The plaintiffs contended that infringement of their letters patent was made out by the evidence, which tended to show that the defendants constructed and sold seeding-machines made according to the specification of letters patent granted to John H. Thomas and Joseph W. Thomas, dated June 30, 1874, for 'an improvement in seeding-machines.'

The evidence showed that the shanks or standards of plows, cultivators, and seeding machines have been used in a great variety of forms.

The patent of the plaintiffs stood on narrow ground, and to sustain it, it must be construed as to confine it substantially to the form described in the specification.

None of the separate elements which the combination was composed are claimed as the invention of the patentee; therefore none of them, standing alone, are included in the monopoly of the patent.

It was plain, upon an inspection of the drawings, that the defendants do not use a brace-bar similar in shape or position to that described in the plaintiffs' patent.

The court found that the curved upper part of the shank used by defendants does not perform one of the material functions of the brace-bar of the plaintiffs' combination.