The Expanded and Annotated My Life and Work

THE SELDEN PATENT SUIT
The way was not easy. We were harried by a big suit brought against the 
company to try to force us into line with an association of automobile manu-
facturers, who were operating under the false principle that there was only 
a limited market for automobiles and that a monopoly of that market was 
essential. This was the famous Selden Patent suit. At times the support of 
our defense severely strained our resources. Mr. Selden, who has but recently 
died, had little to do with the suit. It was the association which sought a 
monopoly under the patent. The situation was this:
George B. Selden, a patent attorney, filed an application as far back as 
1879 for a patent the object of which was stated to be “The production of a 
safe, simple, and cheap road locomotive, light in weight, easy to control, pos-
sessed of sufficient power to overcome an ordinary inclination.” This applica-
tion was kept alive in the Patent Office, by methods which are perfectly legal, 
until 1895, when the patent was granted. In 1879, when the application was 
filed, the automobile was practically unknown to the general public, but by 
the time the patent was issued everybody was familiar with self-propelled 
vehicles, and most of the men, including myself, who had been for years 

---

44  •  The Expanded and Annotated My Life and Work
working on motor propulsion, were surprised to learn that what we had 
made practicable was covered by an application of years before, although the 
applicant had kept his idea merely as an idea. He had done nothing to put it 
into practice.
The specific claims under the patent were divided into six groups and I think 
that not a single one of them was a really new idea even in 1879 when the 
application was filed. The Patent Office allowed a combination and issued 
a so-called “combination patent” deciding that the combination (a) of a car-
riage with its body machinery and steering wheel, with the (b) propelling 
mechanism clutch and gear, and finally (c) the engine, made a valid patent.
With all of that we were not concerned. I believed that my engine had 
nothing whatsoever in common with what Selden had in mind. The powerful 
combination of manufacturers who called themselves the “licensed manu-
facturers” because they operated under licenses from the patentee, brought 
suit against us as soon as we began to be a factor in motor production. The 
suit dragged on. It was intended to scare us out of business. We took volumes 
of testimony, and the blow came on September 15, 1909, when Judge Hough 
rendered an opinion in the United States District Court finding against us. 
Immediately that Licensed Association began to advertise, warning prospec-
tive purchasers against our cars. They had done the same thing in 1903 at the 
start of the suit, when it was thought that we could be put out of business. I 
had implicit confidence that eventually we should win our suit. I simply knew 
that we were right, but it was a considerable blow to get the first decision 
against us, for we believed that many buyers—even though no injunction 
was issued against us—would be frightened away from buying because of the 
threats of court action against individual owners. The idea was spread that 
if the suit finally went against me, every man who owned a Ford car would 
be prosecuted. Some of my more enthusiastic opponents, I understand, gave