been often stated, and are found in the decisions quoted in Lawrence Mfg. Co. v. Tennessee Mfg. Co., 138 U. S. 537-549, 11 Sup. Ct. 396, 34 L. Ed. 997, among which is Thompson v. Montgomery, 41 Ch. Div. 35, known as the "Stone Ale Case." Many of the cases are collected in Flour Mills v. Eagle, 30 C. C. A. 386, 86 Fed. 608, 41 L. R. A. 162. This misappropriation could have been prevented because the label did not fairly describe the water which he manufactured, and he could have been compelled to tell with complete plainness upon his labels that he was manufacturing in New York artificial Vichy water. What he was doing was to imitate Struve, and artificially manufacture a water which corresponded with the analysis of the Grand Grille spring. This misappropriation was, however, more apparent than real, because he was, in the literature which he circulated, announcing that his product was artificial and not natural; and this fact was thoroughly known by the ordinary consumers of the article, until Schultz's Vichy became an article distinct from the still water of the natural spring.

It is conceded that an injunction cannot now be directed, because the original defendant is dead, and there is no proof that his executrix is continuing her husband's business. The question of importance is whether an accounting shall be directed. An accounting for the period within which the distinctively artificial character of the Schultz Vichy has been well understood would not seem to be equitable; but it is needless to consider that subject, for it is established in trade-mark cases, in accordance with the general principles of equity (2 Story, Eq. Jur. § 1520), that when "acquiescence of long standing," and "inexcusable laches in seeking redress," have been shown, the complainant is not entitled to an accounting, nor to a decree for gains and profits. McLean v. Fleming, 96 U. S. 245, 24 L. Ed. 828. These prerequisites to a refusal for an accounting clearly appear in this case.

It is said that there can be no imputation of laches against the owner of the springs, the republic of France being a sovereign power. The lessee is the actual party in interest, which would profit by a decree for an accounting; and while the republic of France is the owner of the springs, and a party to the suit, the lessee is the one beneficially interested in the gains and profits which might result from a decree. The principle that laches are not imputable to the government of a nation is not applicable in this case. The decree of the circuit court is affirmed, with costs.

(102 Fed. 159.)

CAMPBELL PRINTING-PRESS & MFG. CO. v. MIEHLE PRINTINGPRESS & MFG. CO.

MIEHLE PRINTING-PRESS & MFG. CO. v. CAMPBELL PRINTINGPRESS & MFG. CO.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. May 16, 1900.)

Nos. 634, 635.

1. PATENTS-INFRINGEMENT-PRINTING PRESSES.

The Miehle patent, No. 317,663, for improvement in machinery, consisting of a pinion operating with a rack or racks to effect a reciprocat

ing movement, as in printing presses, etc., claim 1, which covers a com bination of a rack frame and racks with a pinion provided with a wrist pin, which engages automatically into end slots for the purpose of effecting a reversal of the movement of the rack frame, discloses nothing new in the means employed except the form of the slots, by means of which the reversal is completed by a shorter movement than in prior devices, and such claim is not infringed by machines made in accordance with the Southgate patent, No. 606,096, in which the wrist pin or its equivalent travels through a half circle to effect the reversal, as in previous forms of presses.

2. SAME.

The Miehle patent, No. 322,309, for improvements in printing machines, held not infringed as to claims 1, 2, and 4.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the Northern District of Illinois.

These appeals are from a final decree in the suit of the Miehle PrintingPress & Manufacturing Company against the Campbell Printing-Press & Manufacturing Company for infringement of the first claim of patent No. 317,663, and the first, second, and fourth claims of patent No. 322,309, issued on May 12 and July 14, 1885, to Robert Miehle. The first patent was declared valid, and further infringement enjoined. The claims of the second patent were given a narrow construction, and found not to have been infringed. 96 Fed. 226. Each company has appealed and has assigned error on the portion of the decree which is adverse to it.

The first claim of patent No. 317,663 and portions of the specification read as follows: "1. In a mechanical movement, the combination of a rack-frame and racks, with a pinion provided with a wrist-pin, which engages automatically into end slots, to properly guide the pinion with the said racks, substantially as described." "This invention relates to improvements in that class of devices consisting of a pinion operating with a rack or racks to effect a reciprocating movement for printing presses, pumps, iron planers, large church-organ bellows, and other machinery wherein a regular reciprocating movement is desired between the centers, with a slow stopping and starting movement at the centers or turning points of each reciprocating stroke. The invention consists of a mechanism by which a very slow stopping and starting movement is obtained at each end of the reciprocating movement without losing the amount of stroke heretofore lost by diminishing the revolutions of the pinion, as will hereinafter be explained. The invention also consists of a novel mechanism and arrangement of parts whereby the racks are shifted laterally of the pinion, that is to say, parallel with the axis thereof,-to require less space in its operation; also to obviate the necessity of a counterbalance when the pinion shaft is placed in a horizontal position; and, furthermore, to obtain from a pair of racks and a pinion which has but one revolution a regular and complete reciprocating movement between its centers greater than the radius of the pinion or sweep of the wrist pin across the center, with a very slow stopping and starting movement at the end of each reciprocating stroke, the same as obtained from a crank arm and wrist pin. *** By arranging the parts so that the pinion has an odd number of revolutions,as one, three, and five,-only one wrist pin is required; but, when the pinion has an even number of revolutions,-as two, four, and six,-two wrist pins are necessary. The diagram Fig. 13 is to show the length of stroke obtained from pinions having two, three, and four revolutions, the large pinion being proportioned the same as pinion D in the drawings, and the smaller one just one-half thereof. It is evident that, when the revolutions of the pinions are diminished, the length of the stroke is also diminished, the greater amount of stroke being lost when the revolutions of the pinion are diminished from three to two revolutions for completing a reciprocating movement, and the length of stroke heretofore obtained from pinions, as shown in Fig. 13, is indicated by the dotted lines, I", at the pitch-lines of the gears, and the dotted lines, I', at the end of that portion representing the racks. The manner in which the present improvement obtains a stroke greater than heretofore by a pinion with two revolutions is by the additional length of the racks, C C', which extend outwardly from the dotted lines,

*

I', as indicated in Figs. 1 and 6, to enter the wrist pins, E, between the end shoes, A' A", the ends of which are formed upon the epicycloidal curve, I, heretofore described, sufficiently to receive the wrist pins, E, properly while the pinion is disengaging with either of the said racks, after which the shoes are shaped to impart a reduced movement to the rack frame, A, by the wrist pins, E, in time to retain the slow stopping and starting motion at the centers or turning points." "The shoes, A' A", in the present drawings, are formed in such manner as to produce a stroke,-which is indicated by the dotted lines, I', at the end of the dotted lines, I", in Fig. 6,-with a pinion which has two revolutions, to equal that obtained from the devices heretofore constructed, in which the driving circumference of the pinion is just one-half thereof, having four revolutions. It is evident the length of stroke can be extended by forming the shoes, A' A", in the manner shown in Fig. 18, the upper half of which is formed upon the epicycloidal curves, I, very near to the center or turning point, the lower half of the shoes, A' A", being formed the same as in the main drawings. By this arrangement a quick stopping or a slow starting movement at the centers or turning points is imparted to the rack frame, A, and in turning the pinion in an opposite direction just the reverse movement is obtained."

Patent No. 322,309 is for "improvements in printing machines," and the claims in question read as follows: "(1) In a bed motion for printing presses, as herein described, in which the bed is operated by a pinion that engages alternately with top and bottom racks attached to the press bed, the combination of the operating pinion provided with a wrist pin, E, with the rack frame provided with a vertical guide slot, E', at each end, for the purpose of properly guiding the pinion into gear with the racks, essentially as set forth. (2) The combination, with the reciprocating bed of a printing press, of a rack frame having racks, C C', and vertical end slots, E' E", driving pinion, D, provided with a wrist pin. E, and mechanism, substantially as herein described, for alternately engaging the pinion, D, with the upper and lower racks, C C', essentially as set forth. (4) The combination, with the reciprocating bed of a printing press, of a rack frame having racks, C C', and vertical slots, E' E", driving pinion, D, carrying the wrist pin, E, said pinion being journaled at the end of a rock arm, I, and receiving a continuous rotary motion through gears, K K', and an intermittent rising and falling motion from cam, M, all combined essentially as set forth."

In the brief for the Miehle Company the following cut is given as "a picture of the entire combination or mechanism consisting of the parallel racks constituting a rack frame, the pinion with the wrist pin mounted on it, the cam for raising and lowering the pinion and maintaining it in the raised or lowered position, and the guide slots applied at each end of the rack frame"; and it is further said of it that "it embodies the subject-matter of claim 1 of the principal patent No. 317,663, and claims 1, 2, and 4 of the subordinate or improved patent No. 322,309, the specific mechanism here shown being one of those illustrated in the latter or improved patent":

The machines made by the defendant, the Campbell Company, it is conceded, conform substantially to the construction shown in letters patent No. 606,096, issued on June 21, 1898, to Louis W. Southgate, one of the counsel for that company in this litigation. In his brief, referring to the following cuts, he says of it:

"For a reversing mechanism, the defendant has rigidly secured on the face of the driving pinion, 21, a reversing pinion, 38, of one-half the diameter

of the driving pinion, 21, and at each end of the bed has arranged a semicircular rack, 40-40, with which said pinion will engage during the time of the reverse. A large circular working shoulder or bearing, 36, is arranged on the pinion, 21, concentrically with and behind the reversing pinion, 40, to engage semicircular shoulders, 41, arranged concentrically with the curved racks, 40, carried by the bed. Projecting through the reversing pinion, 38, is a stud, 37, which engages behind rollers, 45, carried by the bed concentrically with the curved racks, 40, and shoulders, 41. The principle on which the device is arranged to work is to have a continuous engagement of gearing between the pinion and the bed during both the working and the reversing movements."

"The operation may be clearly understood from the opposite (next following) cuts. In the first figure of the cuts, the main movement to the right is just completed. The driving pinion is leaving the double rack, and the reversing pinion is just engaging one semicircular end rack. In the second of the figures, the driving pinion is shown as having made a quarter turn from the position shown in the top figure, and the movement to the right has been retarded and stopped with a crank-motion action by the reversing pinion running up the lower part of the curved rack. In the bottom of the figures the driving pinion is shown as having made another quarter turn, and as just engaging the double rack to commence the full or main working stroke to the left. During this last quarter turn the bed has been started from zero up to full working speed to the left by a crank-motion action, by the reversing pinion running up the upper part of the curved rack. In defendant's machine, instead of relying upon a wrist pin and slot for the reversing