WASHEUEN & MOEN MANUF'O <X). V. HAISH. 909- �claims of Hunt's original and re-issuo patent, can we Cofl- strue the claim in the re-issue as including anything more than the special spur or barb whieh hehad described in the first instance ? I think not; although the claims are somewhat differently worded in the two oases, — in the One instance, "providing the wires of a wire fence with a series of spur wheels;" and in the other, "a fence wire provided with Bp^urs for the purpose specified." We think we shall not oonstrue this last claim independent of the description of the spurs set forth in the specifications, and they are substantially the same as described in the original patent. In comparing the claim of the re-issue with^ that of the original, we assume they mean substantially the same thing, and thiat the claim in the re-issue caniiot fairly be enlarged to ihclude every kind of barb that may be attached to a fence wire, Mt that " the fence wire provided with spurs" means the kind of fence wij-e and of epuiS that'he had described in his specifi- cations and drawings. The claim in the re-i-Bsne ought, in this caise, to Beconstruedwith' reference to the limitatioii of the iiiveiition in the originail patent. : '" - �The' difference of the phraseology iti the original ' and re-issued specifications, where in the former it says, "the' spurs fit the wire loosely, sb' as to revolve easily upon'it;
- * * the spurs may be kept in their places and at suita-
ble distances apart by nleans of flarlges or otherwise;" and in the latter, "the spur-wheels Tnay fit the wire looseljt, so as to xevolve easily upon it, or they may be kept in their places and at suitable distances apart by means of flanges, A, or otherwise," — cannot change the nature of the invention de- scribed. I do not understand that this language in the re- issue necessarily implies that the spur- wheels are fastened to the wire, so as to prevent them from revolving, nor am I prepared to admit, if that were the fact, it would change the essential character of the device. �The object of the Kelly patent was also to describe and claim a particular mode of constructing the barb, and attach- ing it to the wire of the fence. And the drawings of the orig- inal patent clearly indicate that this was donc upon a single ��� �
