MONOPOLY, from the Greek manopLlia (µororrwrfa), which occurs in Aristotle's' l'olitick ' (I. 11), where It is used simply in the sense of a man buying up the whole of a commodity so as to be the solo holder of it, and to have the power of selling It at his own price. When the word woonopaiuta was titled by Tiberius in addressing the Roman senate (Suet ,' TM.; a 71), he thought an apology necessary for introducing a new word. The word however soon came into common use. Tho term monopoly, which signifies sie'jk or sole selling, is used in a constitution of Zeno (' iv. 59) in the sense in which it is used by Aristotle, and In the sense of what our law understands by fore. stalling, engrue.ing, regrating, to which we may add combining to keep up prices. Zeno declares that no person shall exercise a monopoly of clothing. fish, or any other thing adapted for food or use. Ile gives no definition of monopoly. 'rho term, however, must be explained from tLe context, from which it appears to signify any morns by which a person gets or attempts to get the whole of any commodity into his possession for the purpose of enhancing the price. In the same consti tution he forbids all combination among dealers to raise the prices of any commodity. Zeno's punishment for monopoly was confiscation of the goods of tho offender and perpetual exile.
A monopoly, according to the English law, Is defined by Coke (3' 181,c. 85, " against monopolists," Sc.) to be " an Institution or allowance by the king, by his grant, commisaion, or otherwise, to any person persons, bodies politic or corporate, of or for the solo buying, selling, making, working, or using of any thing, whereby any person or persons, bodies politic or corporate, are sought to Ito restrained of any freedom or liberty that they had before, or hindered in their lawful trade." In' Le Case do Monopolies' (11 Co., 86, 6) it is said that every monopoly has three inseparable Incidents—the raising of the price, the deterioration of the commodity, and the impoverishment of artificers and °there. It appears that these insepa rable incidents were considered as tests by which a grant savouring of monopoly might be tried.
Every royal grant or letters patent tending to a monopoly, as thus defined and explained, was void. Tho crown, however, could by letters
patent graut and create exclusive privileges of buying and selling when such grant was of general use, or when the grant was to an individual who had introduced into the country something new and useful. This prerogative of the crown was often abused, and by none more than by Elizabeth, who granted many patents of monopolies for time purpose of raising money. As an instance of this, Elizabeth had grantee] to a certain person the sole making, importing, and selling of playing cards, which grant was declared void by the judges. (' Le Case de Monopolies.') It seems, then, that the word tnonopoly was never used in English law, except when there was a royal grant authorising some one or more persons only to deal in or sell a certain commodity or article.
By the Act of 21 Jae. I., c. 3, all monopolies and all commissions, grants, licences, charters, and letters patent to any person or body politic or corporate, of or for the sole buying, selling, making, working, or using of any thing, or of any other monopolies, Sc., are declared contrary to the laws of the realm and utterly void and of none effect.
By the sixth section of the same statute, the above provisions do not extend to letters patent and grants of privilege thereafter to he granted for fourteen years or under, of the sole working or making of any new manufacture to the true and first inventor thereof, which others at the time of making such letters patents and grants shall not IISO, so as also such letters patent ho not contrary to the law or mischievous to the state, or generally inconvenient. This section is the foundation of the present law as to patents for inventions. crams's.] Copyright and patents are now genera y placed among monopolies by legal writers, but nut correctly. The original legal sense of the tern monopoly has been already explained ; and the power of the crown to grant patents is now limited and defined, as well as the several formalities to be observed hi obtaining them. Any patent not obtained in due form is void; and tho tern monopoly, as above explained, has legally ceased to exist.