118
FEDERAL REPORTER
has been a contest, yet it is, plainly, an independent, original jurisdiction which is given to the courts. If it were not so, the mode of appeal, and the security to be given the adverse party, would undoubtedly be provided for, but especially the time within which the appeal should be taken, so that the commissioner might know whether he could issue the patent or not. Upon the theory of the bill it is left to the mere discretion of the defeated party when, and under what circumstances, the action of the office shall be suspended. This cannot be the law. Injunction refused.
MARGOT
v.
SCHNETZER
and others.
(Oircuit Court, D. Mauachvutts. February 6,1883.) PATBNTB lPOB INVENTIONS-DoUBT AS TO NOVELTY-INJUNCTION NIIL
In Equity. On motion for preliminary injunction. James E. Maynadier, for complainant. Avery et Hobbs, for defendants. LOWELL, J. This is a motion for a preliminary injunction. The suit is upon patent No. 12,775, dated February 21, 1882, for a design for watch-cases. The defendants copied the plaintiff's design before it was patented, and without knowing that a patent was to be applied for, and they are ready to stop infringing. The damages must be small, and I should wish to end the case here, if that were possible; 'but a serious doubt is raised as to the novelty of the design, by the affidavit of one Smith, and by the admissions of the plaintiff in his affidavit in reply to Smith, so that I think an injunction ni,i 1S aJ.l that I oUlZht to 'lI'ant. InjUllction nUf.
·THE CHEROKEE.
119
THE
CHEROKEE.·
(District Court, 8. D. Ohio. W. D. January 30, 1883.\ 1. COLLISION-ENTERING NARROW CHANNEL-PILOT HULE 3.
2.
The question of negligence, where a vessel enters a narrow channel while another is aground on its banks, depends on the apparent sitnation and circumstances of the vessel aground, making proper for a change in the relative situation of the vessel aground; but unexpected changes, not brought about by the vessel attempting to pass, should not be considered in determming whether there has been any blame. Where, therefore, pilot rule No.3 requires an ascending vessel, about to enter a narrow channel at the same time with a descending vessel, to lie below the channel until the descending vessel 1111S passed through, she may, without negligence, enter the channel, if the descending vessel, being a tow-boat with barges in tow, has grounded one of the barges, anrl is not coming on, and there be room to pass without collision: and the unexpected drifting of one of the barges, by which a collision occurs, is an inevi·, table accident, for which the vessel is not liable. SAJtlE-TuG AND Tow. A tow-boat working at one of its barges agronnd should, if po!'!S!11Ie, make way by temporarily suspending work to permit another vessel to pass, where that is necessary to prevent delay. Where a barge, constituting part of a tow, is adrift in a narrow channel, 'a passing steam-boat owes the duty of doing all that is possible to prevent collision with it; but if she reverses her engines as speedily as possible, and other. wise does all she can, t,here can he no blame, because she is in a narrow channel, where the tug and tow would have had the right of way if it had not been partially aground.
3. SAME-BARl7E ADRIFT.
In Admiralty. Lincoln, Stevens d: Slattery, for libelants. Hoadly, Johnson « Colston, for claimants. fuMMOND, J., (sitting by designatiun.) Notwithstanding the vol· uminous testimony in this case the essential facts lie within a small compass. There is opposite Rising Sun, on the Ohio river, a very narrow channel, caused by the encroachment of a bar, making out from the Kentucky shore, and at the stage of watH existing at the time of the collision sued for, navigation at the place was difficult. It is conceded that this place comes within the application of the following rule, prescribed for the, government of pilots: "Rule 3. Where two boats are about to enter a narrow. channel at the same time, the ascending boat shall be stopped below such channel until the descending lJoat shall have passed through it; but should two boats unavoidably meet in such channel, then it shall be the duty of the pilot of the descending buat to make the proper signals, and, when answered, the ascend-, <lteported by J. C. Harper, Esq., ofthe Cincinnati bar.