C62 
THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 
[MARCH I, 1892. 
won't work any more than that wilt. The 
plaintiff’s model is a good and true one. It is 
posaihlo from one crank to drive the otlier by means 
of a connecting piece or rod, only that the one crank 
requires to bo l)alanccd a little bit to carry it oyer 
the dead set. Tliat is a common motion in thresliin^ 
machines at home, in tlio dofondants’ machine it 
is carried over the dead sot by the upper crank being 
set at right angles to it and by tlio two opposing 
crank pins being connected. Tno jacket has the 
motion of tho connecting piece or rod. The lower 
surface has the motion of the connecting piece or tod 
between the lower cranks. 
Mr. A. E. Bhown, examined by Mr. Wendt, who 
is associated with Mr. Withers in conducting the 
plaintiff's case, said I am rjocomolivo Engineer of 
the Ceylon llailway. I have had a general training as 
an engineer and am an associate member of tho 
Institute of Civil Engineers. I received my training 
in the employ of Messrs. White A Sons, Isle of 
Wight, and Messrs. Stevenson A Co., Newcastle-on- 
i’yne. 1 have been ill yoais in the practice of my 
profession and have been in Ceylon since 1874. I 
do not know anything special about tea machinery. 
1 have seen tho specification of the plaintiff's 
machine. 1 consider tho model in Court to bo a 
model of the Excelsior. The case or jacket is tho 
brass frame, the wooden lining and the bracket. 
In the defendants’ machine I lind a piece of mecha- 
nism corresponding identically witli tho plaintiff’s 
machine, with tho exception that the one is 
cylindrical and the other is rectangular. Tho jacket 
in tho Excelsior givas the upper rolling surface 
motion. It imparts a reciprocating motion. The 
upper rolling surface is left free to niove vertically 
only. The principle of free vortical motion is em- 
bodied in the defendant’s machine. The fastening 
of the bow or bracket is merely a detail of constnic- 
tiou, and I do not consider that it in any way alters 
the principle of the arrangement. It is a small de- 
tail of njtoration that might have boon made to give 
ths bow more rigidity or firmness. 
Crots exaintned.—Tha claim I understand is the 
movement of tho upper rolling surface through tho 
jacket. There ace certain thiugs that ace entailed 
by tho movement of that jacket, lly carrying the 
upper rolling surface in tbe jacket it is kept free 
from friction with the lower table. I glanced at 
the specification in (lourt this afternoon. The 
only one of the defendants' machines that I have 
seen at work was the one in the Racket Court. I 
have not read tho specification of the defendant's 
machine. Mr. .Jackson in his specificatiou calls tho 
jacket the wooden lining and metal surrounding. D 
Speaking from momory in his specification the • 
tiKiPtiff refers in bis specification to the lettering I 
in his drawing. I do -not think there is any letter- J 
ing in the dra'iUg on i'.he Inass part, but 1 do not 
consider that ^ any impoV'taimo. 1 think the brass 
work would rm. 'e deHcrib.Sj^ lettering m the 
drawing inasmucb the let , oquidistant 
from the iKU-pendieubiX „jc.re hue of the drawing. 
The lettering “11" in plaintm « drawing, figures 1 
and 2, i» placed upon the drawing ;'f the woodwork. 
I seo no reason for putting tho letter “II ' on the 
metal part. ’There is no reason lor not doing sO, That is 
a matter for tho draughtsman. Uraughtsmen w’ould 
not repeat the lettering. 1 should imagine that fof 
tlie purpose of transmitting motion from tho driving 
crank-shaft to the guiding crank-shaft tho jacket 
and tho lower surface acted as guiding rods. Roth 
must be working to got the proper motion on 
either. It is necossary that the driving motion of 
the Excelsior may bo effectual that both tho jacket 
and the lower rolling surface should bo at w ork at the 
same time. Tiie lower surface (after examining tho 
model) will not move without the npper surface. It is 
also necessary that the jacket should be attached to tho 
sliding bars at the opposite side to the crank-shaft 
in order to make the upper surface work. It is also 
necessary that tho jacket should bo supported by tho 
sliding bar which acta as a guide for tho bearings on 
the jacket to work on. The jacket is acting as a 
connection between the bearings on tho rod and 
(bo crank-shaft. If you take away the jacket tho 
machine is incomplete and therefore will not work. 
The function of the jacket is to mve motion to the 
upper rolling surface, and to the best of my 
knowledge that is its only function. It also carries 
motion through and assists in tho working of tho 
lower table. I should think that it was placed there 
for the purpose of holding the leaf. It carries tho 
leaf to and fro across the lower rolling surface. 
To a degree the hornplatos in the defendants' 
machine do the same work as the bear- 
ings in tho other. In defendants’ machine tho 
hornplates guide the jacket laterally and in plaiutiff’s 
laterally and vertically. 
Mr. ilACKSON was auain examined by Mr. Withers for 
the purpose of having recorded that what he said had 
been quite understood in the case. He deposed : — In 
strict accordance with my patent specifloation and 
drawing I have constructed throe sizes of machines : 
the Excelsior, the Universal, and the Ceylon. It is 
those throe classes of machine that I complain has 
been infringed by the defendant's machine. 
Jly Mr.lSrmme . — The defendant’s machine is nearest 
the size of our Universal; it is between the size of the 
Universal and the Excelsior. Tho area of tho Excelsior 
box is <100 square inches. I have not worked out tho 
cubic contents; it all deiieuds upon how high yoit 
make tho jacket. 
It was then understood that tho plaintiff had closed 
his case, witli the exception of some documents which 
would be put in and perhaps one or two questions. 
Mr. WiTHEKs put in his documentary evidence — 
letters patent, specifloation and drawings all of 
which are filed with the plaint. He also read in 
evidence the specification filed with the defen- 
dant’s answer. 
Mr. HnnwNE objected to this latter point on the 
ground that it could not be read in evidenco against 
them as to whether the defendants had infringed 
or not. He pressed this specially as regards tho 
case of the second defendant company, that paper not 
being signed hy them and did not bind them — any more 
than the report of any of tho gentlemen of the press. 
Tho defendants would be judged by what they had 
done and not by what anybody else had said they 
had done. In other words the issue was not what 
defendant had patented or plaintiff had manufac- 
tured, but liad defendants' machine infringed that 
for which tho plaintiff got a patent. 
Mr. WiTHKKs said there might bo something in that 
objection if the defendants hod made separate answers. 
They had put in a common answer auilany admission 
that one of tho defendants made was surely evidenco 
against all of them. Tlie plaintiff also produced tho 
models as part of this evidence. 
Mr. Hhownf, said the defendants objected to tho 
plaintiff's model of the Excelsior on the greund as 
was admitted hy plaintiff, tho bower bracket was in 
the model attached to tho metal frame whereas 
in the specification of patent it was attached to 
what was woodwork in the model. 
The -JuiiOK also recorded tho admission by tho 
defendants that tho defendant company bad under 
the license of the first defendant sold tho ton leaf 
rolling machines alleged by the plaintiff to in- 
fringe his invention and that these rollers were 
represented by the models. With this the plaintiff 
closodh is case. 
.Mr. Hhownf. then began his address in opening 
the defendant’s case. lie said ho should have desired, 
if it hssi been possible as regarded tho conveniescoof tho 
Court, that, a longer lime could have been available to 
him to digest the mass of evidence that had boon led 
ore ho ventured to twldress the Ooiu't, but they wore 
hurried here from u.oe case to another, from do- 
famation to infringement, aod ho could only hope 
that the remarks he mode that ‘I'ty whereinever they 
might be imperfect or oven incotT°®t-, would o 
supplemented and corrected by the ‘A 
skilled expertwitnesaesto be placed before the 
At tho commencement of the case for the defence it wOi? 
agreed between bim and Mr. Dornhorat who with Mr. 
Loos appeared with him, that ho should undertake 
the responsibility of learning as far as he could the 
viows of his clients as regarded tho mechanism 01 
tho djll'etent machiuoa pud of esprussiug them to 
