5oo "fMP TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. Qanuary i, 1892, 
the specificatioQ and explain how the parts of it corres- 
ponded with the parts of hie maohine. 
Mr. Bbowne: — Does my friend propose to read the 
Bpeci&oation in evidenoe, 
Mr. Withers:— Yes. 
Mr. Bbownb then objected on the ground that 
what the defendants were ch«r{^ed with in this case 
was importing and selling and in the case of the 
Beoond defendant oompany neing certaia machines 
an alleged infringment on the plantitf's maobiae, 
They were not charged with having patented a ma- 
chine or made a specification and thereby infringed a 
xight. In other words they were charged with things 
they had done and not with things they had writtea or 
said the specification might possibly afifect whatever 
man signed or filed it. It could no more affect any- 
body else in this suit than it could affect any leading 
merchant in the Fort like Mr. Henry Bois for iustanoe, 
and therefore it was inadmissible in evidence as a 
BBoond ground against anybody except the person who 
signed it. 
The Judge was understood to say that being part of 
the defendants' answer the plaintiff h^d a right to 
refer to it. 
Mr. Beowne : — Possibly as a matter of pleading but 
not in evidence. 
Mr. Withers then proceeded to identify the 
various parts of the one machine with the other. 
The difference struck the eye at once. There was 
nothing of the kind ever seen before in any icachiDe 
in Oeylon or, he made bold to say, in any tea roller 
elsewhere, and its usefulness would be proved by the 
fact that it had met with public acceptance. Hun- 
dreds of the machine had been sold, and that was one 
of the ordinary proofs of usefulness. It was most 
aeeful by having the independent vertical movement 
b which it could be fed easily: and by having the parts 
removed which required oiling so that not a drop could 
fall into the tei. He would read from the specification to 
Bhow the corresponding parts of the other machine. It 
was said that the invention consisted of a circular table 
or of platform and hollow cylinder in which the 
latter revolved a circular lid. That circular table or 
platform answered to the square table of Mr. Jackson's 
machine and theirs was round whereas Mr. .Jackson's 
was more or less square, the square hollow cylinder 
answered to the square hollow jacket in which the 
latter revolved, and the circular lid was the upper 
table corresponding to the square cap in the " Ex- 
celsior" ; and it was perfectly clear that the motion 
which was directly imparted was an infringement of the 
motion in Jaokeon'a maohine. It was also said that they 
imported eccentric motion to the table, that was 
the bottom one, and to the whole cylinder. That 
showed that the driving machinery in Brown's im- 
parted the motion the same as ia Jackson's. It 
was also said that the cylinder carried the table 
with it and that was really a description of plain- 
tiff's machinery, the only difference being in shape; 
that what Mr. Jackson had done on the square they 
had done in the round. In reply to the Judge ho 
showed that the triple action was fed in the same 
way as the "Excelsior." In conclusion he said that 
however much the alleged infringing machine might 
differ in appearance from Mr, Jackson's the court 
must not be guided or influenced by that. Parts of Mr, 
Jackson's machine might bo omitted in the 
infringing machine ; there might be additions to 
the infringing maohine which were not in the 
plaintiff's; thesn omissions or additions might 
make the defendants' machine a better one than his ; 
but all that went for nothing if the plaintiff's vital 
arrangement had been substantial'y taken and by them 
and with all these omissions and additions the machine 
was a colourable imitation of the plaintiff's patent. 
(Mr. DoiiNHOBST: — I admit that to be the l»vv.) He cited 
the caie of Proctor v. Bennia and called upon the plain- 
tiff to give hia evidence. 
Mr. Wm. Jackson, the plaintiff, examined by Mr. 
Withers said : — L am a mechanical engineer by pro- 
fesBion. I began the study of my profession when I 
was 10 years of ago and served an apprenticeship of 
5 yeara, Atter that I went to India, going to Oal. 
cutta and afterwards to Assam, where I was on a 
tea plantation of the Scottish Assam Co. for two 
years, after that I confined myself entirely to tea 
machines — rolling, drying and sifting and various '< 
classes of machine. I came to Ceylon about I 
three years after the introduction of this machine 1 
(the " Excelsior") I think. My first visit to Ceylon 
was during 1885 or 1886. I called at Colombo before i 
that but did not stay. I first introduced some of i 
my machinery here in 1878 or 1879 when the "Standard" i 
machine which was sold in London was sent out. I 
As far as I am aware that was the machine in use ] 
up to the time of taking out the" Excelsior" for which 
I took out a patent in April 1881. The "Standard" 
was one of my inventions. It was invented when I | 
was in India The first thing that led me to invent 
the " Excelsior" was that the planters wanted a less 
costly machine, and in the " Standard" there was a i 
considerable amount of time wasted in India 
where the leaf was rolled very much quicker ; 
than here in trying to get the leaf down \ 
through the centre of the roller cap. The next 
point was that the jacket had to be made heavy to \ 
prevent it from jerking or jarring over the leaf whilst < 
it was contained by it. The jacket of the " Standard" 1 
rests on the lower table and its heavy weight made 
it stiff to drive. 1 was not satisfied with the rolling 
obtained by that machine, and what I had in my mind 
when working out the idea of the " Excelsior" was to ' 
contrive that there should be the same action on the [ 
leaf as in the case of the Standard, but in a less costly 
way and that the maohine should be more easily driven ] 
and worked. In the " Excelsior" it is necess-^ry to ] 
place the leaf on the feeding platform at the top of ' 
the machine. If you place a sheet of paper on the ■ 
lower table and pass a pencil through the upper surfacOj 
jacket or cap a true circle will be described. That 
mo'.ion is precisely the same as the motion of the i 
" Standard" when the cranks are geared up at right i 
angles to each other. I have now transferred the 
driving mechanism from the cap or upper rolling sur- 
face to the jacket surrounding it, that is to say that 
I have connected the driving crank with "the jacket j 
itself. The driving mechanism in the " Standard" was 
coupled direct to the upper rolling surface or cap, the i 
jacket surrounding such upper cap or surface being 
left free or loose. In the " Excelfiior" or improved ! 
machine I have just reversed that. I have taken ' 
the driving mechanism away from the upper cap 
or surface and attached it to the jacket which 
surrounds the surface. By connecting the driving ; 
mechaLism to tbe jacket I was enabled to ! 
keep the lower edge of the jacket or outer case just \ 
clear of the lower table. By this arrangement of ! 
driving through tbe case or jacket I was aleo eaabled ] 
to secure free vertical movement of tbe surface. In i 
connection with that I was the first to introduce the | 
bow and bracket attached direct to the jacket through , 
which the cap is operated. This arrangement of i 
driving through the jacket which we must continue i 
to refer to as the jacket enables me to lift the i 
cap sufficiently far to feed the leaf in on one side ' 
underaeath. I can see the leaf being operated on j 
in this machine by looking through the same passage ! 
as the leaf is passed in. That passage is called the j 
hopper. The pressure by the cap on the leaf under j 
this system resulted in the work being accom- 
plished more quickly and promptly than under the i 
old system in the " Standard." By transposing the ; 
driving mechanism from the cap to the jacket sur- | 
rounding it, the dirty, greasy oily parts are removed | 
from the cap or top of the surface. In answer to 
Mr. Morgan be said: — Tbe jacket in the "Standard" 
weighed from one to two owt. and that weight 
resting on the lower table whilst the machine was i 
in action produced an amount of wear and tear on i 
the lower table which wore that lower table .out. 
That wear and tear dcea not take place in the other 
machine because tbe weight does not rest on it [ 
Beplying to Mr. Withers he said : — Of the "Excelsior' 
embodying the improvement of driving through the 
jacket we have sold I suppose 800 in Ceylon. Did 
the " Exoelaior " that you brought out when it 
