The Express.
London, England, 1848-08-24 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.7Gun.DroaD, Aro. 29.

before the lord titled Macs and a aisle' Jeri,
HAMILTON v. COCHLXI—INPUINOING • rmtiorr.—
This was an •ortion brought upon an alleged infitagement of
a patent. The came commenced on Monday morning, and
occupied the cwurt till the middle of the day on T esday.
Mr. Serjeant Channel!, in stating the case, odd the plain-
tiff was a native of the United States, resoling near New
York; sad the delendant was also a native of that country.
The plainiift caul nevoted his attention to the improve-
ment of the mode by which timber for ship-budding
purposes could he at ones tut to the required
shape; and he at lan succeeded in inventing a sawing
machine, by which timber could be cut to any shape, and
without the waste of stuff occasioned by the common pro
au. He took outs patent for America, and being also de-
sirous of obtamiug one in Etiolate', the uccereary drawings
and specifications were turns:id. d to a gentleman in London,
who, having obtained a intent in his own name, afterwards
assigned it to the pinintiff. A patent was alse liken out in
France, but, &conduit/ hi the French law, it was necessary
to pat the invention in practice within a given time, and as it
was found to ~ucc;:ed cite, sive works were erected at
Toulon for that mutton". The deondant was at Toulon,
and had opportunities of seeing the plaintiff's invention,
and upon one occasion he appeared desirous of being
interested be taking a personal share in it, anti he Broke to
the son ot the plu,ntiff upon the subject, who referred him
Se nit fetter, bat no arrau,iereernt of that detotiption took
place. There would he too important questions for the jury
to decide; h=at, whether there was soy novelty in the in-
vention of tke pliuntitt, whether in fact noinetbing was ob-
tained which had out been accomplished before; and es.
madly, if they tuought this to he toe case, whether the de.
lends= had appetipri.ttCi to his own machine any material
portion of the plaint..:'. invention. With reference to the
first youstion, he ehntld snow that the sawing machine of
tke plaiottf bad accomplished wanething which had not
been done before, namely, cutting wood by one saw, in
cut res, and beetle, and also cox poucd bevels,
and the must important feature in the znacht-os was, that the
saws, instead of being fixed in one saw frame, or gate, had
an outer and inner frame, and in the later the saw could be
_made to move in a lateral direc•ion. The learned serjeant
went on to oiy that in Octolw r. 1846, the defendant repre-
men Mel bilaseit as tho inventor of a new sawing machine,
and the ssanj,:t toeing brought undi r the consideration of the
Admiralty, Mr. Cochrane rivets, ,1 instructions to erect one
of hi. %machines iii Woolwich Dockyard, and this was accord-
ingly do. ,e; and the cane on the pant of the plaintiff was
that this nmachine so evicted was, with some trilling excep-
tions, pthe same as trio one for which the plaintiff
had obtained
.a patent, and he said that if he established that
fact to the satiasa,llon of the jury, be should be entitled to
their verdii t.
The evidence way' then gone into, but from its extreme
hart' and the t.ehel,..al Chersder of the greater portion of
it, it will no! be neceesas v to give the particulars in detail.
The specifications and the lett, npatent, as well as a model
- e invented by. the plaintiff, were put it/.
• &Need he=ated as the agent of Mr. I
the west in Bggland, bat all the

seriatim omits were not completed until 1813, and in thai
near the eat, rat war obtained.
Mr. Csrpnieel de' coed that tho drawings and spo._;ftea
liens of the plaintiff's machine were so plain and int. inn h 4 •
thee be could have constructed a machine himself fum thaw
if they had been before him as a guide. lie hr.. seen the
machine at work at Stepney. The object of is was to tut
wood for ship-building to any required shay., thereby oh
viatiog the tedious pet ems of first usieg tiand,an, and
then abating with an adze. The priucipl aof the invention
were twofold first, the application of a'a inner saw-frame, or
gale, capable 'of moving within the. ordinary saw-gate of
• saw-mill; and secondly, the ss.w was ateasan,d in nn
inner frame on an axis, so as tr. vary the direction ot
the cutting by means of a stilt bar or lever used for
direotine the saw. Another rtimaiple was, that the umber
required to be cut had • motion given to it when neoemary,
so as to produce any required level to the saw. The witnem
described some other particutars, and said that from his
knowledge of engines and mechanics he had no doubt that
the combination of the principles to which he referred was
an entirely new invention when the rlaintiff obtained his
patent iu 1843.—1 n cross-examination the witness said he
had seen the defendant's machine at Woolwich, and he said
he could not see one of the principles he had spoken of but
was either 'applied directly or else an equivalent for it.
Mr. Ward, the Secretary to the Admiralty, proved that
an order had been given to the defendant for the construc-
tion of the machine at Woolwich, and it was set up in Feb.,
1848. It had been paid tor, but the machine had not yet
been sufficiently tested to enable them to decide upon its
value.
Some other witnesses were examined to show the utility of
the plaintiff's invention, and the model having been shown
to the jury aad the various portions of it dmcribed to them,
this concluded the case fur the plaintiff, and the court ad-
journed at six o'clock on Monday evening.
On Tuesday morning the case was resumed, when a
model of the defendant's machine was produced, and
Mr. Chambers addressed the jury at considerable
length in support of his case. Ile went into an
elaborate detail of the invention, and contended
that the principle of the plaintiff's machine was not •
novelty, and that the mode of working in the cid end.
ant's invention was a d tided improvement upon the other,
and that it poeseraed a greater degree of public utility and
superiority in doing the work, combined with simplicity ot
management.
Several engineers were then examined, who expressed an
opinian that the principle of the def. nilant's machine was
essentially different to that of the plaintiff. The ev,denoe for
the defendant was not gone through at the ruing ot the court
on Tuesday, and yesterday moimag some other witnesses
were examined.
S rjeant Channel) replied upon the whole case.
The Chief Baron, in summing up, Meat through the
whole of the evidence with great care and minuteness. He
concluded by submitting to the jury the following quee
Lions:—First, whether Mr. Smith was sufficiently possessed
of the invention at the time he took out the patent; se•
eondly, whether the machine was independent of and sub-
stantially different front one of a 'limiter character patented
in 1834; thirdly, whether the invention was new and use•
tut; and fourthly, whether the defendant had borrowed any
portion of plaintiff's invention.
The jury retired, but were r.ot absent more than five
minutes when they returned and gave a verdict for the
plaintiff on all the points submitted to them, with 40e.
nominal damages.

NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Ltvaitrooz, Arm. 23.
Cmws Coear.—liefore Mr. Jusuce Creswell.
MURDBII.--The court was crowded this morning with
persons anxious to hear the trial of W. Adams, aged 32,
charged with having, at Manchester, wilfully murdered
Diana Adams, his wife, by shooting her. The prisoner, on
being called upon to plead, said : Labouring under a melan-
choly degree of excitement, I believe I am guilty.—Clerk
of the crown: What do you ssy I—Prisoner : Labouring
under a deep degree of excitement, I cannot say whether I
was guilty or not. I don't believe I am guilty.
The • trial was then proceeded with. Edward Craven,
one of the Manchester police, stated, tkat on the morning of
the 25th of July he was in Lever-street about halt•put
o'clock. Saw the prisoner along with deceased. They ap.
pear,d as if they were disputint;,the deceaseddappezred
Threnthletemarilleage Priso.netrreetat'le and
o
into
alCateyd-s.treliete;
go home with him. She replied that she would not, and they
quarrelled. The deceased ran away, followed by the pri-
soner. He put his hand into his right hand pocket, and
took out a pistol, which he presented at the head of the de-
ceased, and it mapped ; he was then about three yards off
the deceased. He presented it again, and the deceased fell.
He seised the prisoner, and found two pistols upon kiln. The
prisoner told the witness to be cautious, so one of the pistols
was loaded with ball. The prisoner, who appeared quite
calm and cool, was taken to the station-house. The prisoner
stated that he had intended to destroy himself with
the awed pistol. Witness thought his breath
smelt of liquor, but he was sober.—Joseph Rough y,
• labourer, residing in Lever street, Manchester,
stated that about five o'clock on the morning of the
25th of July he was preparing to go to work, when he
heard a woman screaming in the street. He went oat to
s..e what was the matter,. and observed the prisoner running
atter deceased. The prison: r put his right hand into hie
right coat pocket, and pulled out a pistol. He presented it
to the head of the deceased and drew the trigger, but it
snapped and did net go off. He pulled the trigger back again,
and seized the dress of the deceased with his left hand. He
presented the pistol again, and this time it went off ; de-
ceased ran about two yards and then tell. At the time the
pistol was fired the prisoner could not be above half a yard
tram the deceso ed. Witham laid held of the prisoner, who
was immediately afterwards taken into custody. Witness was
not above five yards off the parties at the time of the occurrence.
—Jas.Sorley,superintendent of the Mane-.e-air pollee, stated
that when the prisoner was brought to Bridewell on the
morning of the occurrence, he told him the charge spinet
him, and cautioned him so to what he said. He said "I
went to meet my wife this morning in Newton street. I
stopped her, and said to her, ' Dinah, love, come and let us
live comfortable together.' She said ' No, a gay We I have
led, and a gay life I will lead.' I then said to her ' you or
I must die.' She replied that she would raise the street en
me and called me • foul name. 1 then put my hand 'lto
my pocket, drew out • pistol, and shot her. 1 don't think
I would have shot her had she not called me that bad name.
I have nothing more to say ; I don't care how swoon' die."—
Mary Ann Smith had known deceased Inc eight years. Her
name was Dinah Thomas. She went to live with the pri-
soner three years ago. She proved that the prisoner had on
lormer occasions threatened her.
The jury, after • short consultation, returned • verdict of
Guilty. Sentence of death was then passed upon the

