ALLI8 V. BTOWELL. 203 �ness lyith which counsel, in applying for reliearings, Bome- times asseverate their convictions of the errors of the court; and, to repeat what is there said, "that if any judge should be 80 unstable in his views, or so feeble in his judgment, as to yield to them, he would net only surrender his independence, but betray his duty. However humble may be his own tal- ents, ho is compelled to treat every opinion of counsel, how- ever exalted, -which is not founded in the law and the facts of the case,tobevoiceleBS and valu eless." 3 Story, 303. Noth- ing can be gained by the strong language expressed by coun- sel in presenting the petition as to the supposed errors of the court, nor by the statement as to what may have been said of the decision by other counsel, who have neither examined, Btudied, nor understood the case. ���AiiUS and otbers v. Stowell. �(Cireuit Court, E, D. Wieconsin. December 9, 1880. ) �L Equitt Pleading — Rulb 66. — A suit will not be dismissed under the sixty-sixth rule in equity, for want of a repHcalion to an amended answcr, where a motion is pending to strike sucb answer from the files for irregularity and insufflciency. �2. Same — It seems that the fllingof exceptions is not the only method of testing the snfflciency or regularity of an answer.— [Ed. iSlrangev. ColUns, 2 Veaseyô Beamcs, 162. �In Equity. Motion to Dismiss. �W. G. Raney, for complainants. �E. H. Bottum, for defendant. �Dyeb, D. J. This is a bill to restrain the infringement of two patents for saw-mill dogs, known as the Selden and Beck- with patents. On a previous hearing upon bill, answer, and proofs, a decree was entered in favor of complainants, sus- taining the validity of both patents. Subsequently the de- fendant moved that the cause be opened for a rehearing on the ground of newly-discovered evidence, The court granted a rehearing as to the Selden patent, but denied it as to the Beckwith patent, and it was ordered that the defendant have ����
