The Extra Annotation here following is arranged in the order of the cases in the original reporter's volume which precede it. At the upper outside corner of the page is given the volume and pages of the cases to which the Annotation refers. After the official reporter's volume and page in the heading of each case is given book and page of the present edition, the abbreviation L being used for Lawyers Edition, or Law. Ed. for brevity, as it is throughout in the duplicate citations of cases from the Supreme Court. ABBREVIATIONS. F. C. appended to a citation from the regular reports of the U. S. Circuit and Distarct Courts refers to the series of reprints called the Federal Cases and gives, as its publishers do and recommend, the number of the case in that series. Fed. Cas. is used when the case is contained in the series of Federal Cases but is not reported in the regular series of U. S. Circuit and District Court Reports, and the citations of such cases is to the volume and page of Fed. Cas., not to the number of the case. Fed. or Fed. Rep. refers to the well known series Federal Reporter, containing reports of the Circuit and District Court decisions since 1880. L. R. A. will be readily recognized as the abbreviation for the Lawyers Reports Annotated, and particular attention should be given to these citations, as in a large proportion of cases the citing case will be found accompanied by a note on its principal point absolutely exhaustive of the authorities thereon. Am. Dec., Am. Rep. and Am. St. Rep. will be readily recognized as the abbreviations for the well known trinity of selected case reports, The American Decisions, American Reports and American State Reports. Pennsylvania State Reports (Pa. St.) The New Jersey Law Reports (N. J. L.) and Equity Reports (N. J. Eq.) are distinguished by the number of the series, not by the name of the reporter, while the North and South Carolina Reports, Law and Equity, are cited by the name of the reporter where the reports are so titled and it has been the universal custom. Duplicate citations are given to the National Reporter System where cases are therein contained, and to the Reporter System alone of cases not, at the date of the preparation of the annotation, officially reported. The usual abbreviations are used, as follows: Atl. Atlantic Reporter, Pac. Pacific Reporter, N. E. Northeastern Reporter, N. W. Northwestern Reporter, So. Southern Reporter, S. W. Southwestern Reporter, S. Ct. Supreme Court Reporter. We think that in all other respects the abbreviations used are clear and familiar to all who are accustomed to the use of legal reports and text-books. U. S. Notes 114 U. S. 29 L. ed. 298-84 p. EDITOR. ANN 114 U. S. 1-14, 29 L. 76, THOMPSON v. BOISSELIER. Patent.- Carr improvement in water-closets, held not patentable Invention, pp. 1-13. Patents. It is not enough that a thing be new in shape or form, but it must amount to an invention or discovery, p. 11. Approved in Gardner v. Herz, 118 U. S. 191, 30 L. 163, 6 S. Ct. 1033, and Vulcanized Fiber Co. v. Taylor, 49 Fed. 745, both holding improved chair seats not patentable; Pomace-Holder Co. v. Ferguson, 119 U. S. 338, 30 L. 408, 7 S. Ct. 384, patent for improvement in cheese formers for cider presses, held void; Thatcher Heating Co. v. Burtis, 121 U. S. 295, 30 L. 946, 7 S. Ct. 1039, patent of fireplace heater void for want of novelty; Hendy v. Miners' Iron Works, 127 U. S. 375, 32 L. 209, 8 S. Ct. 1278, holding mere putting of rollers under article, to make it movable, not patentable; Watson v. Cincinnati Ry., 132 U. S. 167, 33 