March i, 1892.3 
THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. < 
655 
rolling surfaces moving at right angles to each other. 
I do not think any machine had the lower table 
traversing and the upper stationary. As I have said the 
Standard had the two surfaces moving at right angles 
to each other, and each surface being operated by 
a separate crank-shaft enabled me to put on wheels 
of uneven or unequal size to produce a varying 
action on the tea leaf which was then thought 
necessary. The Standard was the only one of my 
inventions, which I brought into Ceylon prior to the 
Excelsior for which I took out a patent in 1881. 
I never patented the Standard in Ceylon. I first 
saw the defendants' machine about May or June 
last year. I had not seen it at the manufacturers' 
in Scotland, but I got specifications and drawings 
about July 1890 I think. I got the specifications 
first and the drawings afterwards. As regards the 
Excelsior, what I claim as novel in my invention is the 
arrangement for transmitting motion to the top rolling 
surface through the case or jacket surround- 
ing it, whereby the top rolling surface is left free 
as regards vertical movement from the mechanism 
operating it. The square piece of wood on my 
machine is the top rolling sm-face. In the specifica- 
tion it is described as usually composed of wood. 
It is capable of being moved up and down at the 
will of the attendant. — And if the attendant has no 
will about it but has gone to sleep or is having a 
cheroot outside, is not its vertical action by gravity ? 
—is not its natural motion downward by gravity ?— 
Yes, gravity is the natural force that drags it 
down. I claim for it that in this vertical action it 
is entirely free from the driving mechanism. — That 
is the pith and marrow of your claim, is it not? — No, it 
is not. — Then what is ? — The arrangement of trans- 
mitting motion through the jacket to the top 
rolling surface. Free vertical movement of the 
top rolling surface is one of the results flowing 
from that arrangement. — Will you say that it 
necessarily flows from the subject of your claim?— 
I cannot add the word or keep it away. It is one 
of the results flowing from it, but there are other 
results named in the specification which may not 
necessarily flow from that arrangement. The machine 
might be badly put together. It does not follow 
that the result necessarily flows. I cannot say 
that it is a necessary resialt or otherwise, but it is one 
of the results that flows from the utility of the in- 
vention. Then you claim it only as a result 
of the invention and not as part of it ? In Kerr's 
case I think you took the opposite view. — I am not 
aware that free vertical motion was claimed, and 
in speaking of this free vertical action it must be 
taken into consideration that this was a machine 
having free vertical action as against the other 
having no vertical action. I take it for granted that 
in the specification of my machine the spindle is 
not mentioned and in the drawing there is only 
shown a hole in the bow through which a spindle 
might pass. The spindle, itself is not drawn. In 
figure I. there "are dotted lines from the bow to A. 
which represent the spindle and as a matter of fact 
the first Excelsior that came to Ceylon had both 
bow and spindle. (Mr. Browne here read part of 
Mr. Hutsen's evidence at the last trial.) Witness 
then said: — A few small hand-machines were 
sold without either bow or spindle for cheapness. 
If the chain of my machine is unhooked the 
rolling surface may drop down to the bottom, 
or if the tea gets into a lump it may force 
the cap to rise somewhat, but it has no auto- 
matic action. The mechanical description of it is 
a controllable action vertical or downwards. Descri- 
bing the case or jacket of his model ho said: — The case 
or jacket consists of a wooden case with a brass 
frame, to which is fixed a bow or bracket. (Mr. 
lU'owue licro called the witness's attention to the 
description of the jacket given in his specification.) 
In figure I, 15 — the case or jacket enclosing the 
rolling surface— is that part of my model which 
is made of wood. There is no lettering in the 
drawing on that part of my machine which 
in )uy model Is made of brass or metal. The 
drawings indicate that that part of my nui- 
chino which in tho model is made of wood is 
acljustablc vertically within the metal frame to whicli 
it is attached: it indicates it by showing the 
slot-holes through which pass the bolts which 
secure the lining to the frame. There is no 
mention of the frame in my specification, se- 
parately from the jacket. There is no mention 
of the materials of which the jacket is to be 
made. I describe them all as the jacket or case. 
Up to the present time our largest machines of this 
make have wooden lining inside as all the machines 
at first were made. The frame round it has never 
been made of wood but of cast-iron. One of the 
objects that influenced me in improving on the 
Standard was, the weight of the jacket resting 
on the table below. The weight of the wood and 
iron composing my Excelsior jacket is from 6 to 
8 cwt., of which the woodwork would weigh about 
24 lb. The weight of the Standard jacket is 
about 1 cwt. 9 lb. I would explain that the Standard 
(Loolecondura) machine takes a charge of 125 lb. of 
leaf at a time and that the Excelsior takes .300 lb. 
We are comparing a small with a large machine. 
To increase the Loolecondura machine to take 300 lb. 
would cause its present weight to be increased twice 
or three times, and this increased weight would destroy 
the under table in no time. When the Court 
resumed Mr. Jackson said he should like to make 
a little explanation with regard to part of his 
previous evidence. He was then asked whether 
the letter "B" referred in any way to the iron (or 
brass as in the model) frame, and he replied "No," but he 
wished now to say that he referred to the whole thing as 
being "B." Continuing his cross-examination he said : — 
The power in my machines is transmitted through the 
pulleys, through the shaft, through the bevel-wheels 
and then through the boss on the bevel-wheel to the 
crank-shafts, and through the jacket to the top surface. 
That is the driving mechanism. The motion is con- 
veyed to the pulley (R) by means of a belt. The power 
is then taken through the driving shaft (Q in the 
plan), then through the bevel-wheels (P and N), 
through tne crank^ahaft (M, L and R), K, L, M being 
the three crank pins on the said crank shaft. The 
crank-pin M is inserted in the boss of the 
bevel wheel marked N. The crank pin L tramsmits 
motion to the lower rolling surface marked G. K 
is the upper crank pin which transmits motion 
through the case or jacket to the upper rolling 
surface. Asked what was the furthest object to 
which motion was given in the machine he said: — It 
is difficult to say without seeing the full machine. 
My machine as a whole is a piece of mechanism. 
The crank pin L gives to the lower rolling surface 
G a reciprocating motion. If I remove the upper 
rolling surface of the Excelsior from its bearing I 
may then turn part of the driving mechanism with- 
out moving the under rolling sm-face at all, or I may 
put the driving mechanism in such a position 
that the under surface will not move at 
all. The motion imparted to the under rolling 
surface G is a reciprocating motion which 
is obtained by an unique crank-shaft which when 
disconnected from any of its bearings is utterly 
useless. — Is not the motion which this crank-pin 
gives to the lower rolling surface a circular motion, 
suppressed by the lower rolling surface being borne 
in rectilinear guides ? — There can be no circular 
motion. It is purely a reciprocating motion. — Does 
a crank give anything but a circular motion ? — The 
crank-pin is doing otherwise just now. (The witness 
illustrated his answer by moving the model). It is mov- 
ing in straight lines revolving in its own axis. An 
uncontrolled crank pin travels round the crank in a 
radius in proportion to the size, but the pin is revolving 
in its own axis.— Does it give a circular motion 
suppressed by these guides, yes or no?— I cannot 
answer the question yes or no. I cannot be 
bullied into using words to suit opponents' counsel. 
I say that tlic crank pin transmits a reciprocating 
motion to the lower rolling surface. The motion 
which A (tho top rolling surface) receives is a reci- 
procating motion. A reciprocating motion is a motion 
given in straight lines backwards and forwards. "A' 
has the same reciprocal motion as wliat I call tlie 
case or jacket has. — That reciprocating motion tliat 
'•A" gets is a liorizontal motion? — Horizontal when 
the mauhiuc is not chwgml with leaf. Wbcu the 
