872 FEDERAL REPORTER. • �any reasonable degree of probability, change the resuit, but would only delay this and other causes, and add to the expense of the parties. �The patent was granted under the acts of congress of 1836 and 1861, and carried the full and exclusive right and liberty of making, using, and vending to others to be used, the patented invention, during the term of the patent. Act of 1836, § 5. The defendants have machines made during the term of the patent, and which were infringements when made. If they could be made then and used now, in defiance of the owner of the patent, the exclusive right granted would not be fuUy enjoyed. The grant of the exclusive right is substantially the same in this country as it is in England. The question raised here arose there in Crossley v. Derby Gas- Light Co. Webst. Pat. Cas. 119. The case is more fuUy reported in 4 Law Jour. N. S. Chan. 25. There the patent ■would expire on the ninth of December, 1829; and on tha twenty-eighth of November, before a bill was filed praying for an injunction against using infringing machines and for an account, the vice chancellor granted the injunction, and directed the account, and the defendants appealed. �After argument, the lord chancellor, Lyndhurst, said: "This is an appeal from his honor, the vice chancellor, and is a case for an injunction against the invasion of a patent- right by preventing the use of certain gas-meters. This case is very peculiar, and is distinguishable from ail other cases in the books. It appears that the plaintiff obtained his pat- ent on the ninth of December, 181.5, and that on the twenty- eighth of November, 1829, only a few days before the patent expired, he fîled a bill. It was objected that the court would not interfere, just on the eve of the expiration of the patent, and grant an injunction which would only last a week. The point has never yet been deeided; but I am of opinion that the court would interfere, after a patent had expired, to restrain the sale of articles manufactured previous to its expiration in infringement of a patent-right, and that a party would not be allowed to prepare for the expiration of a pat- ��� �
