Home| FAQ Search:Advanced|Person|Company| Type|Class Login
Quick search:
Patent number:
Patent Date:
first    back  next  last
US Patent: 5,575X
Cooking Stove
Patentee:
Ezekiel E. Bennett (exact or similar names) - Sandy Hill, Washington County, NY

USPTO Classifications:

Tool Categories:
household : stoves

Assignees:
None

Manufacturer:
Not known to have been produced

Witnesses:
Unknown

Patent Dates:
Granted: Jul. 17, 1829

Patent Pictures:
USPTO (New site tip)
Google Patents
Report data errors or omissions to steward Joel Havens
Description:
Most of the patents prior to 1836 were lost in the Dec. 1836 fire. Only about 2,000 of the almost 10,000 documents were recovered. Little is known about this patent. There are no patent drawings available. This patent is in the database for reference only.

“For a Cooking Stove, in which mineral coal, charcoal, or wood, may be employed; Ezekiel E. Bennet, Sandy Hill, Washington County, New York, July 17.

We are unable to tell in what particulars this stove differs from many others, excepting in its shape, and in some unimportant variations in the arrangement of its parts; the principal of these variations appear to be, the using of two grates, and the making the side and back plates to flare out, which increases the dimension of the upper parts of the stove. These are both claimed, together with various other particulars, as follows: Having the insides and ends of the stoves in a position diverging from each other, from the bottom, upwards. In having narrow plates round the inside, on which the lower grate is to rest. In the use and location of the two grates. In having the front plate moveable. In having the upper plate moveable on hinges, so as to open or close that apartment of the stove. In the use and application of the tin oven. And in whatever else, either in form or principle of the thing itself, or of its application, use, or combination, the improvements described may be considered original.

The kind of sweeping claim with which the above concludes, is common in patents for those improvements which are scarcely visible or tangible; such claims, however, must be considered as useless, if not injurious : if they are mere surplusage, it would be better to leave them out; if they indicate any thing, it is that there is something intended to be claimed which is not set forth in the way that the law requires.”

Journal of the Franklin Institute Vol. 7, Oct. 1829 pg. 260

Copyright © 2002-2024 - DATAMP