The Sun.
London, England, 1862-04-18 00:00:00

L A W INTELLIGENCE.-April 17.

COURT OF CHANCERY.
(Before the Lord Chancellor.)
HILLS V. THE LIVERPOOL UNITED GAS LIGHT

COMPANY.

The arguments in this part-heard appeal from
an order of the Vice. Chancellor Wood, relating to
an alleged infringement of the plaintiff's patent for
purifying gas, were this morning resumed. The
order complained of directed an issue at law to
ascertain whether the material used by the defend-
ants in the first instance for purifying gas was a
precipitated oxide, and also granted an injunction
restraining the defendants from making use of the
plaintiff's invention in renovating the materials used
by them for the purifying of gas, whether the same
be a precipitated or other hydrated oxide of iron, so
that they may be used over and over again to
purify the gas. It appeared that the material used
by the defendants for purifying the gas was " bog
iron ore," an oxide of iron, the use of which, the
plaintiff contended, was an infringement of his
patent. The defendants, on the other hand, insisted
that the material was a native or natural oxide, and
that the letters patent of the plaintiff only embraced
the use of artificial oxides. The question mainly
depended upon the meaning of the scientific terms
employed by the plaintiff in his specification as com-
pared with their universal or general sense.
Sir H. Cairns and Mr. Druce appeared for the
appellants (the defendants) ; Mr. Rolt, Mr. Grove
(of the common law bar), and Mr. Marten supported
the order of the Court below.

The Lord Chancellor, anterior to the reply, said
that the injunction in its present form could not
stand, as it was founded upon a misapprehension of
the plaintiff's patent,but whether another injunction
having the same effect ought to be substituted was
a question for grave consideration. He had no
hesitation, therefore, in dissolving the injunction,
and would suggest to counsel in his reply to direct
his arguments to what was the meaning intended
by the plaintiff in the phraseology of his specifica-
tion, and also whether it was within human power
and within the scope of human testimony to predi-
cate of the material used by the defendants, that ii
was a " precipitated oxide" within the meaning of
the plaintiff's patent. A third point also arose,
whether, by the revivyfying -process used by the
defendants, a "hydrated oxide" was not formed
within the meaning of that term as described in the
specification of the plaintiff, and therefore amounted
to an infringement of his letters patent.
Sir H. Cairns replied, and
The Lord Chancellor reserved his judgment on
the other part of the motion, and dissolved the in-
junction.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
Sittings in Banco.
(Before Lord Chief Justice Cockburn and Justices
Crompton, Blackburn, and Mellor.)
BOOTE V. PORTER-MAINTENANCE OF A WIFE.

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine said this was an action
tried recently at Maidstone before the Lord Chief
Justice of the Common Pleas, when the jury re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff, the amount of
damages to be considered, and settled by the learned
judge. There was no leave reserved to move the
Court, but execution was stayed. He (the learned
sergeant) now moved for a rule nisi for a new trial,
on the ground that the verdict was against the
evidence. The action was brought by the plaintiff
to recover for necessaries supplied to the defendant's
wife. The plea was never indebted, and the defence
was that the wife had committed adultery with a
Major Ross, a married man. The lady herself and
Major Ross were both examined on the trial. Both
of them denied the adultery, but they admitted cer-
tain facts in connection with their conduct. The
lady had left her husband's house on two or three
occasions in complicity with Major Ross, and had
gone to- lodgings unknown to her husband, where
she was visited by Major Ross in a false name,
and who represented himself t'b be her at-
torney. Major Ross, it was proved, was in the
habit of constantly seeing the husband while the
wife was absent, and he (Major Ross) was visiting
I her at her lodging. The husband was extremely
anxious about his wife. He consulted Major Ross
with reference to her conduct, on which occasion
the latter professed to know nothing about her and
I expressed great concern for the husband, yet it ap-
peared he was constantly visiting her at her lodg-
ing. The learned judge in summing up to the jury
put the denial of these facts in an unfavourable
light, and told them that it ought not to have any
great effect on their minds, and pointed out evi-
dence on the other side of a conclusive character
that ought to be taken into their consideration. The
summing up, he might say, was in favour of the
defendant, and from what he (the learned counsel)
could gather from it he had no doubt this application
would meet with the Lord Chief Justice's sanction,
The defendant's answer to the case was extremely
strong. There was no doubt that his affection for
his wife was genuine, and he induced her to again
live with him. She was labouring at this time
under a disease for which it was necessary she should
undergo an operation, and a nurse from one of the
hospitals, unknown to all parties, was called in.
The house in which they were lodging was occupied
by an elderly lady and two not very young maiden
ladies, and in consequence of the husband coming to
live with them a great deal of gossip went on, it
being the same lodging where the lady had been
visited by Major Ross; and the three ladies gave
such a detailed account of what had gone on between
the lady and Major Ross that, if true, it would lead
to the belief in the wife's adultery. The defendant
was unable to account for the non-delivery of cer-
tain letters which he expected, and on speaking
about it, the little girl said " Oh, mamma gets let-
ters every day." The husband then spoke to the
nurse, and it then came out that the wife was re-
ceiving letters from Major Ross through one of the
women, and the nurse further said to him that she
thought he had better not take a house in the coun-
try, as his establishment would soon be broken up.
He next spoke to one of the young ladies, and she
admitted that she was in the habit of receiving
letters under cover for the lady, which she handed
over to her. Her husband then determined to pos-
seas himself of the next letter that came, and accord-
ingly one morning he waited for the postman's arri-
val and got possession of a letter addressed byMajor
Ross to his wife. The learned counsel read the
letter. It was the same impassioned epistle that
was read on the trial, and referred to the annoyance
it gave him to find that the brute her husband had
accompanied her to the volunteer review at Wim-
bledon. The same night that the husband obtained
possession of the letter the lady left her house, and
portion of the night with Major
about the streets. Afterwards the
phßuaossssbseadinnda
wallinggrer r
received
e d a
letter from his wife imploring
him to take pity on her—to see her if for the last
time, and to let her hear her fate from his own lips.
She also stated she was very ill and prayed him to
grant her that last favour.
The Lord Chief Justice said the court would com-
municate with the learned iudge who tried the case