Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 6.djvu/638

 626 FEDEBAIi REPORTEE. �in September, 1876, oi the collar to which be says he refers. But no original collar is produced. It does not appear that any were sold in the finished state, or how they answered the purpose aimed at. Exhibit No. 4 and Exhibit No. 19 are are produced as showing the collar referred to. The fore- woman of Crissey's factory in 1875, having charge of the se-w- ing, and turning and binding of the collars, and malcing but- ton-holes in them, says that she saw no collar there like either Exhibit, in 1875 or 1876 or 1877. The woman who says she eut ail the button-holes in special-order collars, made in CrisBey's factory in 1875 and 1876, says she never saw such collars as Exhibit No. 4 and Exhibit No. 19 there, and never eut button-holes there placed like the button-holes in those Exliibits. In view of the foregoing testimony, and of the evi- dence that this cut-down four-in-hand collar, whatever it was, attracted no attention in the trade so as to make any demand' for it, and of the great demand that at once arose for the Wilson collar when it became known, it must be held that it is not established that the Wilson collar is anticipated by anything done by Merwin or by Crissey, or that the defend- ants' collars are shown to have existed in any collar got up by Merwin or by Crissey. I see no sufficient evidence that a collar like No. 18 anticipates the Wilson collar. �As to Exhibit No. 17, the Herald collar eut down by Town- send, the evidence is not satisf actory that this identical Collar Nb. 17 was not eut down af ter Wilson made bis invention. No collar eut down by Townsend except No. 17 is produced. As to the others which Townsend eut down ail rests in memory. The exact shape and fit and operation of them cannot be told. He merely says he eut them out in the back to lower them, or had them eut out. He evidently regarded them as experi- mental, for he says he did not wear them long, and got col- lars of another style. They suggested to no one the idea of maMng any like them for sale. The case is not like that of Coffinv. Ogden, 18 Wall. 120, where Erbe regarded his lock as a perfected and complete invention; It is controlled by ^he principles which goyerned in G ayktr v. Wilder^ 10 How. ��� �