Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

ing to it in such way as to bring on a peril. The only principle inherent in it is to so act as to enable the other vessel, on whom the duty rests, to adopt with success means of getting out of the way.

It is apparent that, notwithstanding the alleged endeavor of the Jones to keep close-hauled, with the wind S., the Willis, by her starboarding two points, from a course E. by N. to a course N. E. by E., would have gone clear of the Jones, but for the porting of the Jones, as found in the fifth finding of fact, which carried her head around at least five points towards the Willis. The following diagram illustrates the courses and bearings of the two vessels, prior to any starboarding by the Willis and to any porting by the Jones:

•62

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]

It shows the Willis on a course E. by N., and the Jones on a course S. W. by W. 4 W., five points and a half from S. At that time the vessels were three miles apart, or 15 to 18 minutes. When they were two miles apart, or 10 to 12 minutes, after the Willis had twice starboarded, and to N. E. by E., the green light of the Jones bore two points on the starboard bow of the Willis. Then, with any proper falling off of the Jones to hold a S. wind, even to the extent of seven points, or to w. by S., when the Willis was on a course N. E. by E., or two points away from the course of the Jones, there would have been no collision, if the Jones had not ported five points more.

It is contended for the Jones that the Willis should have ported, instead of starboarding. But, as she saw the green light of the Jones on her starboard bow, to have ported would have thrown her across the course of the Jones, as shown by the following diagram:

[subsumed][subsumed][merged small][graphic][subsumed][subsumed]
[ocr errors]

By starboarding and going away from the green light of the Jones, the Willis took a course of safety, and, in the language of the cases, “determined the risk.” Article 12 applies only to cases where the vessels "are crossing so as to involve risk of collision.” Even assuming, on the facts found, that these vessels were crossing, so as to involve risk of collision, when they first sighted each other, the Willis "determined the risk” when she had gone off two points by starboarding, and brought green light to green light. This is the point in judgment in The Earl of Elgin, L. R. 4 P. C. App. 1. But it is urged for the Jones that the porting mentioned in the fifth finding was a porting in extremis, and therefore excusable. The finding is not to that effect. The changes made by the Willis are found to have been proper and were proper. This being so, no fault of the Willis induced the final act of

porting by the Jones. To be an excusable mistake in extremis, a pardonable maneuver, though contributing to or inducing a collision, when the maneuver would have been faulty if not excusable, it must be one produced by fault or mismanagement in the other vessel. New York & Liverpool U. 8. Mail s. Co. v. Rumball, 21 How. 372, 383; The Nichols, 7 Wall. 656, 666; The Carroll, 8 Wall. 302, 305; The Dexter, 23 Wall. 69, 76; The Bywell Castle, L. R. 4 Prob. Div. 219. The last case is a well-considered judgment by Lords Justices JAMES, BRETT, and COTTON, in the court of appeal, and the rule there formulated is that “where one ship has, by wrong inaneuvers, placed another ship in a position of extreme danger, that other ship will not be held to blame if she has done something wrong, and has not been maneuvered with perfect skill and presence of mind.”

On the whole case we are of opinion that the decree of the circuit court must be affirmed, but without interest on the amount of that decree.

(112 U. S. 624) UNION METALLIO CARTRIDGE CO. 0. UNITED STATES CARTRIDGE Co.1 UNITED STATES CARTRIDGE Co. 0. UNION METALLIC CARTRIDGE Co.1

(December 22, 1884.) 1. PATENTS FOR INVENTIONS – MACHINE FOR MAKING PERCUSSION CARTRIDGE CASES –

Keissu FS 1,948, 1,949.

Letters patent No. 27,094 were issued to Ethan Allen, February 14, 1860, for 14 years, for an “improvement in machine for making percussion cartridge cases.' The patent was reissued in two divisions, No. 1,948 and No. 1,949, May 9, 1865. No. 1,948 en braced that part of the invention which concerned the mechanism for striking up the hollow rim at one stroke. The original patent and drawings showed such mechanism to be a moving die and a fixed bunter. In No. 1,948 the description was altered so as to state that the bunter might be carried against the die, and its two claims each contained the words substantially as described.", An extension of No. 1,948 having been applied for, it was opposed, on the ground that such arrangement of a fixed die and a moving bunter was a new invention interpolated into the reissue. The commissioner of patents so held, and required such new matter to be disclaimed, as a condition precedent to the extension. A dig. claimer was filed, disclaiming the movable bunter as of the invention of Allen, No. 1,918 was then extended by a certificate, which stated that a disclaimer bad been filed to that part of the invention embraced in such new matter. In a suit in equity, afterwards brought on No. 1,918, against machines having a fixed die and a moving bunter, for infringements committed both before and after the extension, held, that the effect of the disclaimer was to exclude those machines from the scope of any claim in No.1,948, without reference to the question whether they contained

mechanical equivalents for the moving die and the fixed bunter. 2. SAME-DISCLAIMER.

