- 2171
JOHN ADAMS & JOHN MARSHALL. PATENT SIGNED, TO WILLIAM YOUNG, 20 NOVEMBER 1800
Estimate
10,000 - 15,000 USD
bidding is closed
Description
- Patent signed ("John Adams") as second President, co-signed ("J Marshall") as Secretary of State, and ("Charles Lee") as Attorney General, for "method of raising and hanging windows without weights or springs by means of Cork," to William Young, 20 November 1800; with a collection of related printed and manuscript material, 1801-1802
1 page (14 1/8 x 11 3/4 in; 360 x 301 mm) on partially printed vellum, accomplished in a secretarial hand, embossed paper seal of the United States with pink ribbon; previously folded, with some discoloration and fading. [With]: 1 page manuscript inventor's description, [and] a collection of related printed and manuscript material including: 1) Assignment of Isaac Ashton to Stephen Sayre, 25 March 1801; 2) Certification, signed ("James Madison") as Secretary for the Department of State, 14 May 1801; 3) Assignment of Isaac Ashton to Frederick Lewis Goch, 5 June 1801; 4) Subpoena to Joseph Jeffers, 11 October 1802; scattered browning and soiling, separation at folds, and repairs.
Literature
Naomi R. Lamoreaux, Kenneth L. Sokoloff, and Dhanoos Sutthiphisal, “Patent Alchemy: The Market for Technology in US History,” Business History Review, (Spring 2013): pp. 3-38.
Condition
1 page (14 1/8 x 11 3/4 in; 360 x 301 mm) on partially printed vellum, accomplished in a secretarial hand, embossed paper seal of the United States with pink ribbon; previously folded, with some discoloration and fading. [With]: 1 page manuscript inventor's description, [and] a collection of related printed and manuscript material including: 1) Assignment of Isaac Ashton to Stephen Sayre, 25 March 1801; 2) Certification, signed ("James Madison") as Secretary for the Department of State, 14 May 1801; 3) Assignment of Isaac Ashton to Frederick Lewis Goch, 5 June 1801; 4) Subpoena to Joseph Jeffers, 11 October 1802; scattered browning and soiling, separation at folds, and repairs.
In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective qualified opinion.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING CONDITION OF A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD "AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF SALE PRINTED IN THE CATALOGUE.
In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective qualified opinion.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING CONDITION OF A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD "AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF SALE PRINTED IN THE CATALOGUE.
Catalogue Note
One of two known Presidential patents signed by both John Adams and John Marshall President John Adams signed only 163 patents, of which only 25 were co-signed by Marshall. However, only nine co-signed by other secretaries of state, and only one other co-signed by Marshall (at Dartmouth College) are presently known to survive.
The day after receiving his patent, inventor William Young sold all his rights in it to Thomas Overton. Within a few weeks, Overton sold the rights to the patent in Pennsylvania’s Lycoming and Northumberland counties to Robert Gray. On January 3, 1801, Overton sold rights to the patent in New Jersey and the rest of Pennsylvania to Philadelphia cabinetmaker Isaac Ashton for $7,000. On April 29, Overton also sold Ashton the rights in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont, for $8,000. On March 25, 1801, Ashton conveyed the patent rights for New Jersey to Stephen Sayre of Philadelphia. In March and June 1801, Ashton re-sold the rights to manufacture and sell the invention in Pennsylvania (except Lycoming and Northumberland counties), Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont to Frederick Lewis Goch of New York City for $10,500. Questions arose about Ashton’s authority to convey the patent rights. On April 14, 1804, Goch released Ashton from all liability, likely after the money was refunded.
Assigning patents for specific geographic regions (usually states or counties) was a common practice, though the documents doing so almost never are found with the original patents. By the end of the nineteenth century, when advances in manufacturing, transportation and communication allowed a more centralized approach, the practice became less common.
The day after receiving his patent, inventor William Young sold all his rights in it to Thomas Overton. Within a few weeks, Overton sold the rights to the patent in Pennsylvania’s Lycoming and Northumberland counties to Robert Gray. On January 3, 1801, Overton sold rights to the patent in New Jersey and the rest of Pennsylvania to Philadelphia cabinetmaker Isaac Ashton for $7,000. On April 29, Overton also sold Ashton the rights in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont, for $8,000. On March 25, 1801, Ashton conveyed the patent rights for New Jersey to Stephen Sayre of Philadelphia. In March and June 1801, Ashton re-sold the rights to manufacture and sell the invention in Pennsylvania (except Lycoming and Northumberland counties), Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont to Frederick Lewis Goch of New York City for $10,500. Questions arose about Ashton’s authority to convey the patent rights. On April 14, 1804, Goch released Ashton from all liability, likely after the money was refunded.
Assigning patents for specific geographic regions (usually states or counties) was a common practice, though the documents doing so almost never are found with the original patents. By the end of the nineteenth century, when advances in manufacturing, transportation and communication allowed a more centralized approach, the practice became less common.