THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 
March i, 1892. 
filed with the Indian specification now produced by Mr. 
Withers was printed in Aberdeen. Had the other 
side a certified copy of what was filed in India ? 
Witness: — I always understood that both plans 
and specifications were the same. How this comes 
to be printed this way in the Indian specification is 
a very strange thing. There has been foul work 
going on here. 
Proceeding, witness said : — I don't know if this is a 
correct plan but this seems to me to correspond 
with the plan that I believe to be deposited in 
Ceylon. (Model of the Rapid Roller produced.) 
This machine embodies the principle of the Excelsior 
in a way. The upper rolling surface is driven in 
the same way. 
Mr. Withers was proceeding to quote from Mr. 
Brown's alleged Indian specification when 
The CouBT asked what Mr. Withers was reading 
from ? 
Mr. DoDWELL Browne : — Jolly & Sons' pamphlet, 
sir. It is a pamphlet printed by Jolly & Sons of 
Aberdeen. 
Mr. Withers, holding up a MSS. copy. We have 
here a more formal copy. 
Mr. Bhow^ie : — Is that a certificate copy of the 
Indian specification ? 
Mr. Withers : — Yes, it comes from the Indian 
Patent Of&ce. 
Mr. Browne Is it a certified copy ? 
Mr. Withers : — It accords with the law of Indian 
evidence. 
Mr. Browne : — Is it a certified copy ? 
Mr. Withers : — It does not purport to be. 
Mr. Browne : —Then it is no better than Jolly's 
pamphlet. 
^Mr. Withers (to Witness): — Is that a correct descrip- 
tion of your Indian specification '! 
Witness: — It may be or it may not be. The por- 
tions of the .specifications now read must refer to the 
Standard or to the Excelsior,— not to the Rapid. I 
have seen Mr. Jackson's agent, Mr. Dalgarno, but 
never spoke to him. I once saw him riding down 
the road near Bearwell. I never had a conversation 
with him about tea rollers — never in my life. I saw 
him and was told who he was when I asked but, I 
never spoke to him. 
Mr. Withers said he had no more questions 
to ask, and the witness was then re-examined 
by Mr. Browne and said : As regards the relation 
of the jacket and the top rolling surface to each 
other the Rapid is the same as the Excelsior. 
Whether the interval between the edge of my upper 
rolling surface and the lining is two inches or only 
the sixteenth of an inch there is never contact — 
there is always an open space all round. I did not 
sign the specification in Calcutta, I remember now 
I appointed an attorney there. I don't know by 
whom it was signed. The plan "ZZ" produced by 
Mr. Withers is a working drawing specifying the 
measurements from the office ofMessrs. Jas. Abernethy, 
engineers, Aberdeen. Q. — It is to erect the machine '! 
— My private property. Q. — Never mind that ; who 
makes your machines for you '? A .—The Agents named 
in this drawing, James Abernethy & Co., Aberdeen. Q.— 
And did you ever authorise them to issue such a drawing 
»athis? 4.— Never. 
The next witness called for the defence was Mr. 
Haecoubt Skrink, who said— I am the owner of 
Osborne Estate, Dikoya. I have been planting since 
1882. I know Jackson's Excelsior machine, but had 
never used it. I have used a No. 2 Rapid and also 
plaintiff's Little Giant Roller. I worked the latter 
about 2i years and the Rapid for 19 months. In 
those machines the upper rolling surface was 
pushed by the inside of the lining and so got its 
motion. I bought a Triple Action Roller in IHHi), 
in London, and it was put up here in January 1890. 
In the Triple Action there is now an inch and three 
quarters space between tlic lid and the liox. Wlien 
I had the Triple Action Roller first it would take 
as a fair cliaigo aljout 225 lb. of withered leaf. 
Now, it tii.kes aljout 271) lb. 'J'lie maximum quantity 
the 'Rapid would take was 150 II). and the Little 
Giant about .')0 lb. The power necessary for the 
Triple Aclwa KoUcr waa about the same as for the | 
Rapid. Witness also gave evidence on one or two 
points concerning the mechanism of the Rapid stating 
that the upper rolling surfaces did not roll the tea. 
