Krag-Jorgensen at the Supreme Court
Major William R. Livermore, U.S. Army, and Captain Andrew H. Russell, Ordnance Department - U.S. Army, were an inventive pair of Officers.
They combined their efforts in the design of a bolt rifle, U.S. Patent 230,823 (1880).
They submitted their rifle design for government rifle trials in the early 1880's and 1890's. They also submitted a 6mm cal. rifle at the Navy trials in the 1890's.
Their rifle design was rejected, but, elements of their patent may appear in the Krag-Jorgensen feed system.
Captain Andrew H. Russell brought a law suit against the U.S. Government that was argued before the Supreme Court in 1901.
It appears their suit was denied on legal technicalities and not the validity of their claim. They appear to have been given a runaround by the Patent Office and Ordnance Department.
(If I understand correctly, they were advised by the Supreme Court to seek redress in a lower court, under Torte Law).
BTW - Captain Andrew H. Russell played a major role in organizing the War Department's Arms Displays at the 1888 Cincinnati Exhibition and the 1893 World's Columbian Exhibition.
He also devised the clever bore-mirror for the 'Trap-Door' Springfield.
Link to the legal case: https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep182516/
The attached Russell-Livermore Rifle drawings are as clear as mud, to me!
The 'orange circled' magazine drawing appears to operate horizontally? In that plane, FWIW, it looks vaguely like a Krag-Jorgensen feed.
There is another magazine that appears to operate on an incline with a sheet-metal housing.
There were two Russell-Livermore rifles submitted for the 1892 Ordnance Department trials.
There were three Russell-Livermore rifles submitted to the board for the 1893 tests.
The test report, in Brophy's book, "The Krag Rifle", page 14: "Nos. 9, 10, and 11. - All with magazine upon the Russell-Livermore pattern,
but with the receiver and entire bolt mechanism the same as on the Lee-Speed, Mark I, of England.
The magazines are of the same general design, differing somewhat in the details of construction. All are awkward to load and operate.