On appeal to the examihers-in-chief-s. ii. hodges for the board.It is true, as has been remarked in this case, that the differences between the design presented, and tlie one referred to by the Examiner in eharge , are very slight . The lines in the respective drawings are nearly the same, and w!Cre nearly in the same direction. it must be remembered, nevertheless, that almost imperceptible ariatioi s in the lines of drawings often change the whole aspect of tlimages represented, and mayeost intense study, and the exercise of the hightest geMus. The emotions indicated by the painting' of a face may be entirely changed by modifications which would not be notieed by a stranger to the art. The novelty of a design is not to be determined, there fore, by the e xtent to which the lines are parallel to those of another, f)ut the effect must also be taken into consideration. The design which was referred to as being an anticipation of the one before us was intended to represent aeoila< with a hem. The purpose of the applieant is to represent a collar with a taue attached to the bordert and his drawing is modifled acco<diny!j-. The eliange, though, slight in itself, produees the desired effect. This constitutes a substantial difference between the two, and precludes the oae from being regarded as au anticipation of the other. The decision of the primary Examiner is reversed.