145 U. S. 156-174

Notes on U. 8. Reports.

200

both applying rule; Corbin, etc., Lock Co. v. Eagle Lock Co., 52 Fed. 985, rule followed; Featherstone v. Cycle Co., 53 Fed. 116, Dunlop tire patent; Singer Mfg. Co. v. Brill, 54 Fed. 383, 7 U. S. App. 601, Brill sewing-machine patent; Holloway v. Dow, 54 Fed. 517, and Sayre v. Scott, 55 Fed. 974, 3 U. S. App. 643, both applying principle; American Cable Ry. v. Mayor, etc., 56 Fed. 151, Miller cable-railway patent; McKay, etc., Lasting-Mach. Co. v. Claflin, 58 Fed. 357, lasting-machine patent; Ballard v. McCluskey, 58 Fed. 882, following rule; Westinghouse v. New York Air-Brake Co., 59 Fed. 590, air-brake patents; Consolidated Brake-Shoe Co. v. Detroit Steel, etc., Co., 59 Fed. 909, upholding Ross railway shoe brake patent; Holtzer v. Consolidated Elec. Mfg. Co., 60 Fed. 750, applying rule; Kilmer Mfg. Co. v. Griswold, 62 Fed. 124, upholding Kilmer patent for improved bale-ties; Eastman Co. v. Blair Camera Co., 62 Fed. 403, upholding Eastman camera patent; S. F. Heath Cycle Co. v. Hay, 67 Fed. 250, holding Johnson bicycle-pump a patentable invention; Consolidated Brake-Shoe Co. v. Chicago, etc., Ry. Co., 69 Fed. 414, Congdon patent for shoe-brake valid and infringed; Davock v. Chicago, etc., R. R., 69 Fed. 469, applying rule; Bray v. United States, etc., Twine Co., 70 Fed. 1007, upholding Bray patent fly-hook; Schreiber v. Grimm, 72 Fed. 675, 43 U. S. App. 10, Schreiber patent void for want of invention; Muller v. Lodge, etc., Tool Co., 77 Fed. 629, 47 U. S. App. 189, patent increasing effectiveness of mechanism sustained, though no original result accomplished; Graham v. Earl, 82 Fed. 741, Graham refrigerator reissue not invalid because of expansion in original patent; Wilkins, etc., Fastener Co. v. Webb, 89 Fed. 997, Wilkins buttonfastener not anticipated; Bowers v. San Francisco Bridge Co., 91 Fed. 417, Bowers' hydraulic dredger not anticipated by Schwartzkhopff patent; Rubber-Tire Wheel Co. v. Columbia, etc., Wheel Co., 91 Fed. 992, Grant patent rubber-tired wheel not anticipated by any prior patent, though essential parts used in different combinations in prior inventions; Ryan v. Newark Spring-Mattress Co., 96 Fed. 103, applying principle; Knapp v. Morss, 150 U. S. 230, 37 L. 1063, 14 S. Ct. 85, dissenting opinion upholding patent dress-form. Patents.- Commissioner of patents, under R. S., § 4916, may correct clear mistake by reissue, p. 164.

Patents.- Inclusion of an incidental function in a reissue will not be deemed enlargement, p. 164.

Approved in Haggenmacher v. Nelson, 88 Fed. 493, reissue of Haggenmacher patent flour-sifter valid; Beach v. American BoxMach., 63 Fed. 603, upholding reissue where mistake in drawings renders machine inoperative in part only; Rocker-Spring Co. v. Thomas, 68 Fed. 200, Connolly patent rocking-chair infringed; Gaskill v. Myers, 81 Fed. 854, 48 U. S. App. 503, Myers reissue valid and patent infringed by Browne patent.