L. 298, 10 S. Ct. 47, holding new combination of rigid and flexible grain doors, did not involve invention; Hill v. Wooster, 132 U. S. 701, 33 L. 506, 10 S. Ct. 231, refusing patent for "cabinet creamery;' Howe Mach. Co. v. National Co., 134 U. S. 397, 33 L. 968, 10 S. Ct. 573, annulling Spring lathe patent; Consolidated Roller-Mill Co. v. Walker, 138 U. S. 132, 34 L. 923, 11 S. Ct. 295, affirming S. C., 43 Fed. 579, improvement in roller-grinding mills held not patentable; Patent Clothing Co. v. Glover, 141 U. S. 563, 35 L. 859, 12 S. Ct. 80, holding patent for Improvement in pantaloons, void; Lovell Mfg. Co. v. Cary, 147 U. S. 636, 37 L. 312, 13 S. Ct. 477, patent for tempering springs not involving invention. 99 The following also hold patents invalid for want of novelty: Hartford Woven-Wire, etc., Co. v. Peerless Wire, etc., Co., 23 Blatchf. 233, 23 Fed. 591, woven-wire fabrics; Fond du Lac Co. v. May, 137 U. S. 406, 34 L. 718, 11 S. Ct. 102, May's prison patent; J. L. Mott Iron Works v. Cassidy, 24 Blatchf. 290, 31 Fed. 48, patent for watercloset bowls; Scott Mfg. Co. v. Sayre, 26 Fed. 154, improvement li ice-creepers; Calkins v. Oshkosh Carriage Co., 27 Fed. 298, patent for carriage body; Consolidated Fruit-Jar Co. v. Bellaire, etc., Co., 28 Fed. 94, patent for fruit-jar caps: Leonard v. Lovell, 29 Fed. 314, patent for improvement in refrigerators; Puetz v. Bransford, 31 Fed. 462, holding two patents for a machine identical, and both covered by an assignment; Landesmann v. Jonasson, 32 Fed. 391. patent for ladies' cloaks; Brahn v. Ramapo Iron Works, 35 Fed. 1028 dalm for Improvements in switch-stands; Williams Mfg. Co. v. Franklin, 41 Fed. 395, patent for stave basket; Heine Safety-Boiler Co v. Anheuser, etc., Assn., 43 Fed. 790, limiting claim for improve ment in steam generators; Simmonds v. Morrison, 44 Fed. 761, pateat for dash-rail; American Road, etc., Co. v. Pennock, etc., Co., Fed. 255, improvement in road machines; Johnson Co. v. Pacific Biling, etc., Co., 47 Fed. 589, citing authorities, and holding patent for rails for street railroads void; Haughey v. Lee, 48 Fed. 384, patent for striker; " Johnson Co. v. Tidewater Steel Works, 50 Fed. 94, claim for method of rolling rails; Bromley Bros. Carpet Co. v. Stewart, 51 Fed. 914, claim for power loom; Deere v. J. I. Case Plow Works, 56 Fed. 844, 9 U. S. App. 567, claims for corn ctivator; Bowman v. De Grauw, 60 Fed. 911, claim for method of making flags; Bonnell v. Stoll, 61 Fed. 768, 17 U. S. App. 543, Improvement in bed bottoms; Brunswick, etc., Co. v. Phelan, etc., Co., 76 Fed. 979, patent for pool-ball frames; Klein v. Seattle, 77 Fed. 204, 44 U. S. App. 741, patent for pins for holding insulators; Olmsted v. Andrews, 77 Fed. 840, 46 U. S. App. 608, patent for p case; Schwarzwælder & Co. v. Detroit, 77 Fed. 891, improve beat in folding-chairs; Interior Lumber Co. v. Perkins, 80 Fed. 531. 3 C. 8. App. 95, claims for improvements in shingle machine; J. J. Warren Co. v. Rosenblatt, 80 Fed. 542, 53 U. S. App. 240, luggagecarriage for cycles; Tlemann v. Kraatz, 85 Fed. 439, 56 U. S. App. 2. case for exhibiting decorative art; Kelly v. Clow, 89 Fed. 303, U. &. App. 364, improvement in water-closets; Antisdel v. ChiHotel-Cabinet Co., 89 Fed. 313, 60 U. S. App. 588, patent for hotel cabinet; Chuse v. Ide, 89 Fed. 497, 60 U. S. App. 646, engine frames and lubricating devices; Christy v. Hygeia, etc., Saddle Co., Fed. 970, patent for bicycle saddle; Johnston v. Woodbury, 96 Fed 434, improvement in ore concentrators. Cited generally in Celoid Mfg. Co. v. Comstock, etc., Co., 27 Fed. 360. Istinguished in Hoe v. Kahler, 23 Blatchf. 