In Battin v. Taggert (1854), 58 U.S. 74, it was held by the Supreme Court that it was for the jury to judge of the novelty of an invention, and of the identity of the machine used by the defendant, with that of the plaintiffs, and whether they were constructed and acted upon the same principle. The Supreme Court noted that whether the defect be in the specifications or in the claim ..., the patentee may surrender his patent, and, by an amended specification or claim, cure the defect.... But where the specification or claim is made so vaguely as to be inoperative and invalid,yet an amendment may give to it validity, and protect the rights of the patentee against all subsequent infringements. (58 U.S. 74, 83.)