BLAWSON V. 0. B., P. P. & S. B. CO. 531 ���Slawsoh V. GitAND Stbbet, Fbospeot Pare & Flatbush Bàilboad Go. �{Circuit Coii/rty E. D. Nea York. , 1880.) �1. Rb-Issitb No. 4,240, for an improvement in fare boxes, held void for �want of invention. �2. Invention— CoMBiNATioiî — Fabb Box. — The mere addition of a win- �dow to a well-known style of street-car fare box, so arrangea thftt a passenger by looliing through. it can see the fare deposited by him, does not constitute an invention vritliln the meaning of the patent laws, where such box previously had a window so arranged that the driver could see the fare •when deposited' by the passenger. Eailea r. Wwrm&r, 20 Wall. 354. �3. Patent No. 121,190, for an improvement in fare boxes, held void, for �■want of invention. �4. Invention — Combination— Fare Box. — The combination of a street- �car fare box with the head-lamp of a car and a reflector, in such a manner that the light from the lamp will be thrown into the tare box, does not constitute invention. �In Equity. �George Oifford, for plaintiff. �P. 8. Crooke, for defendant. �BenEdict, D. J. This is a suit in equity brought to recover damages by reason of an alleged infringement by the defend- ant of two certain patents owned by the plaintiff. One of these patents was issued to the plaintiff July 28, 1857, for an improvement in fare boxes. It -was re-issued May 4, 1858, again re-issued January 24> 1871, and is now known as re- isBue No. 4,240, extended for the term of seven years from the twenty-eighth day of July, 1871. The other patent sued on is also for an improvement in fare boxes, granted to Elijab C. Middleton, assignee of James P. Winchell, December 2, 1871, numbered 121,920, and on the seventeenth of April, 1873, assigned to the plaintiff. The defendant denies the infringement, and also disputes the validity of the patents sued on. �The questions raised in respect to the Sla-wson patent, No. ����
