Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 6.djvu/401

 TALE LOCK MANUF'g CO. ». NORWICH NAT. BANK. 389 �office, and therefore, so far as this mechanical combination is coneemed, the latcbing gear and the tripping mechanism are a mechanical equivalent for the action of the cam upon the dog. Foster v. Moore, 1 Curtis, 291. �The point is made in the New Haven Bank case that the defendants are not infringers because they are mere users of a Chinnock lock, and, confessedly, have so used it heretofore ; that it bas always had the revolving pin whicb trips the latch lever so adjusted, with reference to the hours of closing the safe, as to aot upon such lever at a time prier to the hour when, by the rules and custom of the bank, the door of the safe is closed. The defendants use the lock, but do not use it as a subsequent locker. The lock bas the capacity of be- ing 80 used, and the defendants have the capacity so to use it. The lock is used as an automatic locker at a predetermined hour, for the reason which bas been heretofore given. �In the specification of the Stockwell patent. No. 173,366, the patentee says: "Heretofore time locks have been con- structed or arranged so as to allow the person who performed the winding of the clocks free aceessalso to the adjusting devices, by whicb the hours of locking or uniocking are regu- lated and controlled. This construction involves a source of inseourity in affording to the said person, charged with the duty of winding, facilities for the accidentai or fraudulent alteration of the adjusting device. My invention obviates this source of inseourity by isolating the adjusting devices from the winding devices, and by excluding from the adjust- ing devices the person who winds the clocks, except when he is allowed the use of the key to the supplemental lock by which the adjusting devices are secured. * * * The cover. A', is hinged at a' to the case, and is secured by a sup- plementary lock, a', and is provided with apertures, JJ, (shown by dotted ciroles over the winding posts,) through which aper- tures the clocks may be wound." �The first claim, which is the only one said to have been infringed, is as follows : "In combination with the case of a chronometric lock, having a lid or door for covering the de- vices which control the hours of locking and unlocking, one ��� �