Distinguished in American Soda-Fountain Co. v. Zwietusch, 75

Nav. Co., 73 Fed. 893, 894, 43 U. S. App. 190, negligence of tug not imputable to passenger, and he can recover against owners of negligent boat; The Glendale, 81 Fed. 633, reversing 77 Fed. 907, Federal court can enforce libel in rem for accident in local waters where State statute creates lien; Laidlaw v. Oregon Ry., etc., Co., 81 Fed. 879, 48 U. S. App. 435, State statutory provisions respecting remedy not applicable to Admiralty Courts; The City of Norwalk, 55 Fed. 103, 104, The Premier, 59 Fed. 800, and The Jane Grey, 95 Fed. 696, all following rule; Atlantic Works v. Tug Glide, 157 Mass. 526, 34 Am. St. Rep. 307, 33 N. E. 163, State court can enforce lien for repairs to tug in home port (dissenting opinion in 157 Mass. 532, 33 N. E. 165); Sweetland v. Chicago, etc., Ry., 117 Mich. 358, 75 N. W. 1077, 43 L. R. A. 578, obiter in dissenting opinion; McRae v. Bowers Dredging Co., 86 Fed. 350, obiter; The Oregon, 73 Fed. 848, 849, personal representatives have lien on vessel for death under Oregon statute. See 34 Am. St. Rep. 309, and 70 Am. St. Rep. 681, notes.

Distinguished in The City of Norwalk, 55 Fed. 111, holding State law giving action for damages occurring upon navigable waters of State does not infringe upon maritime law.

Admiralty rules of Supreme Court are obligatory and have the force of law, p. 342.

Approved in The Anaces, 87 Fed. 567, vessel not liable for inJuries to stevedore caused by negligence of fellow servant.

145 U. S. 349-368, 36 L. 732, PEWABIC MIN. CO. v. MASON. Judicial sales.- Manner and conditions of sale, and refusal of resale are discretionary with equity court, p. 356.

Followed in Magann v. Segal, 92 Fed. 256.

Judicial sales.- Order of confirmation will not be set aside for trifling reasons, p. 356.

Followed in Central Trust Co. v. Sheffield, etc., Ry., 60 Fed. 17. Distinguished in Central Trust Co. v. Street Ry. Co., 96 Iowa, 650, 65 N. W. 984, bidder at foreclosure sale cannot object to resale before confirmation.

Judicial sale being attacked after confirmation, equity will scrutinize acts and omissions of parties, p. 356.

Approved in Spaulding v. O'Connor, 119 Mich. 49, 77 N. W. 324, obiter.

Judicial sale cannot be lacking in due notice if advertised in Boston, New York, etc., and locally, p. 357.

Followed in Mason v. Pewabic Min. Co., 66 Fed. 397, 399, 22 U. S. App. 685.

Corporation, being defunct, its stockholders may bid at sale of its effects, in interest of rival, p. 357.

145 U. S. 368-376

Notes on U. S. Reports.

218

Approved in Mason v. Pewabic Min. Co., 66 Fed. 402, 22 U. &. App. 685, following rule; Opinion of Justices, 66 N. H. 639, 33 Atl. 1082, upon dissolution of corporation stockholders become tenants In common of property.

Corporate stockholders need not first obtain leave of court to bid at sale of concern's effects, p. 361.

Followed in Deck v. Whitman, 96 Fed. 879.

Equity.- Rule allowing month for exceptions to master's report does not require same time for sale by master, p. 363.

Followed in Central Trust Co. v. Sheffield, etc., Ry., 60 Fed. 15. Judicial sale will not be set aside before confirmation for inadequacy unless shocking to conscience, p. 367.

Approved in Fidelity, etc., Safety-Vault Co. v. Mobile St. Ry., 54 Fed. 28, and Fidelity, etc., Deposit Co. v. Roanoke Iron Co., 84 Fed. 755, both following rule; Magann v. Segal, 92 Fed. 255, 258, 259, 262, to warrant resale there must be additional circumstances other than inadequacy of price.

Judicial sale after long litigation should not be postponed by master in response to telegram from stranger, p. 367.

Approved in Dazet v. Landry, 21 Nev. 298, 30 Pac. 1067, sheriff's sale will not be set aside in absence of fraud.

