Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/621

606 FBDEBAL EEPORTEE. �the defendants have adduced other and corroborating evidence that bas not been questioned. Davidson, who made the marking plates for Smith, and who is shown to be a reputable man, bas been exam- ined by defendants, and on his examination testified that he had, at or about the time alleged, at Smith 's instance and request, made such plates for Smith as herein previously described ; and his testi- mony is confirmed by the production of one of said plates, which bears every indication of genuineness, and is identified by Smith, Lee, and Davidson as one of the plates made by the latter and used by Smith in his business. There is, in fact, no ground on which to doubt the truth of this part of the evidence. If, then, said plate was made at the time and for the purpose mentioned, it follows, as the night follows the day, beyond all reasonable doubt, that it was so used. �But this is not all. The conclusions reached and announced in the preoeding paragraph are confirmed by the positive testimony of other witnesses. Thomas Y. Huddleston, who was at the time of his examination, and for nearly eight years prior thereto, sherifif of his county, and who, so far as this record discloses, notwithstanding the attempt to impeach his credibility, is a reputable citizen, testi^ fies that he had purchased plug tobacco from Smith about that time with Smith's name impressed upon it ; and he is confirmed by M. W. Wright, one of complainants' witnesses, who, on cross-examina- tion, says that Smith showed him two plugs of tobacco so marked, which Smith at the time represented to be his work. This evidence, supplementing, as it does, the testimony of Smith, Lee, and David- son, makes a clear case of anticipation. �Yet complainants contend that Smith never perfected and reduced his alleged discovery to any practical use; that it was merely experi- mental and incomplete ; and, in support of this theory, they further insist that Smith could not, and did not, impart as fine a finish to his tobacco as was given to the tobacco finished under complainants' process; and that for this and other insuperable diffieulties in his way he abandoned the invention in an incompleted condition. �I cannot, howevea*, concur in this view of the facts. Smith discov- ered the "process." This he seemed thoroughly to understand, and having applied it successfully to one or two plugs, it required no inventive genius to apply it to others. It is not important that he did not do this. He did not have the neceasary facilities, nor the means with which to obtain them. Besides, the seizure of his factory by the government, some eight months after his first experiment was ��� �