New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-09-11
IA W LNI'ELLIGENCE.
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT-Sept. i0-Before
Chief Justice NELSON.

Chief Justice NELSON.
John NJ Carr "a. John Rice.
This suit was brought by the plaintiff, assignee o.
sachar and James Munro ne enee Of and useful
improvement machinery for separating -four bran
Feb r. 1919 reissucd March 49, 1855 The machine
sisted Of three essential pas; An exterior cylindrical case
Within this Cylindrical bolt made of wire boiling cloth
and revolyng cylinder There il also
topic the cylindrical car and hole through for the shaft
Of tie revolving cylinder sl'o bottom which rest. the
bolt and with hoe for the other end Of the
shaft There also conductors for the dcharg of the -four
end bran.
tom when used III connection WIN upright stationary Cor reyC'
ing) bo for Touring The opening for The admission
Of air through the bottom into the bolt
O. The upright stationery bolt. bolt and
and OF either Is ten OF their equivalents TO produce Ike re-
suits in the Touring process and the Of the revolving dis
which the materials distributed secured and the -four blown
through The ms shes Of the boiling cloth.
ponen parts Of the branduster sina but lui; their
claims certain Of the several pants making the
The FIRST claim words is for the combination Of the
bottom with the bolt for the specified The ,econd IS for the
combination Of the opening the bottom for the admission Of
air and the bran spout, with the bottom itself
The third claim y good for nothing on account Of u. nnoer
tsiny Noting is claimed asogtgys, the Whole Ola n the
combined (which D. with the top or in combination WIN claims
!, and 4, either Of them, or their equivalent
voyng cylinder Of heaters and fans Now the patentees
the inventors Of This cylinder Of bateT matter o. law
This they venred claim. and it difficult to
how with the implied admission they not they claim
an exclusive night the use oft.
The frst and second claims therefore judEmen
the only that be upheld the Others bad the
face Of thcm respects these claims the defendant
is chsrgcabe with infringement No such combination
parts found in his bsnduster The elements OF his comb
nation are different He revolving bolt and differently
constructed bottom Bo'h the plaintiff and defendants ma
in 1876 and the defendants different from the plaintiff
New trial granted, costs o sbide
APPEAL IN ADMIRALTY-coLLIsIoN-
ship Wisconsin and the steam-us Hector
This is a ease Of collision that occurred IN October
1855 upon the East River the foot of Dover street agree
damages the lighter and her But cannot agree
that the ship in tow Is also responsible she was ashed iImy to
the the sboard side and under e exclusive command
and direction Of the master Of that vessel and do not see upon
principle her should be- msde liable for the misnan'
in the nayifaon Of the tug more than the
Of board the codne vessel The case IL diherent
where the tug under the commend OF the master OF the tow
in that 1t is but the substitution OF steam power Tor a IN
the navigation Of the vessel by the master bad occasion to ek
though The point WI not directly involved the decision
Decree below reversed the ship and affirmed q the tug
SUPREME COURT.-CHAsBERs-sEPr lO-Before Judge
DAVIES.
CASE OF cANcEMr-ANoTHER BILL FOR THE COUNTY.
This morning, Cancems counsel applied to the
Court for an order directing the record their appeal
in this to be printed at the expense of the county
Mr. McKeon contepded that there no authority
for such order.
Mr. Ashmead said that what they asked was Incl.
dental to provisions Of the Constitution, giving the
prisoner the right to process and appeal lie also re-
ierred to the fact of himself and MIR. Bankman con-
ductng inns case WITHOUT lee UT
for over year, and submitted that it would be nm
charitable to ask of them to pay over slOO TO PRINT
the record If the expense of printing was too great,
then LET them have order directing ten copies to be
made in the Comfy Clerks office, and when the case
came up before the Court of Appeals the absence OF
/ printed copies could be explained.
Mr.. Mckeon said that the prisoner had already re.
ceived great favors. The printing of his cases and
points had been paid by the county on his appeal to
| the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals on his
second trial. The Distrct-Attoney had printed, al
his own risk of being allowed the sum by the super.
visors the case for the Supreme Court the third
trial 1t would be exceedingly improper precedent
to facilitate appeals in cases to the Court 81 Appeals
| after Judgment by the Supreme Court at General
| Term affirming the verdict of the jury on the third
trial.
The Court had no power TO impose the expense Of
such appeal ON the county. If 1t We're done IN this
case il could be done in every of similar charac-
ter If the District Attorney consented to such n
course st the Supervisors and the Controller could
reject il and refuse Ia pay. The Court aud District
Attorney could not exercise their charitable feelings
at the expense of the county
Judge Davies took the papers reserving bis de-
oision.