Allen had not, before the granting of the original patent, made any machine in which the die was fixed and the bunter movable; and it was never lawful to cover, by the claims of a reissue, an improvement made after the granting of the original

patent. 3. SAME-ACTS OF JULY 8, 1870, CH. 230, & 54.

Under section 54 of the act of July 8, 1870, c. 230, (16 st. 205,) a disclaimer could be made only by a patentee who had claimed more than that of which he was the original or first inventor or discoverer, and he could make a disclaimer only of such parts of the thing patented as he should not choose to claim or hold by virtue

of the patent. 1. SAME-REISE, WHEN NECESSARY.

In so disclaiming or limiting a claim, descriptive matter on which the disclaimed claim was based might be erased; but if there was merely a defective or insufficient description, the only mode of correcting it was by a reissue. The decision in Leg

gett v. Avery, 101 U. 8. 256, cited and applied. 6. SAME-EXTENSION.

An acquiescence and disclaimer on a decision requiring the disclaimer as a condition precedent to an extension, are as operative to prevent the afterwards insisting on a recovery on the invention disclaimed, as to prevent a subsequent reissue to claim what was so disclaimed.

1S. C. 7 Fed Rep. 344, and 8 Fed. Rep. 446.

626

Appeals from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Mas. sachusetts.

Causten Browne and Edmund Wetmore, for Union Metallic Cartridge Co. B. F. Butler and F. P. Fish, for United States Cartridge Co.

BLATCHFORD, J. Letters patent of the United States, No. 27,094, were issued to Ethan Allen, February 14, 1860, for 14 years, for an “improvement in machine for making percussion cartridge cases.” A reissue of this patent was granted, in two divisions, No. 1,948 and No. 1,949, May 9, 1865, the application for the reissue having been filed April 7, 1865. The specification of No. 27,094 set forth two improvements: (i) An arrangement or mechan. ism to trim the open end of the case of the cap-cartridge, to make the articles all alike and true; (2) striking up or forming the swelled end to form the recess for the priming, as shown at Z, from that of Y, at one stroke, in distinction from spinning them. There were two claims in No. 27,094: (1) The trimming mechanism; (2) striking or forming the hollow rim at one stroke or operation. In reissuing the patent, the trimming mechanism was made the subject of No. 1,949, and the other improvement, (the subject-inatter of claim 2 of No. 27,094,) was made the subject of No. 1,948. This suit is brought for the infringement of No. 1,948 alone. So much of the specification and claims of No. 27,094 as relates to the subject of No. 1,948, is copied below on the left hand, and the specification and claims of No. 1,948 are copied below on the right hand, the parts of each not found in the other being in italic: Original. No. 27,094.

Reissue. No. 1,948. “Be it known that I, Ethan Allen, “Be it known that I, Ethan Allen, of the city and county of Worcester, of the city and county of Worcester, state of Massachusetts, have invented and state of Massachusetts, have in. certain new and useful improvements vented certain new and useful im. in machinery for making loaded caps provements in machinery for making or cap-cartridges; and I hereby do * loaded caps or cap-cartridges; and I clare the following to be a full, clear, bereby declare the following to be a and exact description of the construc- full, clear, and exact description of tion and operation of the same, ref- the construction and operation of the erence being had to the accompany- same, reference being had to the acing drawings, in which Fig. 1 is a companying drawings, in which Fig. top view or plan, and Fig. 2 a side 1 is a top view or plan, and Fig. 2 is view; the same letters indicating the a side view, and pertains to a masame parts in both.

chine which is the subject of another

reissue of these letters patent. “My improvements relate to the “My improvements relate to the construction or formation of the case construction or formation of the case of the cap cartridge in the form shown of a metallic cartridge, and consist in at 2, or nearly so, and consist *

an arrangement of mechanism for in striking up or forming the swelled forming or striking up the swelled end to form the recess for the prim- end to form the recess for the priming, as shown at Z, from that of Y, ing, as shown at Z, from that of Y, at at one stroke, in distinction from one stroke or operation, in distincspinning them, as has heretofore been tion from spinning them, as has heredone.

tofore been done. “The construction of my improve- “The construction of my improve ments, as shown in the drawings, is ments, as shown in the drawings, is as follows: J is the driving pulley to as follows: K is the base of the mareceive motion, and its shaft is pro- chine; J, the driving pulley, which is vided with cranks or eccentrics at each provided with a crank or eccentric, to end, to which the rods, H and H', which the rod, H', is connected; F is connect, the shaft turning in suitable a slide receiving motion by H', and bearings in the frame or base, K. moving in ways, G, G, carrying the

a

[ocr errors]

F is a slide receiving mo- mandrel, B, which passes through the tion by H', and moving in the ways, die, D; the die, D, has a spring to G, G, carrying the mandrel, B, which keep or move it back towards F, and passes through the movable die, D, a hopper-like opening in the upper which has a spring to keep or move side to facilitate placing the case, A, it back towards F, and an enlarge- to be taken by B and carried into ment in its center, to facilitate plac- the die, D. The mandrel, B, has a ing the case, A', to be taken by B. shoulder, a sufficient distance from The end of D, next to E, has a hole the end, to allow it to enter the car. fitting on the outside of the case, A. tridge shell just the right distance, E is a die with an adjusting screw. and leave enough metal to be pulled Y is a case as it comes from the press, into the head of the cartridge. The and Z shows the same after being die, D, is just the right size to be filled trimmed and set; or, in other words, by the shell, A, when pressed into it gone through the followiny operation by the punch or mandrel, B. E is a to-wit:

die with an adjustable screw, and the case may be carried against it to form the head or rim, or that may be car. ried against the die, D, by similar mechanism to F and H'; Z is a case or shell after being headed, forming the cavity for the fulminating pow

der. "It” (the case or shell) "is placed The operation is as follows, viz., in D or A' to be taken on B and carried motion, being given to pulley, J, és forward until its end projects (sutfi- communicated through H' to Fand B, ciently to form its rim) out of D, and the cases or shells are placed in when F, meeting D, carries it with the recess or in an inclined tube, which A in that position up against E, which feeds them to the punch, B. The flattens the end, and forms the hol. shell is taken on the punch, B, and low rim, as shown in section at Z, carried through the die, D, until the Fig. 2; and the motion of J continu- end projects sufficiently to form its ing, the parts all return to their re- rim, when F, meeting D, carries it spective places, ready for another, with A in that position up against E, . which, during the same time, has which flattens the end and forms the been prepared, as before described; hollow rim, as shown in section at Z, the finished case dropping between Fig. 2; and, the motion of J contin. the dies, D and E, or, if sticking in uing, the parts all return to their reD, is punched out by the first motion spective places, ready for another of the next one and falls out of its shell, which, during the same time, way.

has been placed in position, as before Having thus fully described my described, and the punch, B, taking invention, what I claim therein as on another shell, is carried into the nero and desire to secure by letters die, D, and presses out the one before patent is *

headed, which drops between the dies, D and E, when the operation is re

peated as before. Second. I claim striking or form- I claim the mandrel which carries ing the hollow rim at one stroke or the cartridge shell, in combination operation, as above set forth and do with the die, D, which admits the scribed."

same, and against which the closed end of the cartridge shell is headed, substantially as described.

"Second. I claim the die, D, con structed and operating for the heading of cartridge shells, substantially as described."

The following are the drawings of the original and of the reissne:

* 629

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

*630

The Allen machine, as organized for heading, and making a flange apon, cartridge shells, consists mainly of a mandrel, a die, and a bunter, which are combined together in order to operate. The mandrel is a rod with a shoulder upon it, the rod beyond the shoulder being of such diameter as to enter the cartridge shell which is to be headed with a pretty close fit, and the shoulder being at right angles to the rod, and formed to support the edge of the shell at the open end of the cartridge during the operation of heading. The die is a block of metal with a hole in it, of just the size of the outside of the shell, and the axes of the die and mandrel are in the same line. The bunter is a piece of metal so located that it is opposite one end of the die. The machine is also provided with a gutter, which is a prolongation of the hole in the die, but open on top, into which shells are to be introduced prior to being acted upon by the machine. When an unheaded shell is placed in this gutter, with the mandrel as far retracted from the die as possible, the mandrel advances, inserts itself into the shell, and shoves the shell into the die with its closed end projecting beyond the die a sufficient distance to afford metal from which the flange may be formed. In this position the outside of the shell is supported by the die, the inside of the shell by the mandrel, and the edges at the open end of the shell by the shoulder on the mandrel. The die, mandrel, and shell then advance together, and the closed end of the shell is forced against the bunter, the shell being thus squeezed down so as to form the flange of the cartridge. The mandrel then retreats, and, as it retreats, slips out of the shell, leaving the headed shell in the die, and, when the mandrel is fully out of the shell, the die is in its old position. The shell can not follow the mandrel, owing to the fact that it is now headed, and that its head is on that side of the die which is furthest from the mandrel. After the mandrel has retreated sufficiently far from that end of the die which is nearest the mandrel, a second unflanged shell may be placed in the gutter. The mandrel then ad

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »