292 FEDERAL REFOBTEB. �that the tooth will retain its position when working in arabl* Boil, but will yield when coming in contact with an immov- able obstacle, and pass over it without breaking; the shank tuming back upon its pivot, and the brace-bar being forced up through the slot." �The invention being thus deseribed, what is claimed as new and desired to be secured by letters patent is the "com- bination of the slotted beam. A, shank, B, brace-bar, C, and boit, D, when the parts are constructed and arranged to oper- ate as and for the purposes herein specified." �The device patented to J. H. & J. W. Thomas, and which the defendants are selling, consists of a wooden bar or beam having a slit in the rear end to receive the shank of the shovel or tooth. The shank and the tooth consist of one piece of metal, the shank at its upper end being of curved form, and secured in the slit by a boit or pivot. Another threaded boit is passed through the beam or drag-bar, a little in the rear of the boit to which the shank of the tooth is fastened, and in such place as to sustain the tooth or shovel when in proper position. It is stated in the specifi- cations of the patent that the ends of the bifurcated bar or beam are drawn down by the threaded boit which sustain» the tooth or shovel when it is in position, or by the united action of both the bolts mentioned, "until clamped against the standard of the shovel with such force that the fric- tion shall maintain the shovel in position while passing through mellow earth, but not so tight but that it will yield to an excessive resistance before force enough is applied to break the shovel." It is further stated that by making the shank in one piece its construction "is greatly cheapened as compared with that class where an arm has to be welded to the shank;" and the substance of the patentee's claim is, in combination with the drag-bar or beam, bifurcated at the rear end, the shovel standard, curved at its head and where it is adjusted to the drag-bar, and pivoted and clamped by the bolts before deseribed. �The only question which it is neeessary to consider is that of infringement. The complainants' patent is for a combi- ��� �
