The National Register.
London, England, 1818-08-24 00:00:00

!fITI 'GATT .tl. rtrztsTrit.

LAIV INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, MONDAY, Auo. IT.
WHICIAR Y. MALING.

The plaintiff, in 1810, obtained a patent under the Great
Seal for a new method of preparing malt to be applied to the
impure of colons ing porter and other kinds of malt lignor.
The nature of the invention was very simple ; It consisted
wily of drying or heating malt to 400 degrees of Fahrenheit's
therniotueter,lby which it would be converted into a substance
like g , easily soluble in hot or cold weer ; the Matting was
effected by an ordinary cylindrical coffee-roaster, or by
passing the malt down a screw cyliuder exposed to a certain
heat, so that the malt when delivered would exhibit a (lark-
brown appearance. the spceißeation stated, that this sub-
stance, when dissolved, would be much more effectual in
colouring porter than burnt sugar, the use of which had been
prohibited by an act pasted in the year in which the ['atria
was granted. Soon afterwards, the defendant commenced
the same process, and :told the dried or roasted malt to vat ions
brewed, by which (Ito patentee sustained considerable injury.
A proceeding by a ;ire facia,: was accordingly instituted in a
Court of law, in order to try the validity of the invention,
when it appeared on trial, that there had been some irregu-
larity in putting in the specification withiu six calen-
dar montliv after the (late of the patent, in rouse-
qaence of which the patentee was tionsitited. Au iniune-
tiun KM etc.( wards applied for against the present pluintilr,
the patentee,and it was granted. A motion was subsequently
made, that it might be dissolved, and after at guttietas on both
sides, the question stood over for his Lordship's decision,
which he this day pronounced.
'l* Ito Lord Chancellor first entered into a long detail of the
facts from the petition and affidavits, of which we have
given a Inlet seminary above. He observed, that a Iptv.tinis
had been raised spun the validity of' say patent granted fur a
new method of pertarming a known operation ; and next,
whether this method stated in the specification were new, As
to the first, the case of Bolton and Watt, derided long ago,
id settled, that a patent might be granted for a new method;
and as to the second, the termination, by noesoit, of the trial
1/11 the trite jacias,ll4ti not fixed any thing as to the merits, fur
they bad nut been entered into ;at thee (me time it was evident
that the defendant, at the time tbe plaintiff bad proem-ed his
patent and others, had done the same thing ; and in the pro-
cess itself it did not seen. that there was any thing of peculiar
novelty it might, however, be an important discovery to
brewers, whose customers were fiat of drinking beer of a
dark colour. anti who were prohibited from mammy:At for that
purpose. Under all the facts, his Lordship %Via of opinion,
that the injunction should ba cuntinned, °Merin:. however,
in ease the question should be bi ought for Will d in some other
shape, that the defendant in the mean time should keep an
accannt of the quantity of malt he dried in the mode ;toted
iu the plaintiffs specification, and that it should be delivered
to the plaintiff every fortuight under affidavit.