ANDREAS KURTZ 145 



for roasting, the finishing chamber being 

 heated by a separate furnace. 



By Gamble a good deal of evidence was 

 given to show that the object for which his 

 patent was obtained was the use of two 

 separate furnaces, which was not known 

 before. But Kurtz proved that a person of 

 the name of Beswick had previously used two 

 chambers, connected by a spout, ten or 

 twelve feet long, through which the materials 

 when partially decomposed ran from one to 

 the other, in which state they were roasted or 

 finished. The jury decided that the use of 

 two separate furnaces was not new, but 

 Gamble contended that his claim was not for 

 the use of two retorts worked in connection 

 with the whole apparatus for the condensing 

 of muriatic gas, although the words of the 

 specification were " in connection with each 

 other," not in connection with the whole 

 apparatus. The verdict was contrary to 

 Gamble's contention ; the judge now upheld 

 the verdict, and the judgment was accordingly 

 given in favour of Kurtz on the 2nd and 3rd 

 issues, viz., that Gamble was not the first 

 inventor, and that the alleged invention was 

 not new. But whilst this trial was proceeding, 

 shortly after the first decision of the jury, 