362, 369, 25 Fed. 277, bolding patent for " improvement in printing press" involved breation. Vellaneous.- Miscited in Kates v. Atlanta Baggage, etc., Co., Ga. 649, 34 S. E. 377. Patents.-Bartholomew improved water-closet patent, construed and limited, pp. 13, 14. 4 S. 15-47, 29 L. 47, MURPHY v. RAMSEY. Appeal and error.- Action at law not tried by jury should be brought to Supreme Court by appeal, p. 35. Eections.- Utah commissioners, under act of 1882, were not bed to prescribe rules for registration officers, or qualification fraters, but only to appoint election officers, canvass returns and certificates of election, p. 36. Distinguished in Bloomer v. Todd, 3 Wash. Ter. 621, 19 Pac. 142, 1 L. R. A. 117, holding legislative act of territory did not confer suffrage upon women. Elections. Bigamist or polygamist, within meaning of § 8, act of March 22, 1882, is one who, having become husband of two or more wives, maintains that relation when he offers to be registered as a voter, without reference to cohabitation, which constitutes punishable crime, pp. 41, 42. Approved in Cannon v. United States, 116 U. S. 72, 29 L. 567, 6 S. Ct. 287, affirming S. C., 4 Utah, 142, 144, 7 Pac. 382, 383, where defendant was convicted of bigamy; Davis v. Beason, 133 U. S. 344, 33 L. 640, 10 S. Ct. 301, prosecution for violation of provisions of act of 1882; Innis v. Bolton, 2 Idaho, 415, 417, 17 Pac. 268, 269, holding territorial statute valid, disfranchising bigamists and polygamists; United States v. Simpson, 4 Utah, 229, 7 Pac. 258, holding marriage established without proof of cohabitation; Wenner V. Smith, 4 Utah, 243, 9 Pac. 297, holding defendant a polygamist and not entitled to hold office; dissenting opinions in United States v. Langford, 2 Idaho, 526, 21 Pac. 411, majority rejecting evidence of general repute of bigamous relations; United States v. Musser, 4 Utah, 175, 7 Pac. 404, indictment for unlawful cohabitation. Constitutional law. Act excluding blgamists from voting in Utah is not ex post facto, because not seeking by disfranchisement to punish for crime, and not retrospective; nor does it amount to an unlawful mode of prosecution for crime, pp. 42, 43. Approved in Garrett v. Weinberg, 54 S. C. 144, 31 S. E. 345, holding act disqualifying as juror one previously convicted of crime, not ex post facto. See explanatory note in 37 Am. St. Rep. 590. Territories. People of United States have sovereign power over territories, and Congress may take from their inhabitants any right of suffrage previously conferred, or at any time modify or abridge it, pp. 44, 45. Followed in United States v. Kagama, 118 U. S. 380, 30 L. 230, 6 S. Ct. 1112, holding act of Congress valid, giving territorial courts jurisdiction of crimes committed by Indians; Mormon Church v. United States, 136 U. S. 43, 34 L. 491, 10 S. Ct. 803, holding Congress had power to repeal charter of Mormon Church of territory of Utah; Boyd v. Thayer, 143 U. S. 169, 36 L. 112, 12 S. Ct. 385, construing naturalization laws of Congress for territory of Nebraska; Shively v. Bowlby, 152 U. S. 48, 38 L. 349, 14 S. Ct. 566, reviewing authorities, and holding Congress has power to grant lands below highwater mark of navigable river in territory; Thompson v. Utah, 170 U. S. 348, 42 L. 1066, 18 S. Ct. 622, provisions of Federal Constitution, relating to criminal prosecutions, apply to territories; Endle man v. United States, 86 Fed. 459, 57 U. S. App. 7, holding Congress could regulate sale of liquors in Alaska; Innis v. Bolton, 2 Idaho, ANN |