Lehigh Valley Railroad v. Kearney

158 U.S. 461, 15 S. Ct. 871, 39 L. Ed. 1055, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2273
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedMay 27, 1895
Docket314
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 158 U.S. 461 (Lehigh Valley Railroad v. Kearney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lehigh Valley Railroad v. Kearney, 158 U.S. 461, 15 S. Ct. 871, 39 L. Ed. 1055, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2273 (1895).

Opinion

*463 Mr. Chief Justice Fuller,

after stating the case as above, delivered the opinion of the court.

Kearney and Tronson applied January 5, 1871, for letters patent for a . certain “ improvement in spark-arresters for locomotives,” which application was rejected on reference to patent to James L. Yáuclain, August 20, 1861, and after various amendments was allowed, and the patent issued April 11,1871. The following is the specification of the application and of the patent as allowed, the parts stricken out by amendment being in brackets and the parts inserted being in italics:

“The improvement relates to effectually preventing hot coals passing from the chimneys of locomotives, [by a peculiar manner of] arresting them before they get to the chimney.

“ On the forward end of a locomotive boiler is an extension, on the top of which is the chimney or smoke-stack. This receptacle of all that passes [from the fire] through the boiler flues to the smoke-stack is technically known as the smoke-head; the pipes from the boiler to the engine pass through the smoke-head, and the steam is exhausted thereinto from the cylinders. In the unoccupied space in this smoke-head we place a grate, [formed either with bars of of netting, or perforated plates; the shape is not material; we make them circular, as being most convenient in ordinary cases. It is best there should be a clear space on all sides or around the grate] the peculiar- features of which are its perpendicular bars with fixed apertures sufficiently fine to stop the sparks that come from the fire, the size of the grate being determined by the area of opening needed for the regular draft and escape of smoke on kindling the fire, or when the engine is not in motion.

“Upon the top of the grating a tube or pipe is fitted, extending upward a short distance above the top of the smoke-head into the chimney. A space is left around the top of the pipe between the edges of the aperture in the top of the smoke-head and the pipe. This space is covered with, netting or grating to prevent sparks or coals from passing, through into the chimney.

“In the accompanying drawings, Figure 1 is a view, in sec *464 tion, of the front of the smoke-head, with the gratings and pipe imposition. Figure 2 is a side view of the end of the boiler and of the smoke-head. A is the boiler. B, the-flues. C, the smoke-head.- D, the grate. E, the pipe on the'top of the grate. . F is the netting closing the aperture between the pipe and the smoke-head. , Gr is the chimney or smoke-stack; and I, the exhaust pipes from the engines.

“ It will be seen that nothing but smoke and gas can pass the top netting F, and that no coals or dangerous sparks can pass into the chimney, they being arrested by the grate D without having received any impulse from the exhaust pipes. The strong draft created by the exhausting steam up the pipe into the chimney brings the coals and sparks to the grating, against which they strike and fall harmless into the space in the smoke-head. [The force of coals drawn from the fire when impelled by the exhaust steam up the chimney is such as to cut through netting, and even cast iron over a quarter of an inch thick, in two or three months, in any description of spark-arresters located in the smoke-stack.]

By our arrangement the gases that are returned by contrivances that turn sparks downward in the smoke-stack, and sometimes force open the fire-door, have a clear passage to the atmosphere.

“ [What we claim and desire to secure is —

“1. The grate D, pipe E, the net or grate F, as and for the purpose specified and shown.

“ 2. Combining a spark-arrester with, the smoke-head of a locomotive in the manner and for the purpose hereinabove set forth.]

We disclaim all draft-regulating contrivances, and also, all gratings with lateral adjustable openings. What we do claim, as our improvement, and desire to' secure, is — The grate D with longitudAnal bars, as and for the purposes specified and shoxonT

On June 7,1872, Kearney and Tronson applied for a reissue, which was rejected on reference to James L. Vauclain, smokestack, August 20, 1861.; Weideman, Major and Sample, sparkarrester, December 20,1870; and James Smith, spark-arrester, *465 March 7, 1871; and after amendment was allowed, and the reissue granted December 10,1872.

The following is the specification of the application and of the reissue as allowed, the parts stricken out being bracketed and the parts inserted italicized:

“ Figure 1 is a vertical cross-section of the smoke-box of a locomotive with our improvements attached, and

“ Figure 2 is a vertical longitudinal section of the same, and a portion of the boiler.

“ The letters of reference indicate the same parts in both figures.

“ A represents a portion of the boiler of a locomotive. B is a space, commonly called the smoke-box. CO are the flues at the point where they enter the smoke-box; E is a pipe extending from within the base of the smoke-stack down into the smoke-box, and commonly termed a ‘ petticoat pipe; ’ D is a grating placed at the lower part of the petticoat pipe to prevent' any cinders or sparks passing into the same; F is a netting or grating placed around the top of the petticoat pipe so as to cover the annular opening caused by the difference ih size of the upper part of the petticoat pipe and the bottom of the smoke-stack GL H is a piece of boiler plate or sheet iron placed at the bottom of the smoke-box in order to provide a flat surface for the grate D to rest upon, and is provided with holes, through which the exhaust pipes II pass.

“ Our improvements relate to providing locomotives with a suitable device for preventing live coals, cinders, sparks, and like substances, which may leave the furnace, from passing into or out of the smoke-stack, and to retain them in the smoke-box, from which place they may be removed at pleasure.

“It has heretofore been the practice.to cover the tops of smoke-stacks of locomotives with a wire netting or grating, for the purpose of preventing the escape of sparks and cinders; and, in some cases, an'inverted metal cone is also placed in the centre of such netting or grating to receive and break the force of the cinders as they are thrown against it.

“ In all of these contrivances the cinders receive so much force from the exhausting steam while on their way up the *466 petticoat pipe and smoke-stack that they very soon destroy the netting or grating placed at the top of the smoke-stack, and where a cone or other device is used to turn the cinders downwards and partially protect the grating the gases are also retarded in their escape.

“ In order to overcome these difficulties, we place a grating, D, at or near the lower end of the petticoat pipe E so as to surround the exhaust pipes II, and prevent any cinders or sparks entering the pipe E, while allowing free passage for the smoke' and gases.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Superior Skylight Co. v. August Kuhnla, Inc.
265 F. 282 (E.D. New York, 1920)
State v. . Danenberg
66 S.E. 301 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1909)
Kelsey Heating Co. v. James Spear Stove & Heating Co.
155 F. 976 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania, 1907)
Good Form Mfg. Co. v. White
153 F. 759 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1907)
Voightmann v. Weis & Ridge Cornice Co.
133 F. 298 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Missouri, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
158 U.S. 461, 15 S. Ct. 871, 39 L. Ed. 1055, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2273, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lehigh-valley-railroad-v-kearney-scotus-1895.