145 U. S. 368–376, 36 L. 738, GALLIHER v. CADWELL. Public lands.- Pre-emption act of 1880 does not include preemptioner's widow or children in its operation, p. 371.

Distinguished in Amacker y. Northern Pac. R. R., 58 Fed. 854, 15 U. S. App. 279, reversing 53 Fed. 55, 57, where pre-emptioner still alive when rights became fixed.

Equity.- Laches is not a question of number of years, but of equity from changed value, etc., p. 371.

Approved in Leggett v. Standard Oil Co., 149 U. S. 294, 37 L. 742, 13 S. Ct. 905, poverty of patentee not excuse for postponing assertion of rights; Johnson v. Atlantic, etc., Transit Co., 156 U. S. 647, 39 L. 566, 15 S. Ct. 531, following rule; Cockrill v. Cockrill, 92 Fed. 817, seven years' delay, after knowledge of fraud, bars suit to set aside deed where grantee made improvements and is infirm; Ryan v. Newark, etc., Mattress Co., 96 Fed. 104, knowledge of officers is knowledge of corporation, and estops it from denying infringement of patent; Church of Christ v. Reorganized Church, 70 Fed. 188, 189, 36 U. S. App. 110, lapse of twenty years after knowledge of trust deed bars suit against claimant deriving title from same grantor; State v. Mayor, etc., 101 Wis. 215, 77 N. W. 169, property-owner estopped from denying validity of sewer assessment after sewer completed; Taylor v. Slater, 21 R. I. 109, 41 Atl. 1003, following rule; Gildersleeve v. New Mexico Min. Co., 161 U.

S. 578, 40 L. 814, 16 S. Ct. 665, reviewing cases; First Nat. Bank v. Nelson, 106 Ala. 542, 18 So. 155, Loomis v. Rosenthal, 34 Or. 601, 57 Pac. 60, Hubbard v. Manhattan Trust Co., 87 Fed. 59, 57 U. S. App. 744, Old Colony Trust Co. v. Dubuque, etc., Traction Co., 89 Fed. 807, and Penn Mutual L. Ins. Co. v. Austin, 168 U. S. 697, 698, 699, 42 L. 631, 18 S. Ct. 228, all following rule; Lemoine v. Dunklin. Co., 51 Fed. 492, 493, 10 U. S. App. 227, delay of twenty-two years after repudiation of trust constitutes laches; Naddo v. Bardon, 51 Fed. 499, 4 U. S. App. 642, facts avoiding laches must be specifically shown; Edison Elec. L. Co. v. Equitable L. Assur. Soc., 55 Fed. 480, patentee, having knowledge of use for eleven years, guilty of laches when he does not object; Wetzel v. Minnesota Ry. Transfer Co., 65 Fed. 26, 29, 27 U. S. App. 594, ignorance due to negligence is laches where party does not seek to establish title to land when facts ascertainable; Lasher v. McCreery, 66 Fed. 841, laches not imputable to party whose right to land not clear until remedy pointed out by Federal court; Imperial Chemical Mfg. Co. v. Stein, 69 Fed. 618, purchaser of patent not guilty of laches because grantor had acquiesced in infringement; Pelzer Mfg. Co. v. Hamburg, etc., F. Ins. Co., 71 Fed. 832, equity corrects mistake in judgment when bill filed as soon as mistake ascertained, though time for new trial or appeal expired; Cockrill v. Cockrill, 79 Fed. 149, grantor cannot attack deed seven years after restoration to competency; Providence, etc., Engine Co. v. Hathaway Mfg. Co., 79 Fed. 517, defense of laches to reform contract based upon substantial change in relation of parties; Miles v. Vivian, 79 Fed. 853, 51 U. S. App. 203, equity will not assist person who has slept on his rights for twenty years; Godkin v. Cohn, 80 Fed. 465, 466, 53 U. S. App. 18, 19, twenty-four years' delay after mistake not laches if plaintiff not put on inquiry; Nantahala Marble, etc., Co. v. Thomas, 76 Fed. 64, where there is mistake in description of land sold, and innocent purchaser buys remainder, delay of twelve years by former is laches; Jones v. Perkins, 76 Fed. 84, negligence in bringing suit, due to mistake of law, is laches; Hamburg, etc., F. Ins. Co. v. Pelzer Mfg. Co., 76 Fed. 483, 42 U. S. App. 123, bill filed immediately upon discovering mistake in verdict, rendered three years previously, valid; O'Brien v. Wheelock, 78 Fed. 677, following rule; Bartlett v. Ambrose, 78 Fed. 841, 42 U. S. App. 381, owner of land, having every reason to believe taxes paid, not guilty of laches, though barred by statute of limitations; Richardson v. Osborne, 82 Fed. 97, sixteen years' acquiescence in infringement of patent is laches, even though co-owners would not prosecute; Duke v. State, 56 Ark. 497, 498, 20 S. W. 603, in absence of prejudice to rights of parties, states right of foreclosure not barred by mere lapse of time; Hagerman v. Bates, 5 Colo. App. 402, 38 Pac. 1104, diligent prosecution, and not mere institution of auit, necessary to relieve party from laches: Grand Lodge v. Gra