Cross-examined, witness said that formerly the space 
between the upper rolling surface and the lining of 
the T. A. Roller was only about an eighth or six- 
teenth of an inch. Afterwards a brass jacket was 
supplied in place of the wooden one and then an 
inch and three quarters interval was left and this 
allowed for a greater quantity of leaf being rolled 
than formerly when the wooden lining was very thick. 
— What made you keep a useless machine like 
the Rapid for 19 months A useless machine •> I 
did not say it was useless.— (J.— I think one would 
gather that from your answers to counsel in examina- 
tion in chief.— .1.— Extreme questions were put to 
me. I said if the Rapid was carelessly or hurriedly 
revolved the leaf would not revolve. — Q.—l cer- 
tainly understood and gathered from your several 
answers that the Rapid was quite a useless machine? 
Then it was a useless machine!— vl. — Certainly not. 
— Did you not get a guarantee with the defendant's 
machine. I got what I considered to be equally good, 
I have the assurance in writing that in the event 
of any contingencies arising I shall be protected. 
Q.—D\A you ask for that ? y/.— Yes, I asked for 
it. Why? ^1.— Because I had heard a good 
deal of talk about some litigation likely to arise out 
of rollers. 
Major Day, R.E., was next called. He said: I 
am a Major of the Royal Engineers. Mr. Good«ve 
was our lecturer on mechanism at Woolwich, where 
I completed my study as an engineer. I left about 
December 1867. I "took second place on leaving. 
I got gold medal which is given for the most 
distinguished cadet of season. I have had a scientific 
training therefore, in mechanics. Our practical 
course we went through the Royal Arsenal. I 
was in charge of the printing and lithographic 
machinery at Chatham when I was Secretary of the 
Royal Engineers Institute, that was from 1884 to 
1889, when I came out here. I had a soda-water 
manufactory once with all the machinery, and in 
addition to that I was sent as one of the Travelling 
Inspectors of Science Classes for the Science and 
Art Department, South Kensington. This took me 
to the manufacturing districts a good deal, and I 
used to meet manufacturers, and generally they 
went over their worl.j with me, so that I saw their 
machinery while in the Arsenal; they make every- 
thing—from big guns to percussion caps and all 
kinds of machinery. I have read the specification 
and studied the drawings filed by the plaintiif in 
taking out his letters patent from the "Excelsior"' 
machine, and I examined his models and 
also the model of the Triple Action Rollei. 
In the "Excelsior" the upper rolling surface 
is moved backwards and forwards by the box 
by coming in contact vidth it. (Model of the Triple 
Action machine pointed out.) The upper rolling 
surface in the defendant's machine does not receive 
motion like Mr. Jackson's machine. It receives its 
horizontal motion by the continuation of the crank- 
pin upwards, which is fixed to a pulley, and that 
drives the second pulley by means of a band, and 
that drives the upper rolling surface. Working the 
machine as I do not know that it receives two motions. 
You have got to roll the tea in the box, and it is necessarj' 
that you must give the box and the upper rolling surface 
an isochronous motion, that is moved in equal time ; 
then you also impart this rolling motion by means 
of these two pulleys and the band. Witness next de- 
scribed the train of mechanism in the Triple Action 
Roller, and said that with Defendant's RoUer it did 
--lot matter if the jacket was used or not; the 
machine could be worked all the same ; but 
with the "Excelsior" the case was different, and 
the machine would not work without the jacket. In 
his opinion as an expert motion was not imparted to the 
upper rolling surface in Jackson's "Excelsior" and 
Brown's Triple Action in same way ; the upper rolling 
surface of the " Excelsior " would not act if it did not 
come in contact with the jacket : the hornplates in 
the defendant's machine were not equivalent to the 
bearings in Jackson's machine, and could not be 
