CITY OF ST. LOUIS.
ently, thoroughly prepared and presented. This, although quite frequently thought by losing parties to be desirable, is not by any rule of law or practice allowable. The motion must be denied.
RAYMOND v. SINGER MANUF'G Co. and others.
(Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts. April 18,1882.)
Where the evidence shows that the claim was an invention anticipated, the bill alleging the infringcment will be dismIssed.
In Equity. T. W. Clarke, for complainant. Browne, Holmes tt Browne, for defendants. LOWELL, C. J. The plaintiff is the owner of patent No. 101,140, granted to Lawyer & Gasten, March 22, 1870, for an improvement in sewing machines, and alleges an infringement by the defendants of the second claim of the patent, relating to a spring catch for keeping the shuttle in place. After careful and repeated examinations of the evidence, I think the defendants have· proved that this part of the invention was anticipated by James Bolton, in 1867, as alleged in the amended answer. Bill dismissed.
HAYWARD and another v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS and another.(Circuit Court, E. D. Missouri. April 14, 1882.)
LETTERS PATENT-ExTENDED TERM-STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.
Where suit was brought for an infringement of reissued letters patent, reissued in 1868, and a plea of the statute of limitations was interposcd, held, (1) that the state statute did not apply; (2) that section 55 of the act of JulyS, 1870, had not been repealed, so a8 to either party to the case from the federal limitation of six years after the expiration of the extended term.
Demurrer to the plea of the statute of limitations. This is a suit for an infringement of letters patent of the United States, originally
.Reported by B. F. Rex, Esq., of the St. Louis bar.
FEDERAL REPORTER. granted in the year 1854, and reissued for an extended term of seven years in 1868. The petition alleges that the defendants "infringed upon the exclusive rights and privileges intended to be secured to plaintiffs by the reissued letters patent," but does not state when said rights and privileges were infringed. The board of president and directors of the St. Louis public schools (one of the defelldants) filed a separate anAwer containing-First, a general denial; and, second, a plea that the alleged cause of action set forth in the petition did not accrue to the plaintiffs within five years next before the commencement of the suit. D. M. Spier, Jr.· and O. B. Sansttm, for plaintiff. Leo Rassieur, for the board of president and directors of the St. LOUIS public schools.. TREAT, D. J. The defendant pleads the statute of the state which requires suit to be brought within five years from date of cause of action accrued. The state statute does not apply, inasmuch as congresshaa fixed the date in .patent cases whereof the federal government haa exclujurisdiction. It is contended that the congressional limitation has been repealed.. If so, no limitation would prevail, except as by the state statute. Without repealir.J what has been so ably ered by other United States courts, it is held that the federal statute in this respect has not been repealed so as to relieveeith.er of the pal"ties to this case from the feder'11 limitation of six years. The plea, therefore, is bad, but the petition is very indefinite. As the case is presented, the defendants, if they desire to set up that the claim is barred by the federal statute, must aver the period of six instead of five years. ' . Demurrer is sustained.·
"'A'ct,ofJmly 8; 1870, § 55; Rev. St. § 5599; Sayles v. Louis1Jille Oity,il. 00. 9 FED. REP. 512; Sayles v.L. & M. S. R. 00. Ill. 515; Sayles v.J)ubuque & S. O. R. Co. Id. 516. '
GAZELLE. (Two Cases.)
April 12, 1882.)
(District Oourt, D. Maryland.
Where a vessel is chartered for a voyage to a safe Norwegian or Danish port, as ordered on signing bills of lading, or as near thereunto as she can safety get, and always lay and discharge afloat, lighterage, if any, to be at the expense and risk of the cargo, Md, that the vessel could not be ordered to Aalborg, a Danish port, into which a vessel of her towage could never get by reason of her draught of water, and where she would have to discharge the whole of her cargo into lighters two miles out in the open water of the Kattegat, at a distance of over 17 miles from the port, and at an anchorage proved not to be reasonably safe for that purpose. Held, that the fact being that the vessel could not get into the port, and that there was no anchorage near and customarily used in connection with it, where she could safely Jay and discharge. it the duty of the master to refuse to sign bills of lading purporting that he was going to deliver the cargo there, even with the clause inserted, C, as near the vessel can safelv e:et, and always lay and discharge afloat."
4. Stirling, Jr., for own4lrs of the ship. 8. T. Wallis and H. O.
Kennard, for owners of cargQ. MORRIS, D. J. On June 16, 1881, the Norwegian bark Gazelle, 571 tons, being then in the PQrt of Baltimore, was chartered by ma!:!ter, under the usual grain and petroleum charter used in the At· lalltic ports Qf the United States,.. tQ Messrs. Meisner, Ackerman' & Co., Qf New YQrk, for a voyage from the pQrt Qf BaltimQre tQ "a safe; direct Norwegian or Danish PQrt, as ordered on signing bills of li\ding, or as near thereunto as she can safely get, and always lay arid charge afloat." The charterers agreed tQ furnish a full cargo of fined petroleum in custQmary barrels, arid to. pay freight at the rate Qf three !lhillings three pence per: Qarrel. The lay days in Baltimore' 'Vl3re to expire July 6th, and for discharging' at port Qfdischarge cua. tomary dispatch. Demurrage to be at the rate of 11· lillg per day. 'rhe cargQ tQ be received and delivered along.side the vessel within reach Qf her tackles. Lighterage, if any, always tQ 'be th(l risk and expense Qf the cargo. The cargQ, cQnsisting Qf 3,131 barrels Qf refined petroleum, was put on board by·the and' Oil July 6th they tendered to the master of the Gazelle bills of lading, ordering the vessel tQ the port of Aalborg, on the eastern cMst of Denmark. The master refused to sign the bills Qf lading, except with protest as tQ the pQrt nQted Qnthem, upon the ground that AalbQrg was a port intQ which, Qn accountQf shallow water on the bar,uo