Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/99

 EENEDICT & BUBNHAM MANUF O CD. V, HOLLISTEE. ^& �or o'her suitable material, and havinga removable slip ôf metal or other material, displaying thereon a seriai number or other specifie identifying mark corresponding with a similar mark upon the stub, and bo attached that the removal of such slip must mutilate or destroy the stamp." The stamps which were Bold and used prior to the date of this bill and since the date of said letters patent, by the defendant, as a coUectôr of internai revenue iç the state of Connecticut, and which were furnished to him by the commissioner of internai revenue for the purpose of being affixed to packages of distilled spirits to denote the payment of tax thereon, are made as follows : The body of the stamp is composed of a piece of paper of one thickuess, upon which is impressed the printed matter of the stamp. A strip of blank paper is attached to the outside edges of the back of the body of the stamp. This strip is about one-third of the Icngth of the body of the stamp, and is of the sama' width. When the stamp is to be used it is placed upon that part of the head of a barrel which hae been previously cov- ered with paste, is secured to the barrel' by tacks, is var- nished, and eancelled by a stencil plate. "When the barrel goes from the distiller or owner to the rectifier, the portion over the. blank .strip, and which is not attached to the barrel in conaequence of the interveh'tion of the strip; is eut ont and is preserved by the revenue ofiicer. This portion bas upon its' face identifying marks corresponding with similar marks upon the stub. It is eut out so that the evidence that the tax upon the contents of the barrel bas been paid may be preserved, and so that the stamp may be etfectually destroyed and be rendered incapable of subsequent use upon another package. This kind of stamp has been used by the internai revenue bureau since January, 1876, and has been an effiea- cious preventive of fraud. The stamps previously in use did not accomplish this most important resuit. �The principal question in the case is that of infringement. The objects of the two devices are the same. Upon a narrow construction of the specification and claim, the plain- tiiï's stamp is of a single thickuess of papor gummed upon the back, except as to the part which is to be tom or eut out. ����