145 U. 8. 247-284

Notes on U. S. Reports.

210

improved band-sawmill only combination of elements of other patent, and not invention.

145 U. 8. 247-263, 36 L. 693, EARNSHAW v. CADWALADER. Customs duty on iron ore under act of 1883 is as weighed, irrespective of moisture it contains, p. 259.

Approved in Zante Currants," 73 Fed. 188, 189, tariff laws construed according to commercial use of terms used in them.

Distinguished in Seeberger v. Wright, etc., Mfg. Co., 157 U. 8. 186, 39 L. 667, 15 S. Ct. 585, holding importer entitled to allowance on duties for impurities in flaxseeds.

Customs duties.- Burden is on plaintiff seeking to recover taxes paid, to show his interpretation correct, p. 262.

Approved in United States v. Ranlett, 172 U. S. 146, 19 S. Ct. 118, burden of proof is upon person claiming illegality of duty.

Distinguished in United States v. Wetherell, 65 Fed. 990, 21 U. S. App. 618, generally.

145 U. S. 263-284, 36 L. 699, INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION V. BALTIMORE, ETC., R. R.

Carriers. Before commerce commission, common-law rule that rate must be reasonable and without discrimination, prevailed, p. 275.

Approved in Cincinnati, etc., Ry. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 162 U. S. 197, 40 L. 939, 16 S. Ct. 705, following rule; Interstate Commerce Commission v. Cincinnati, etc., Ry., 167 U. S. 493, 42 L. 251, 17 S. Ct. 898, commission has no power to fix rates; Raleigh, etc., R. R. v. Swanson, 102 Ga. 759, 28 S. E. 603, 39 L. R. A. 277, holding contract between broker and railroad, whereby broker enabled to sell tickets at less than established rate, void. Commerce.-Purpose of interstate commerce commission act, stated, p. 276.

Approved in Interstate Commerce Commission v. Lehigh Val R. R., 74 Fed. 788, and Interstate Commerce Commission v. Cincinnati, etc., Ry., 76 Fed. 185, both following rule; Merchants' Cotton-Press Co. v. North America Ins. Co., 151 U. S. 389, 38 L. 206, 14 S. Ct. 374, allowance of rebates contrary to law does not exempt company from liability on bills of lading; Texas, etc., Ry. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 162 U. S. 204, 232, 40 L. 942, 952, 16 S. Ct. 669, 680, commission is body corporate, with legal capacity to sue or be sued, holding through rates from abroad with steamship connections, not unjust; Interstate Commerce Commission v. Alabama, etc., Ry., 74 Fed. 722, 41 U. S. App. 453, and Detroit, etc., Ry. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 74 Fed. 840, 43 U. S. App. 308, interstate commerce commission has power to regulate, but not construct, reversing Interstate Commerce Com