the learned judge instructed the jury that "if they should find that the
defendants had infringed the plaintiff's patent by using substantially
the same device as ornamental on the same part of the stove they would,
of course, find the defendant guilty. To infringe a patent right it
is not necessary that the thing patented should be adopted in every
particular; but if, as in the present case, the design and figures
were substantially adopted by the defendants, they have infringed the
plaintiff's right. If they adopt the same principle the defendants are
guilty. The principle of a machine is that combination of mechanical
powers which produce a certain result. And in a case like the present,
where ornaments are used for a stove, it is an infringement to adopt the
design so as to produce substantially the same appearance."

It has been the constant practice to grant patents for designs for fonts
of type, for sets of silver plate, for a series of printers' flourishes,
and the like. This class of cases has always passed without objection.

Two other cases which have arisen within the Office deserve notive.
The first was for a series of miniature shoulder straps, with emblems
denoting rank, provided with a pin, to be worn under an officer's coat,
upon his vest, or as a lady's breastpin. The drawing shows eight of
these pins with emblems of rank, varying from that of second lieutenant
to major-general, specification describing the brooch for a second
lieutenant goes on to say: "I propose to introduce, on some of them, the
different ornaments showing the respective ranks of the army, from a
major-generalship to a second lieutenancy. See Figs. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
8."

The second case was that of an application for a monogram visiting
card, on which the name was to be inscribed or printed in the form of a