
    GEORGE H. PALMER v. THE UNITED STATES.
    [20 C. Cls. R., 432; 128 U. S. R., 262.]
    
      On the defendants’ Appeal.
    
    An officer exhibits his patented knapsack and infantry equipments to a board appointed to select and recommend an equipment for infantry. The board recommends them, the Secretary of War approves, and the Ordnance Department, "with no express license, proceeds to manufacture. The device fails to give satisfaction in the Army, and is superseded by that previously in use, but informally, with no order of revocation.
    
      The court below decides:
    (1) Where the validity of a patent is conceded, he who uses the invention must judge for himself of its utility; he can not use it under an implied license and then allege that it is valueless; and the Government, when it manufactures military equipments after a patented device, but under an implied license, is as responsible as an individual.
    (2) The Ordnance Department has no right to manufacture a patented article for experiment.
    (2) In estimating damages where the action is to recover an implied royalty for articles “ manufactured and used’’ a return from the Ordnance Department showing that of 10,500 infantry equipments manufactured 9,000 have been “ issued for use" is evidence of use.
    The decision of the court below is affirmed, the Supreme Court holding that the Court of Claims has jurisdiction over claims and demands of patentees for the use of their inventions by the United States in cases where the use was with the express or implied consent of the patentee, and his right was not controverted by the Government.
   Mr. Justice Bradley

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court, November 19, 1888.  