, therefore, relevancy to the subject under consideration 
in the writer’s illustrative allusion to the well-known business house 
in which he has learned many instructive things concerning the 
correlations of professional honor with business honor, and as 
common rules of practice, the terms appear to him to be not as yet 
synonymous. 
As a matter of fact, it is proper to state here that, aside from the 
young lady type-writer, no person either nearty or remotely con- 
nected with the business house referred to is aware of even the 
intention of the author to write or read a paper upon this subject; 
and, therefore, the responsibility for the views and sentiments 
herein presented rests entirely and exclusively upon him. 
As supplemental to the foregoing paper, the author adds to this 
publication of it on his own account, for personal distribution, the 
following extract, in order that the reader may verify the irrefut- 
able fact that the exclusive copyright and the exclusive patent right 
are fundamentally identical in their establishment under the law 
which was intended “ To promote,”—and has to a marvelous degree 
practically promoted,—“ the progress of science and useful arts.” 
So far as the author is aware, the copyright and the patent right 
are the only instances of the constitutional creation of property in 
materialized or embodied thought. 
Article I., Section 8, in the Constitution of the United States 
declares: “ The Congress shall have power ” . . . “ 8. To promote 
the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited 
times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respec- 
tive writings and discoveries.” Also, “ 18. To make all laws which 
shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the fore- 
going powers, and all other powers vested by this constitution in 
the government of the United States, or in any department or 
officer thereof.”