Star.
London, England, 1820-01-08 00:00:00

AW INT.tthobki.
COURT OF RINGS BENCH, JANUARY 9.

• .
• • • PAUL! v. sivitz.
This *is an issue directi•c. by the Court of Chan:
cery, tb try whether a weighing-miehine, for which
`the defendant had procured a patent, called " Max-
ryott's Royal Patent Weighing-tnachine," was an in-
fringeilnent on a patent obtained by the plaintiff for
a weighing-mathine of a similar kind. By the terms
of the order the defendant was obliged to_ admit that
the plaintiff's invention was a new one. The plain-
tiff's machine consists in >t small metal case or box,
near the sides of which are placed t‘N o springs, stand•
ing nearly perpendicularly) and fixed at their bases
to the bottom a the sides of the box ; across the tops
of these springs is fixed an horizontal piete of metals
to the centre of which is fixed another bar, which
'passes in a vertical direction through the base of the
box, and terminates in a book, to which the substance
to be weighed is appended. When this bar is forced
down by the weight, it depresses the horiaiintal bar,
which bar presses upon a rack, which communicates
with, and turns a circular pinion in the centre of the
machine, whereby the perpendicular motion is turned
into a rotatory one ; to this pinion is affixed ari index,
and this turning with the pinion, points out on a cir-
cular plate, like the dial of a clock, the number of
pounos weight of the appended substance:, The
defendant's machine also consists of a box, to the top
of which is fixed .an oval or endless spring ; to the
I bottom of this spring is attached tht bar that carries
' the weight ; and as the weight depresses the bir, the
spring is drawn down into a shape more approaching
to a circle, and the rotatory motion is produced by a
perpendicular rack and pinion acting on an index in
the same manner as the plaintiff's.
The plaintiff called several engineers, who titre ft
as their opinion, that the principle or the defendant's
tnachine was precisely similar to that of the plaintiff's
—the aim of both being to produce a regular per-
pendicular descent, by pressure oti the spring, by
forcing it inward ; and that the effect produced was
precisely the same in both, notwithstanding any va-
riety in the-shape bf the spring:
The SOLICITOR-GRNIRAL, on the part of the de-
fendant, said, that althou?h by the order of the Lord
Chancellor, the plaintiff s invention must be admit-
ted to be new, yet that must not be intended to apply
to the general principles of the machine, but only to
the particular combination of the two upright springs,
and the cross bar. He said, the invention of ascer-
taining weight b)' means of the action of springs, was
a very old invention; it was first effected by gradu-
ating the bar to which the weight was fixed ; -this
was found to be inconvenient; and afterwards the
perpendicular motion was converted to a rotatory
one by means of a rack and pinion, in the same way
as in the present machines. In the old invention the
spring was not like either of the present ones ; it was
a half circular one, in the shape of aC. The plain-
tiff could, therefore, claim originality only for the
peculiar combination of the springs used in his ma-
chine, of which the defendants was not an imitation.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICR said, there was a diffi-
culty arising in this case float the older of the Court
of Chancery compelling the defendant td admit that
which, to him, seemed not to be true namely, that
the plaintiff's was a new inventions
The SOLICITOR-GENRRAL then called Mr. bonkin
and Mr. Brunell, two eminent engineers, who proved
the invention, upwards of 30 years ago, of a machine
such as stated by the Learned Solicitor in his speech;
and they gave it as their opinion, that the spring
used by the defendant was not an imitation of that
used by the plaintiff, and that it bore no more re-
semblance to if than the necessary resetiablance which
the action of one spring must always bear to that
of another.

The LORD CRlEFJurrice asked the latter wittiest,
whether, supposing the.plaintiff's machine to be a
new invention, he thought the defendant's was a
piracy of it ?
The witness said, he thought not,
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE then so/timed-up the
evidence to the Jury. He said, that it would.have
appeared to him, that if the plaintiff's had been a
new invention, the defendant's would have beerran
imitation and a piracy ; the mere difference in the
shape of the springs would is that case, he thought;
not make a material difference. The defendant's wit-
nesses, who were men competent to fnim an accurate
opinion on that subject, were of a different opinion.
He said it was for them (the Jury) to decide accord-
ing to the evidence of the witnesses.
'fhe Jury found a verdict for the defendants
WESTMINSTER SESSICINS, _

Yesterday, John Gyms,- was indicted for picking
the pocket or a Mr. Francis Davy, in Piccadilly, of a
pocket handkerchief, value ten pence. This offence
was accomplished by the prisoner while the prosecu-
tor was looking at two monkeys and some white mice
dancing upon an organ. The prisoner was obseived,
by a Constable,.by degrees drawing out the handker-
chief, and when he had completed his purpose he was
seized, and the property found upon him. He was
found Guilty, and sentenced to three months impri-
sonment.
John Kemp and Thongs. Woolley, two were
indicted for a similar offence, at the bottom of South-
ampton-street, in the Strand. The prosecutor was
walking whit a Lady, and felt a hand* his pocket;
he turned round immediately and found the two pri-
soners close to him ; be collated them, and took the ski
into a shop, when he was informed that a third boy,
an accomplice, as was supposed, had
.picked up the
handkerchief, and hod run off with it. The prisoners
were searched, but nothing was found upon them;
they, were, however, committed at Bow-street.—The.
Jury did not think the evidence sufficient, and ac-
quitted the prisoners.
The CHAIRMAN told the boys that they had had di
very narrow escape. Woolley had been convicted
only at the last Sessions, and if now found guilty, he
would have been transported.
William Jackson, aged 13, *as sentenced to six
months' imprisonment-fot stealing two canisters Of
confectionary, from a shop in Piccadilly. When leav-
ing the dock, the young delinquent thre.ttened to
shoot the Constable who' took him w hen he recovered
bis.riberty

Upwards of IS tubs of giti were oil 'Wednesday
sennight lodged in the Excise store, Woodbridge,
being the cargo of a smuggling cutter, wrecked off
Hollesley ; the crew of which, eight in number, is
supposed to have perished.