The different ways of appropriating other people's invention without giving any equivalent for it, are made possible by our existing laws which are notoriously defective for insuring justice and equity to those who labor with their brains, who, in the opinion of most people, are as deserving of protection, in the enjoyment of the fruits of their labor, as they who work with their hands.

If the man who cultivates the soil, raises a crop and when the same is ripe, some one should come and boldly reap and harvest the same, and carry it off to his barn and enjoy the proceeds thereof, the law would immediately lay its hands on that person, deprive him of his stolen goods, to return the same to the rightful owner. The community would also be wrought up in righteous indignation and add its ostracism of the malefactor, even after he has been deprived of his stealings, suffered the penalty, and is probably penitent.

But it is different, oh! how different, if the stolen property is a mental instead of a hand product. It ought to be apparent that there is a defect somewhere in the profound reasoning of our august law-makers and honorable jurists in framing and interpreting our laws for protection of property that makes it possible for a man to arrest another man that he has found in possession of his plow, while allowing a man to steal another man's invention, for the improvement of all plows, and to throw the inventor out of his office for attempting to remonstrate with him for appropriating his property.