M'mURRY ». MALLORY. 593 �But the defendant insista that the machine belongs to the public to use, and that nothing ean be manufactured from it except the product, of which the complainant has yet' the monopoly. If this be true, then the public must find out some other use to put it to, or abstain from its use until the time cornes in which it may be used without infringing the right of others. �A provisional injunction must issue according to the prayer of the bill. ���McKay, Trustee, v. McKnight and others. �(CircnU Court, D. New Jersey. , 1881.) �MoEat, Tbustee, V. DiBKBT, onte, 587, foUowed, and provislonsd In- Junctloa allowed. �In Equity. �Nixon, D. J. The preliminary injunction is allowed in the above case, not only for the reason stated in the opinion in the case of the same complainant against Dibert, but for the additional reason that the defendant William McKnight, as licensee of the complainant, is estopped by the express terms of his contract from setting up the defences which have been brought forward in excuse of the infringement by the defend- ants. ���MoMuBET, Lano & BuKNHAM V. D. D. Mallobt & Co. �(Circuit Uowt, B. Mmryland. February 2, 1881.) �PATEaST— InPEINGEKBINT— SOLDEMNG ISION. �HM, that the " Barker" patent No. 103,125, re-issue No. 8,781, and the " Bostwiuk" patent No. 104,412, re-issue No. 8,466, for improve- ments in soldering irons, are not in^'ringed by the device known as the " Tillery Soldering Tool," as exhioited >n thiB case. �In Equity. v,5,no.7— 38 ����
