880 FEDBBAL REPORTER. �bottle, by upward pressure of a spiral spring working around an upwardly projecting stem ; and the stopper is opened by pressure applied to the top of the stem. And an internai bot- tle stopper, having substantially the same arrangement and method of operation, is shown by the Nouvean English patent of 1858. If it be true that in the patents just referred to the valve does not close agE!,inst a seat formed in the substance of the bottle itselj, it is equally true that in the Christin and Kelly bottles the plug does not seat against the substance of the bottle, but against an elastic packing or detachable rubber seat enclosed in a recess within the neck of the bottle. As bearing more particularly upon the claims of the plaintiff'^ second patent, the McCallum English patent of 1862 is worthy of especial observation. The specification, after stat- ing that the invention is "peculiarly suitable for aerated liquids," describes the bottle as "formed with a construction in the neck, A, presenting internally a kind of valve seat, B." This valve seat does not differ from the plaintiff's shoulder, x, and is for the identical pnrpose ; for it is stated that after the bottle is fiUed, and the stopper drawn "into its place against the seat, B, in the neck, A, of the bottle,
- * * the internai pressure keeps the stopper securely
in its place." �The stopper is described as "a kind of valve," consisting "of a washer made of a flexible material, such as leather, or caoutchouc, and fixed on a short spindle or center in such a way,. that, on being pushed into the bottle in one direction, the washer bends inwards towards or against the upper part of the center or spindle, and passes easily, whilst on being moved in the other direction the washer expands and cannot be forced or drawn through the contracted neck of the bot- tle." In closing the bottle the stopper is grasped and drawn into its seat by an instrument inserted into the mouth of the bottle for that purpose. The bottle is opened by pushing the stopper inwardly, and the stopper "remains in the bottle, and can be used over again repeatedly." �If it be conceded that the plaintiff's patents were not fuUy anticipated, it is, nevertheless, clear to my mind that the dif- ��� �
