Statement of the case.

tion B will actually stand off from the portion A, a distance corresponding somewhat to the space shown between the lines b y1 and b X1, and varying only with the extent of curvature of said folding or turn-over line.

"This space between the two portions, A B, when the folding over is done, is available for a neck-tie, if one be worn; but the space itself prevents the two parts from pressing against each other, which pressing tends to wrinkle one or the other. d, e, and f, represent the button-holes, which are punched in the material in the usual way.

"The drawings are about the size of a medium collar, and the greatest distance from the straight line Y to the curved line is about one-fourth of an inch; it may, however, be more or less, and still accomplish the object required. Collars thus constructed never wrinkle nor pucker, and may even be rolled up into a circle of not more than an inch or so in diameter (as is often convenient for transportation) without the slightest injury; as the difference in length of the outer and inner portions, and the fact that the outer portion stands off from the inner portion so as to leave clear space between them, admits of such rolling.

"Having thus fully described my invention, what I claim therein as new and desire to secure by letters-patent is―

"First. The turning over of a paper or a paper and cloth collar by a defined line, whether pressed into the material by a die or pointed instrument, or by bending it over the edge of a pattern or block of the proper curve or line, substantially as described.

"I also claim turning the part B, of a paper or a paper and cloth collar, over on to or towards the part A, in a curved or

Statement of the case.

angular line instead of a straight line, substantially as and for the purpose described.

"I also claim so turning over the part B, on to or towards the part A, in the manner above described, as that a space shall be left between the two parts, for the purpose and substantially in the manner herein described."

As to the first of these claims-which covers a defined line, whether straight or curved, made by the means iudicated, either pressing a die or pointed instrument into the material to make the line, or making the line by bending the material over the edge of a pattern or block representing the desired line-the testimony of several witnesses showed,

That anterior to the date of the patent, paper envelopes, the tops and bottoms of paper boxes, and similar articles requiring folds, were shaped or folded by placing the material upon a lead or other soft platten, and making the impression of the required shape or fold, by bringing down upon it a steel "knife" and applying pressure, thus producing an indented or defined line, which the fold must follow.

That the same method was also employed in paper-folding machinery, and the folding and cutting of writing-papers.

That the method so employed for marking the folds of envelopes was the same as that subsequently employed by an Italian named Karcheski, to make the folds of paper collars.

That linen collars, cut with band and top all in one, without seam where the band joins the top, were folded by means of an indented line, anterior to the patent.

That these collars were turned down or folded in the process of ironing: "ironed on blocks with a groove in the block, and the iron passing in this groove, the collar would receive the indenture to turn down on."

It was also proved that before the patent, paper collars and paper and cloth collars had been turned over by such defined line pressed into the material, or by bending over the edge of a block or former.

Argument for the appellant.-The Evans patent.

As to the second claim which covered the turning over of the collar in a curved or angular line, whether by a defined line or not, and by whatever means, it was proved, and indeed was not denied, that linen collars had, from a date long anterior to Gray's alleged invention, been turned over, on a curved instead of a straight line, and that they had been so turned over "substantially for the purpose described" in the patent, viz., to avoid wrinkling or puckering, and to afford a space for the cravat.

It was shown that a common way of turning down linen collars on such curved line, and a way familiar to all who wear those collars, is to follow the line of the seam where the band joins the top. The band being commonly cut upon an arch or curve upon the upper side, the seam consequently makes a curved line, which is followed as a gauge in making the fold.

It is also proved by the witnesses, that paper collars had, before Gray's application, been turned or folded upon a curve by methods the same as that described by Gray.

The third claim was considered by the witnesses the same as the second; and their testimony applied to it accordingly. The court below found,

I. That Evans's reissue was void as not being for the same invention as the original. It also considered that Evans was not the inventor of the product patented by him. II. That Gray's reissue was also void; his invention having been anticipated.

From a decree accordingly this appeal was taken.

Mr. C. A. Seward (with whom was Mr. C. C. Morgan), for the appellant:

I. As to the EVANS patent.

We assume, for the reason that it was the identical paper in the form of a collar that was embraced in both the original and in the reissued patents-that there was no such plain repugnancy between the original and the reissue as to make it necessary to be held, as matter of legal construction, that

Argument for the appellant.—The Evans patent.

the new patent was not for the same invention as that embraced and secured in the original invention. With this assumption, one rightly made we submit-we safely argue— 1st. That the collar-paper was a new and patentable invention.

2d. That Evans was the person who in truth invented it. 1st. No such paper as collar-paper had ever been thought of before the time when it was now thought of.

That paper resembled no paper ever previously made. It was not like bauk-note or cartridge-paper, bond-paper, or parchment-paper, or Bristol boards, or any other long-fibre paper. It was a union of the known elements of paper, a treatment of them by a new combination of old processes, and a giving to them when united a new application, resulting in the production for the first time of a paper-as we call it, though it might have been called by any new namewhich could be practically and successfully used in the manufacture of collars, and which was not applicable to any other use to which paper is applied. It was "a new combination of old materials constituting a new result or production," and so within the Lord Chief Justice Abbot's definition,* a new and useful "composition of matter, having qualities possessed by no other known material," and so within the definition of Grier, J.,† and of other judges.‡

Indeed it is proved by the evidence that so much was this "collar-paper" an invention-such "a marvel" was it in paper-making-that it opened at once a new field for inventive effort, by directing attention to the practicability of making papers of such strength, thickness, and pliability as would render them suitable for uses radically different from any to which paper had been formerly applied. The invention of collar-paper, we may here mention, in illustration of this statement and as a fact which will hardly be disputed by the candid counsel opposing, was followed by the inven

* Quoted in Curtis on Patents, § 27, note 2.

† Goodyear v. The Rubber Company, 2 Wallace, Jr., 356.

See Many v. Jagger, 1 Blatchford, 372; Muntz v. Foster, 2 Webster's Patent Cases, 96.

Argument for the appellant.-The Evans patent.

tion, in 1864, of paper hats-greatly superior to the old Navarino hats, and now extensively worn-in 1867, of paper belting for machinery-as tough as sole-leather-in 1868, of paper boats-especially prized for their lightness and consequent fitness for hunting skiffs and for use in rowing matches; also of paper vessels for petroleum and other volatile liquids, impermeable to gases and stronger and less liable to corrode than those of tin; in 1869, of paper horsecollars, largely used in work-harnesses, especially in the warmer parts of the South; inventions, indeed, which are but the pioneers of a whole class of inventions in paper now widely used and highly esteemed.

2d. It was to Evans that the credit of this invention was due. Although Crane & Co. were skilful paper-makers, and especially versed in the manufacture of long-fibre papers, it is evident that until Evans began to give his directions, neither they nor any one else had conceived of such a paper as that now known as "collar-paper," and a fortiori had not conceived of the right modes of making it. Crane & Co. went through a long process of instruction from Evans, aud from those instructions the art was obtained. It is thus evident that the conception of the result to be attained originated with Evans alone. He was led by investigation and by trials of numerous papers to conceive of such a practicable combination of qualities in paper as would render it suitable for a coliar. He it was who gave all the directions which were needful to enable Crane & Co., without the exercise of any invention of their own, to effect the desired combination.

Evans's conception therefore was not a mere vague and unintelligent notion that it was possible to make a paper which would answer the purpose, followed by a request to his paper-makers to do it if they could. It was a conception which was the result of a thorough familiarity, acquired by diligent study and research, with the qualities and properties of numerous kinds of paper as respected their fituess in certain particulars for a paper collar; ending in the conviction that it was practicable to combine this quality found in one