Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/924

 COES V. THE C0LLIN8 CO. 909 �or displace it, thus rendering the whole wrench useless." The claira in that patent atates that the arrangement relieves the ferrulefrom all strain, while the rosette is retained in the same relative position aa respects the handle of the wrench. The reissue states that the nature of the invention relates to a mode of constructing the Coes wrench patentod in 1841 in such a manner that the handle shall be relieved from the back-thrust of the screw, the arrangement of the wrench of 1841 being that the rosette pressed against the ferrule, (the ferrule b being the plate and ferrule together,) and the ferrule against the front end of the handle, whereby the handle was often split and broken. It is not said, in the reissue, that the rosette continues to maintain always the same position relatively to the handle, but that is neces- sarily implied in speaking of the wrench improved upon as the Coes wrench patented in 1841, and is a necessary resuit of what is de- scribed in the text and shown in the drawings. The reissue also states that the advantage of the improvement is that the pressure which would otherwise come upon the handle is transferred to the shank of the wrench. �In the monkey-wrenches used before the Coes patent of 1841, a screw nut on the body of the main bar moved the movable jaw, a screw being eut on the body of the main bar, as shown in figure 2 of the Coes patent of 1841. In that form the direct linear or col- umnal strength of the main bar was availed of to resist the back- thrust. When the Coes improvement of 1841 was introduced that advantage was thrown away. The improvement of Taft in 1863 was an effort to restore that advantage and yet retain the Coes improve- ment of 1841. In the defendant's wrench the Coes wrench of 1841 is taken, with its main bar, fiied jaw, adjustable jaw, attachment thereto, screw, rosette, bearing, and plate. But underneath the plate a screw nut is put on the extension of the main bar, a screw thread being eut in the extension, and this screw nut is screwed up tightly against the bottom of the plate so that the back-thrust cornes against the extension at the screw thread. The wooden handle is slipped over the end of the extension, and is held up against the bottom of the said screw nut by a screw nut at the extreme end of the exten- sion below the handle. The rosette is the same as the Coes rosette of 1841, and always maintains the same position relatively to the handle. �The first claim of the reissue, which is the only claim alleged to have been infringed, is a claim to "an improved Coes wrench so con- ��� �