without motion. As an illustration, assume an old watch in which there
was a stem for setting the hands, and assume another old watch with a
stem for winding the spring. If an inventor should make a watch, and
provide it with the two stems, he would have only an aggregation. But
if he employed but one stem, and so located it that it could be used
at will for setting the hands or for winding the spring, then he would
have produced a combination. The particular instance just given is not
a case of the same number of elements, producing a result in excess of
the individual results of the separate elements, but is rather a case
of a lesser number of elements, producing a combination result equal
to the sum of the previous results of a greater number of elements. A
better example would perhaps be a new watch with its two old stems so
related that either could be used for setting the hands or for winding
the spring.


GENERA AND SPECIES.

An inventor, being the first to produce a given organization, and
desiring to patent it, may see at once a patentable variation on the
device. In other words, he makes two machines patentably different,
but both embodying his main invention. He drafts his broad patent
claim to cover both machines. In his patent he must illustrate his
invention, and he accordingly shows in the drawings the preferred
machine. The two machines represent two species of his generic
invention, and for illustration he selects the preferable species. He
drafts his generic claim to cover both species, and he follows this
with a specific claim relating to the selected species. The question
might be asked, If the broad generic claim covers the selected and all
other species, why bother with the specific claim, why not rest on the