350 FEDERAL REfORTER. �The invention of the plaintiff consists in uumbering or let- tering each galley-holder, and putting a series of pins or hooks, with corresponding letters or numbers, upon the upper part of this piece of furniture. As the compositors of galley A put their set-up type into that galley, they are instructed by the patent to hang their copy upon hook A, and so on through the alphabet. By this means the compositors assort the copy and save the time of a sorter, or of the proof-reader. The improvement is so very simple that it seems almost incredible that the plaintiff was the first person to make it. But the stipulation finds him to be the original inventer of it. By reason of the same simplicity it is argued not to be an invention at all. No doubt the chief merit is in the idea, whioh is not patentable, of requiring the compositors for each galley to keep their copy separate from that for every other galley. But I am of opinion that when a mechanical con- trivance is made to aid in carrying ont this idea by lettering the galleys, or galley-holders, and the corresponding hooks, it is an improvement which is patentable. The plaintiff has patents for two other improved forms of his device ; but they are not brought in question novir. �The defendants own and publish the newspaper called the Boston Herald, and letter their galleys, or galley-holders, and have corresponding letters upon pins or hooks, which are ranged upon the wall of their printing house, immediately behind the galley-holders. This appears to me a clear in- fringement. �Decree for the complainant. ���Watson and another v. Smith and another. �{Cirev,it Court, 8. D. Nm York. May 9, 1881.) �1. Infkingbmbnt — LiCBNSE — Peoof. �In a suit for iiifringement, the allegation of a license is an affirma- tive defence, aud must be made out by the proof. — [Ed. �In Equity. ��� �
