The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1852-06-01 00:00:00

CAUTION

C. and B. do not guarantee any article to be of their manu
facture, unless bearing their name and address.

IN CHANCERY-INJUNCTION

MILNER V. HARRISON

N application was made on Thursday, the 25th
September, before his Honour Vice-Chancellor Sir
G rge Turner, at Bath, on behalf of Mr. William Milner, as
-4
Executor of the late Thoinas Milner, the Patentee of an Inven-
tion of "Improvements in Boxes, Safes, or other Depositories
for the Protection of Papers or other materials from Fire," for
an injunction to restrain the defendant, John German Harri-
son, of Liverpool, his agents, servants, &c., from making,
using, putting in practice, or vending, or procuring to he
made, &c., during the remainder of the term meotfoned in the
Letters Patent granted to Mr. Thomas Milner, any Boxes,
Safes, or other depositories made in such the like manner,
or on the same or the like principle as Dr€ said Thomas Mil-
ner's Invention, or in anywise coun feiting, imitating, •r
resembling the said Invention.
Mr. Webster appeared for the intiff, and Mr. Shebbeare
for the defendant, and affidavits ' support of and in opposition
to the motion were read. Mi er's invention consisted in the
use of substances, distrib ed in an absorbent material in
spaces between the outer d inner casings of the Box, which
substances, when expo to heat, evolved steam •r moisture,
the combined effect ,df the moisture and the material, kept
humid, protecting tfie Safes, enclosing papers, &c., from fire.
The defendant sold Safes and Boxes, which he represented
to be made under a Patent granted to Messrs. Tann, of Lon-
don, but which the piaintiff contended were substantially
made according to Milner's Invention, and were an infringe-
ment on his Patent. An action had been brought by the
plaintiff against the defendant for the infringement, and tried
in June last, before Lord Chief Justice Campbell and a special
jury, and a verdict found for the plaintiff, the defendant's
counsel tendering a Bill of Exceptions to the direction of the
learned judge on the construction of Mr. Milner's specification.
Notwithstanding this verdict, the defendant Harrison had
continued to sell the Boxes and Safes complained of, and the
affidavits filed by the plaintiff proved the recent sale by defen-
dant of a Safe, which scientific witnesses stated was substan-
tially the same as those proved on the trial, and found to be an
infringement. This was verified by Doctor Muspratt whose
analysts accompanied his affidavit. The affidavit of Mr. John
Tann stated that he believed this Safe had been made by him
and his partners, and he alleged that it was made according to
hoir enorifienti on

-His HONOUR stated the principle on which the Court inter-
fered in cases of this kintl, and observed that Tann's specifi-
cation appeared to contemplate only a dry non-conductor to
atop the heat, whereas Ililner's created a further obstruction
to the fire, by producing at the period when the fire began to
act on the box an effusion of steam, which pervaded the non-
conducting material with moisture, and thereby protected the
Safe and its contents. His Honour adverted to the ong enjoy-
ment of the Patent which was granted in 1840, the result of the
trial at law, and the clear opinioni n the plaintiff's favour
expressed by the Lord Chief Justice, and in which his Honour
concurred, stating that he considered Milner's was a Patent
claiming every mode by which the liquid. &c., might be em-
ployed to moisten the absorbent material; and he concluded
by granting the injunction in sue terms of the motion.

PRESERVATION OF BOOKS. DEEDS; &c.,

I'ROM FIRE

COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH, JUNE 23RD, 1851, BEFORE

LORD CAMPBELL AND A SPECIAL JURY
MILNER v. HARRISON.

(The latter selling Tann': Safes and Boxes, and advertising
himself as soi:e proprietor of 7'ann's Patent Safes, Chests, 4.c.)

The above trial was instituted for the purpose of vindicating
the exclusive right, on the part of the Plaintiff, of applying
liquids, or materials evolving moisture on the application of
heat, together with ether absorbent materials, within the
chambers of Boxes, Safes, or Depositories, calculated to per-
vade the chambers and contents of the safes with moisture
and steam, when heated by fire, thereby preserving the papers
from ignition. Mr. Crowder, Q.C., Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C.,
and Mr. Webster, appeared for the Plaintiff; and Sir F. The-
siger, Mr. Knowles, Q.C., and Mr. Hindmarsh, for the Defen-
dant. After ►he case had been stated by Mr. Crowder evidence
was given by Mr. Grantham, of Liverpool, Civil Engineer and
Surveyor of Steamers to the Board of Trade; Mr. Samuel
Woods, jun., of London, formerly of Liverpool ; Mr. J. W.
Filcher, of Liverpool ; Mr. Alderman Bennett, Ironfounder, •f
Liverpool; Dr. Sheridan Muspratt, Professor of Chymistry,
Liverpool ; Mr. John Smith, President of the Guardian
Society, Liverpool ; Mr. B. Woodcroft, Professor of Machinery
at the University College, London ; and by Mr. John Owens,
one of the foremen of Milner's Works for the last twenty years,
on the utility, originality, &c., of Milner's Safes—of which
upwards of 25,000 are now in use—and also of the infringe-
anent of Milner's Patent by the Defendant, who was proved to
have used the very materials in the Safes and Boxes he had
tested and sold, which he had seen used by the Plaintiff's firm,
when in their service as Shopman, from 7846 to 1849. This
was followed by Sir F. Thesiger's reply for the Defendant, who
called several witnesses, but whose testimony, on cross-exami-
nation, completely established the Plaintiff's case. Mr.
Crowder finally addressed the Jury on the facts, and

Lord CAMPBELL then summed up. This, he said, was an
action for the infringement of a patent granted on the 26th of
August, 1840, for certain alleged improvements in boxes for
the protection of papers from fire. The defendant set up
several defences, which he would not take exactly in their
proper order. Ist. He said that there was no proper specifica-
tion of this patent. 2dly. That Milner, the patentee, was net
the inventor ; also, that it was not a new invention, that it was
not a useful invention ; and that, at all events, the defendant
had not infringed the patent. He had taken the evidence very
fully, and if the jury thought it would assist them he would
read it over.

The Jury intimated that they did not think it necessary.
Lord CAMPBELL then said, he should shortly direct their
attention to the several questions they were to determine, for
they were all for their determination. With regard to the in-
fringement, he would repeat the direction he had before given
them. Here was the specification, and although lie thought
this issue was hardly disputed, they must consider whether an
ordinary workman, of ordinary skill, looking at it, could make
one of the boxes it described. The witnesses had said that an
ordinary workman, in their judgment, would be able to do so.
The next issue was with regard to the novelty of the inven-
tion. The third and fourth were so much alike that they might
be taken as part of the same Question.

It lay on the plaintiff to show that this was a new invention,
thereso the and if he gave prima facie evidence that it w
defen-
dant would have to show that it was not. Now
cer-
tainly strong evidence on the part of the plaintiff to wasshow that
it was new. It was for them to say whether it was properly an
invention for the protection of papers against fire. papers The
were locked in an iron box, having cases enclosed, leaing
chambers between t e two cases, and the object was to have
some substance that would give out a moisture upon the appli-
cation of the heat, and the steam thus produced was to be in.
closed in the box and moisten the papers so that they might be
preserved from the effects of fire. There had been several wit-
nesses of respectability on both sides, although several of those
called for the defendant had only recently turned their atten-
tion to this subject. Several witnesses for the plaintiff said
that, although there bad been an addition to the old safe which
consisted merely of a single iron box,
duced of having an outer box, flu
troducesome non-conducting substance,
Of heat might be retarded much as possible ;
PM Mr.
nothing until Was the
.finer's patent to moisten ,
by the operation of steam.
On the T.- Marr's and

a mode having been in-
great object was to la-
so that the operation
hot that there

Chubb'
patents
The obj

: of the defendant, he chiefly relied O.
its, and it would be for them to say wl
not confined to introducing non-,
both was to save papers from destruct
!ration was the Question in r

lifference bet

he afterwards found from

was ram
notion of

They both had
eemed to have
as their object
le, but had no
xas to be condensed into steam to
inner case. They had heard the
for them to say whether they were

late of I

• o, a
.y.
and if they thoaght
The third and fourt
that Mr. Milner was
not new. If Mr. Mi

moist. It was a
aeration, by whicl
notwithstandingll lute. Althoust
llot useful, lit ii

terribleeaialnWYC
e defendant bad tl

was to raise any doubt as to its utility; but the question was
for them alone. Now came the direction he should give them
in point of law, and in this they must be guided by what he said.
He thought there might be an infringement, although the de-
fendant did not use vessels, pipes, or tubes for containing: the
liquid. All the rest he left to them ; but be only said that it
was not indispensably necessary that the defendant should use
pipes, tubes, or artificial vessels, but they were to consider
whether the evidence was sufficient to convince them that the
defendant bad infringed the patent. They would bear in mind
that respectable professors from King's College, and other
ries of learning, had been called for the defendant, and
oved the infringement.

