constitution, so as to preclude that question from judicial inquiry. But, at all events, such a construction ought never to be put upon the terms of any general act in favour of a particular inventor, unless it be inevitable.[1]
§ 1149. It has been suggested, that this power is not exclusive, but concurrent with that of the states, so always, that the acts of the latter do not contravene the acts of congress.[2] It has, therefore, been asserted, that where congress go no farther than to secure the right to an author or inventor, the state may regulate the use of such right, or restrain it, so far as it may deem it injurious to the public. Whether this be so or not may be matter for grave inquiry, whenever the question shall arise directly in judgment. At present, it seems wholly unnecessary to discuss it theoretically. But, at any rate, there does not seem to be the same difficulty in affirming, that, as the power of congress extends only to authors and inventors, a state may grant an exclusive right to the possessor or introducer of an art or invention, who does not claim to be an inventor, but has merely introduced it from abroad.[3]
§ 1150. In the first draft of the constitution the clause is not to be found; but the subject was referred to a committee, (among other propositions,) whose report was accepted, and gave the clause in the very form, in which it now stands in the constitution.[4] A more extensive proposition, "to establish public institutions, rewards, and immunities for the promotion of agricul-