Summary

Samuel Blatchford Bussey v. Excelsior Manufacturing Company…

It has been ascertained by experience that when during the use of the oven for baking purposes, a large quantity of cold water is suddenly poured into the reservoir, and there is nothing between the front of the boiler and gases of combustion passing through the rear end vertical flues, the heat of the said gases will be so much absorbed by the reservoir as to sensibly cool the oven and interfere with the process of baking.
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Blatchford Bussey v. Excelsior Manufacturing Company…

In the McDowell patent of 1871 all the upper part of the reservoir is protected by an air-space, open at the top, between the reservoir and the stove.
The point of invention in claim 2 is to take the gases through a small opening into a broad sheet-flue under the bottom of a reservoir and out through another small opening is the rear, so that they will circulate in the broad flue and act on the entire surface of the bottom of the reservoir. The Stewart patent of 1859 shows the same arrangement with an elevated reservoir, but there is no invention in applying it to a low-down reservoir.
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Blatchford Bussey v. Excelsior Manufacturing Company…

If a stove with an exit-flue constructed across the bottom and up the rear upright side of a boiler or reservoir existed before, there was nothing patentable in applying such construction to a diving-flue stove. The combination of exit-flue and reservoir with which claim 2 is concerned has no patentable relation to the arrangement of the internal flues of the stove. The Getz patent of 1840 shows an exit-flue extending across the bottom and up the rear upright side of a boiler.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature