

In the defendant's valve, complainant's Exhibit A, the same effects, in operation, are produced as in the Richardson valve, by the means described in Richardson's claims. Such a valve necessarily requires an annular steam-way.

But, before 1866, an annular form of safety-valve was well known.

When the ideas necessary to success are made known, and a structure embodying those ideas is given to the world, it is easy for the skilful mechanic to vary the form by mechanism which is equivalent, and is, therefore, in a case of this kind, an infringement. The fact that the known valves were not used, and the speedy and extensive adoption of Richardson's valve, are facts in harmony with the evidence that his valve contains just what the prior valves lack, and go to support the conclusion at which we have arrived on the question of novelty. He used some things which had been used before, but he added just that which was necessary to make the whole a practically valuable and economical apparatus. Richardson's invention brought to success what prior inventors had essayed and partly accomplished.The specification of the patent is as follows: Go to Richardson, September 25, 1866, for an improvement in steam safety-valves.