prisoner.
TRZASONABLI CONSPIRACT.— In the thane of the
morning the grand jury returned into court with a
true bill against T. B. M'hianus, Lawrence Reynolds,
Patrick Murphy, Francis O'Donnell, Joseph Ow'dv,
Metthe v Somers, Robert Hopper, Edward Murphy,
James Laffan, Martin SWIM, Thomas O'Brien, George
Smith, Patrick O'Hanlon, James O'Brien, James Camp-
bell, and one or two others, for misdemeanor. Amongst
them ars two or three, young men of respectability and
standing in the town, whose connexion with the confederate
clubs has been traced by books and documents which have
been discovered.
[Some facts relative to these cases will be found in our
correspondent's report on the state of the manufacturing
districts.]

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

Mr. Baron Platt.

STEALINGTETIIIILTLIEVynn, 17, a Po; office clerk,
was indicted far stealing two letters containing money, the
same being the property of the Postmaster-General. It ap-
peared that the prisoner was a clerk in the inland depart-
ment of the Pow-office, and it was his duty, on the arrival of
the mails from the country, to sort a portion of them, and
. separa.e the registered letters from the others. On the
r morning of the 3rd July the prisoner had to perform this
duty with regard to the Scarborough mail, and, in cons.-
queue of directions that had been given to that effect, his
• proceeding* were watched by one of the Post-office officials,
and he was seen to take two letters from the
, bulk, and first place them upon a piece of paper
. in his desk, and then put them into the drawer
appropriated for the reception of the registered
letters. The prisoner then took all the letters out of
the drawer where the rinistered letters were placid, and
I took them to the proper officer, and when he had dune so he
. proceeded to the water-closet. Suspicion had already been
. excited by his proceedings, and he was followed and taken
into custooy in the closet, and the two letters which formed
, the subject of tt e indictment were afterwards found in the
closet upon a search being made with that object. Neither
of the letters had been opened, or their contents in anv way
disturbed_ —Mr. Ballantine, for the defence, said the boy at
; the bar was the sen of an officer of rank in the navy, now
; deceased, and his family were highly respectable. His
, position in the Postoffice was a sufficient guarantee of
hie character, and no charge had ever before been pre-
(erred against him, and he trusted he should be able to
satisfy them that there were grounds upon which they
ii.ight say he was nut guilty in the present instance. He
then proceeded to comment upon the nature of the einem
that were required of the prisoner, and urged that the letters
might hue come innocently into his posseusion, and that, in
his confusion, consequent upon the sudden meaner in which
the officer made his appearance, he had dropped the letters,
and he urged that the tact of the letters not having been
opened, or in any way despoiled or their contents, confirmed
the view of the one which he submitted to the jury—Mr.
Baron Platt, having summed up, the jury deliberated for a
-hors time in the box and then retired. They were absent
nearly three hours, and upon their return into court, the fore-
man said the jury were of opinion that the prisoner dropped
the letters into the closet in order to avoid the consequence
of his mistake in taking them, and that he did not intend to
steal them.—Mr. Baron Platt said that this finding was
tantamount to a verdict of not guilty.—Mr. Clarkson said
that; according to the terms of the statute, the finding of the
jury constituted the offence stated in one of the counts of
the indic ment, that the prisoner had "secreted " the
letters. The act expressly said that any person in the
service of the Post-office, who hovalrl secrete or destroy,
die, any letter, should be deemed guilty of felony.—
Mr. Ballantine contended that some guilty intent should be
proved, Mr. B.ron Platt, after referring to the act, said it
was very explicit, and expressly referred to the secretion of a
letter for any pureose whatever. lie was, therefore, or opi•
nion that the verdict returned by the jury applied to the
count for secreting. Mr. Ballantine then applied to the
court to allow the verdict to be recorded in the precise form
in which it was delivered by the jury, in order that the point,
might undergo filmier consideration. Mr. Baron Platt said
he had ao objection to this being done, and he would cow I
suit the judges upon the subject before any sentence was
pronouneed.

of the machine Metal
Mr. J. Smith depo
Hamilton to obtain