March i, 18(52. J 
rHF TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 
669 
drew that plan put the letter N to represent the wheel 
h- is not an engineer. (Mr. Withers remarked that in 
the specification ‘ N ’ is the wheel.) A specification 
ought to refer more particularly to the class of material 
make the machine, I kunw what a drawing i«, I 
have been at drawing for 40 years and the 
man who put it in the bo ^0 and meant it to 
be wheel was not an engineer. It appears to 
me that the boss was extended for a purpose 
was why N is put where it is on the drawing. I 
say tiiat although in tiie specification N is described 
as the wlieel. I forget where my first machine 
was sent to in Ceylon, and 1 cannot say what 
number was on it. I recognise a drawing of my 
machine, but it has evidently been got up 
for the purpose of a photographer ; it is a 
picture rather thma drawing. (Mr. B owne said he 
would put Jackson in the box eo that the drawing 
miglit be identified. Mr. Withers indicated he would 
not put it in evidence.) In the drawing the upper 
surface is a working fit, but no machine of mine 
has ever been made like that, having contact. 
I know Mr. Jas. Sinclair of Bcarwell estate whore 
there is a triple action roller. He never sugeested 
to mo that there should be a olenr space of two 
inches all round bntweeu the case and the nppor- 
rolling surfiire. If he didi have f ntiroly forgotten. 1 am 
perfectly clear that rone of my machines was cvi*r 
made a working fit. The only thing that the draw- 
iug disclose is that they were never meant to come in 
contact with the jacket. At first before it^ was 
known the idea was that the lid must rise up 
between the edpo of the oppor rolling surface and 
the jacket so that there was a small space made 
but no contact. Do the drawings in C- lombo or in India 
disclose auvthing else hut a working tit? Do they 
show anything to indicate two inches clear 
space ? They do not dUolo^c two inohen clear 
I At that time we did not know that 
two inches space would be allow’od. A working fit 
means in relation to the work that it has to do, and the 
work that this has to do is to revolve inside the case. 
Had there been contact it would not have been 
driven. In your drawings in India ami Ceylon what 
wpace is indicated? About a sixteenth of an inch 
all round. Mr. Withers— just like the Excelsior. 
Was there anything in the plaintiff’s apecifications 
and drawings to prevent him making the whole 
upper part of the roller, that is to say, the how 
bracket, tlie lining, and the shell of the upper 
rolling surface in one piece if ho desired so to do. 
1 here is everything against it in the specifi- 
cation and in the drawings. Firstly the draw- 
ings represent the case or jacket by four letters H. 
1 hose letters refer only to that part whicli is com- 
monly made of wood, and no practical engineer if he 
had meant to refer to the whole piece w’ould have 
made tlie mistake of putting them on that portion. 
There was, on the other hand, a very good reason for 
liis putting the letters whore he did, for he had to ar- 
range for tho case or jacket being raised or lowered 
vertically within what I call the connecting rod. No 
practical engineer would have called this connecting 
rod the case or iacket. If tho case were in one piece 
the case would ne imniovable within tho connecting 
rods. I say that the connecting rods and the wooden 
parts arc two distinct portions each having different 
functions. My definition of a connecting rod is a bar 
of iron or any other strong material which may be 
shaped in any fashion to suit the circumstances in 
which it is employed. They are of various forms. In 
the Excelsior it takes the form of being attached to a 
revolving crank pin at one end and to a guiding rod so 
that it may be the means of converting circular into 
rectilinear motion. It could have no other name in 
machines. In the Triplex tlie connecting rods are 
UHouto transmit a revolving motion from one crank shaft 
There are dozens of connecting rods, 
definition is to he found in Ranken’s an- 
I ma machnios. — Q , — Your dotimtioii does not cor- 
responti with anything that Kankon says.— Ilowovor 
yon say he gives a good definition and von subscribe 
to what he says .-Yes, if he In-id given tho 
aeiiiiition X have given hia book would have boon ten 
84 
times its size. (Laughter.) Isay that this connecting 
rod in tho tea roller has all tho elements of the 
connecting rod of a locomotive. It has tho olomonts 
and re.sembles it in structure — 1 won’t say in ap- 
pearance because that depends how you look at it. 
i\Iy definition of a “connector” is anything that con- 
nects two shafts but it may not be a connecting rod— 
it may be a belt or a chain. There would bono crank pin 
involved with a chain or bolt whereas you must have a 
crank pin with a connecting rod. — Q. — Now, how comes 
it that in your son’s specification the word connecting 
rod is not used at all ? — [Mr. 1). F. Brownk objected on 
the ground that wliat they had written was ultra 
vire$ — the question being wbat they had actually 
manufactured and also on the ground that the 
witness was being asked a question as to^ what 
somebody else had done]— — I did not write tho 
specification.— — Did you draw it up or assist in 
drawing it up ? — A . — I handed over the drawings 
to a patent agent in Loudon in order that he might 
draw up the specification as there are legal formalties 
about which I know nothing. I was called to see 
the specification on mail-day and I was very busy 
and I did not road it through very carefully before 
signing it. I simply looked through tho claim and 
saw that was correct. I admit that in the body of 
the specification tho I'atont Agent should have been 
more careful. The drawings aie .iOiTect: I made them. 
Tliere was no need to mention tho connecting rod 
in my specification,— the drawings represented it. 
It would have been useless to put it in tho suoci- 
fication (witness shown drawing). Will you tell mo 
how you came by this drawing ?— I believe it is my 
private property. Mr. Withkks: — I t is a cerLtied 
copy from the Patent office. Witnksh: — T here was 
a drawing put in and taken back. Mr. Withhhh: — 
Well this IS a true copy, certified by the Patent 
office.— WiTNKss : That was withdrawn from tho 
Patent Office. It was put in by mistake. — Q. — Look- 
ing at the specification and plan what in your 
specification is lettered as “ K is it not a hollow 
cyliudor all through?— A. — Well it could not be, 
if tho Bpocification said so tho specification is not 
correct : In tlio plan tho letter ** K ” is on tho 
coimcotiug rod. Well, the central portion of tho 
connecting rod is a hollow cylinder, and it receives 
the case or jacket. I don’t think this plan is a right 
one. I cannot tell where it came from. Tho crank 
pins here are shown all wrong ; as far as I know 
not one of my machines has gone to India, but tho 
Roller is patented there. Tho (Ceylon spociticatioii 
was made about April ‘iUli, 1HH8. My son got the 
patent about the 24th of October. Tho delay 
occurred in our withdrawing one plan and putting 
in another. It may he that my application for 
a patent in India was not made till tho 2rtth of 
February, 1889. 1 don't remember. I cannot say 
that I have read my Indian Hpocification. A Patent 
Agent made it out for nie and I signed it and sent 
it. The (!!oylon specification was withdrawn with 
tiio plan, and a new specification tiled. If the 
Indian specification differs in wording from the 
local one which you have it is duo to that. 
Mr. Withhhh said it differed in toto. 
The Indian specification was never withdVQiwn ; but 
the Ceylon one was. Oh, I remember, there is a 
very good reason for it. When that specification 
for Ceylon was first sent in tho loading partner of 
tho house was aw'ay from homo, and tho junior partner, 
1 think, wrote that specification. It was done hnr- 
riedly, and wlien the senior partner came homo I 
thiiiK that ho and I must have seen these errors and 
made the specificatiim right. I admit that tho lan- 
guage in tho two specification is different but they both 
relate to the same machine. Q . — I think you will be 
surprised tc hear that tho plans sent to India were 
not the same as those sent to Ceylon ? Would you 
be surprised to lioar they are entirely different?— 
n.— That is an utter impossibilitv ; it could have 
boon nothing of tho sort.— f,). — Well, look yourself 
(Handed plans) Those are not identical The 
machines are identical but the cranks are shown 
differently and the hornplates are slightly different 
liiit thev servo the same purpose. ’ 
Mr. J>. F- iiiiowNE said lire plaoi alleged to have boea 
