Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/422

 414 FEDERAL REPORTER. �tically useful clinker cleaning passage, nor one operating as Thatcher's does. The passage was so narrow at its inner end, in proportion to the diameter of the grate, as to require ail the clinkers on the grate surface which could be reached to be drawn to such narrow aperture, and thus a large part of the clinkers which could be reached would be drawn through, and carry along with them the live coals remaining in the parts previously cleaned of clinkers. This difficulty is obvi- ated in Thatcher's arrangement by the relation which the sizo of the inner end of the passage bears to the size of the grate. Moreover, in the "Old Philadelphia Heater" the sides of the fire-pot were nearly at right angles to the opening, and this made it impossible to reach considerable portions of the grate surface. The structure had no downward passage. �The Spear car-heater does not contain Thatcher's inven- tions. �The John P. Hayes patent, of Jnne 22, 1858, is adduced. The upwardly projecting studs on the grate prevented Hayes' arrangement from operating like Thatcher's, and there was no downward passage leading out of a clinker cleaning pas- sage. The same remarks apply to "defendants' exhibit, J. P. Hayes' heater," and to "complainant's exhibit, New Jersey representation of Hayes' heater." �The Moore patent of May 22, 1866, bas no bearing on the case. �The patent to James Morrison, Jr., of February 21, 1865, is for a stove, not a furnace, The store has near its base an opening from the outside, on a level with the grate, to and into the fire-pot, for the purpose of raking out the clinkers and dropping them into the ash pit over the edge of a projec- tion from the grate. The clinker cleaning passage does not extend through a chamber containing hot air, as in Thatcher's arrangement. Nor is the downward passage wholly within the clinker cleaning passage, as in Thatcher's structure, but, on the contrary, it is wholly outside of the clinker cleaning passage. The Morrison model, if difïering from the descrip- tion and drawings of the patent, cannot be regarded to afïect Thatcher's patent. The Thatcher patent requires that the ��� �