ses, stores, saloons, restaurants,
etc., and are a source of considerable income to the railway company.
The owner of one of the restaurants in the arcades decided to provide
his place with a bowling alley, but found that he could not command
the requisite length, 75 ft., and so he had to arrange it in some
other way. A civil engineer named Kiebitz constructed a circular
bowling alley for him, which is shown in the annexed cut taken from
the _Illustrirte Zeitung_. The alley is built in the shape of a
horse-shoe, and the bottom or bed on which the balls roll is hollowed
out on a curved line, the outer edge of the bed being raised to
prevent the balls from being thrown off the alley by centrifugal
force.

[Illustration: A CIRCULAR BOWLING ALLEY.]

The balls are rolled from one end of the alley, describe a curved
line, and then strike the pins placed at the opposite end of the
alley. No return track for the balls is required, and all that is
necessary is to roll the balls from one end of the alley to the other.
A recording slate, the tables for the guests, etc., are arranged
between the two shanks or legs of the alley.

It is evident that a person cannot play as accurately on an alley of
this kind as on a straight alley; but if a ball is thrown with more
or less force, it will roll along the inner or outer edge of the
alley and strike the group of pins a greater or less distance from the
middle. A room 36 ft. in length is of sufficient size for one of these
alleys.

* * * * *

PATENT OFFICE EXAMINATION OF INVENTIONS.

_To the Editor of the Scientific American:_

It is with considerable surprise that the writer has just perused
the editorial article in your issue of March the 28th--"Patent Office
Examinations of Novelty of Inventions" It seems to me that the
ground taken therein is diametrically opposed to the views heretofore
promulgated in your journal on this subject, and no less so to
the interests of American inventors; and it appears difficult to
understand why the abolition of examinations for novelty by the Patent
Office should be recommended in face of the fact that the acknowledged
small fees now exacted from inventors are sufficient to provide a
much greater force of examiners than are now employed on that work.
If inventors were asking the government to appropriate money for this
purpose, the case would be quite different; although it may be shown,
I think, that C