BLISS v. ‘MER‘RILL. l 39
other, but not in bringing them into such juxtaposition to allow each to
work out its own effect and produce an aggregate of results. Although
the Morgan-Brown patent had shown a combination between the indica-
tor and trip register, it was open to Harris to invent a new one, or one
between the indicator and a trip register and a permanent register. But
after he had done this it was open to others to make a combination be-
tween the same parts which would accomplish a similar result by a dif-
ferent organization, introducing a different mode of operation. This has
been done in the apparatus of the defendants. ,
It follows that the defendants do not infringe, and the bill must be
dismissed. ·
Buss ‘ and another v. MERRILL and another.
(Circuit Court, B. D. New York. December 7, 1887.)
. 1. Psrnnrs ron Iuvm¤·rroNs—1Nrnmenunnr—Sn1r Loss.
Reissued letters patent No. 10,625, granted July 21. 1885, for an improve-
' ment in registering logs of ships, the original patent being dated June 6, 1876,
and the original application filed February 16, 1876, for an elongated cylin-
5 drical case containing the registering mechanism, with the shaft introduced
axillary at one end, in combination with anti-friction rollers, eye, propeller,
A and connecting cord or wire, held to be infringed by a registering apparatus
‘ which has an elongated cylindrical case containing the registeri g mechan-
ism, a shaft introduced axillary at one end, and the anti-friction rollers and
the eye adapted to receive the propeller cord. all substantially in the same ~
combination as the patent. V
2. Sum. ‘ '
~ Reissued letters patent No. 10,625, for a horizontal attaching-yoke, in com-
bination with the elongated case, registering mechanism, and s aft of a ship
log, is not infringed by providing the elongated case with eyes to which a rop• _ `
may be attached in such a manner as to constitute infringement, there being
no evidence that the defendants ever used it in this manner, and Ithe device
being susceptible of a perfectly innocent use.
3. Burn-Pmonrriz or INvnn·rro1~z—FonnroN Pyrnnr. , _
In an action upon reissued letters patent No. 10,625, granted to the com-
plainants, July 21, 1885, for an improvement in registering logs of ships, the
original-patent being dated June 6, 1876, and the original application filed Feb-
ruary 16, 1876, there was evidence that a patent substantially the same was
sealed in England, July 27, 1875. Held, that the peculiar coincidence that the
same idea, alike even in minute details, should have occurred to two persons
on different continents without having seen the other’s device, in absence of
satisfactory evidence, will not warrant the court in rejecting the positive tes-
lgmggy of the complainants that they conceived their invention prior to May
In Equity. Bill for injunction. J
Edwin H. Brown, for complainants. · p
A. M. Pierce, for defendants.
Coxn, J. This action is founded upon reissued letters patent No. 10,-
625, granted—to·comp1ainants July 21 , 1885, for an improvement in regis-
tering logs of ships. The original patent was dated June 6, 1876. The