t, for it

evmence on the ground of infringe-
.as not taken out until nearly four years after
but if, as it would appear that Harrison sold Tann's
not say that they were not to look to Tann's
if they came to the conclusion that tne coxes made
were the same as those Milner described in his specie-
. They were to look on all the evidence on either side
mg on these issues ; and if they thought that, although the
xes that the defendant sold did not contain any pipes, tubes,
Scial vessels for containing the liquid, they contained
d other substances from which moisture was to he ex-
•--.. they were lubstantially the

same as Nliiners, tney won't, pumitin
and if they thought they were not the same as lilner's, for the
defendant. They were at liberty to find that issue for the
plaintiff, although the defendant did not use any pipes, tubes,
or artificial vessels. If they thought the process was substan-
tially the same as that mentioned in the plaintiff's specification,
they would find that issue for the plaintiff. 'they must bear in
mind that the plaintiff said, " I claim as my invention the in-
application of the combined effect in chambered
isitories of the moisture and material kept humid
urrounding the innermost box, and its contents.
1y way being confined to the material or liquid
or the manner in which it may be distributed or

n the- spat

Abontin ar

employed

..,ged, in order to produce the desired effect of protecting
.poxes, safes, or other depositories enclosing papers, or other
materials, from fire." It was on the construction of these
words that he had directed them in point of law, that the de-
fendant may have infringed the patent, although he did not
make use of tubes, or pipes, or artificial vessels. With this
exception, be left it for them to say if the defenckat had in-
fringed the patent ' • if they found that it was so, au ages not
being in dispute, the sum of forty shillings would he sufficient:
but they were to consider, themselves, which way they would
find their verdict

Jury, after a short deliberation, said they found their

ssues for the

VERDICT FOR THE PLAINTIFF

establishirur the validity of Milner's Pa-
med by his Honour the Vice-Chancellor's

nither proceedings in Chancery are being adopted
against.al? parties Selling, Holding, or Using these Safes or
Boxes.

TUESDAY

MORNING, JUNE 1, 1552.

THE WEEK.

WHETHER or not the weather has been adverse to
liveliness, or the Derby and Cricketting have
absorbed the attention of our community, certain it
is that, except in the cotton and sugar markets, the
past week has been one of the dullest which we
have had for some time. Not a solitary squib—not
a scintillation of wit or fun—has been emitted from
amongst the many laboratories usually engaged on
the eve of an election in the production of placards
and other similar matters. The Conservatives pro-
ceed quietly with their canvass, like men who have
made up their minds to substitute work for talk ;
but their opponents—the Whig-Radical party—are,
like poor WIDDRINGTOX, "in doleful dumps."
An hysterical " Hurrah for CARDWELL and
En ART" is the extent of their achievements. The
latter gentleman's name seems to operate like a
nightmare upon the spirits of the party ; and the
Whig " aristocracy" still regard distastefully the
allies with whom they have been forced into yoking
themselves. Nearer and nearer as the struggle
approaches, they seem to hear more plainly the
direful warning—
" Strike, oh ye bards, the melancholy harp,

For this is the eve of death !"

It is true that their scribes have made the most of
the late " count out" in the House of Commons to
damage the reputation of Mr. FORBES MACKENZIE,
about whose Protestantism they affect to be under
serious alarm. Upon a few weak people this trans-
parent dodge may produce a temporary effect ; but
when it is explained that the " honourable member"
—as the report generally runs on occasions when to
give a name is unpleasant—who moved that the
House be counted was Mr. HATTER, a member of
Lord John Russell's Government, and that the
parties most active in the attempt to shelve Mr.
SPOONER'S motion were Peelites, the manoeuvre of
our local Whig-Radical party to throw the onus of
this transaction upon Mr. MACKENZIE will perhaps
recoil upon themselves.
Apropos of the dodges and " enormous lying,"
which a member of their own party once asserted
to be the characteristics of Whig-Radical tactics,
their local organs have been holding up their pure
hands, in affected horror at an alleged misrepresen-
tation of their candidates, and of the League, made,
or said to have been made, by a Conservative can-
vasser. But what ought to be said of a committee,
who have the dishonesty to placard the walls with
an assertion so reckless as that " THE GOVERN..

MENT HAVE BURRED THE MAYNOOTH QUES-
TTnN" : Liberalism must have a very mean opinion
of the intelligence of the Liverpool people, to ima-
gine that, in an age of newspapers, such an assertion
could be believed for four-and-twenty hours. Let
them indulge in ribaldry and stale wit as much as
they choose, but avoid deliberate story-telling !
The arrival of the Baltic on Wednesday morning,
bringing news of the safe completion, by the
splendid steam-ship Great Britain, of her voyage to
New York, after a run of 13 days 51 hours against
head seas, has delighted thousands amongst this
community. Apart from the interest attached to
the vessel herself, from her unfortunate antecedents,
this passage, with the recent ones of the City of
Glasgow, the City of Manchester, and the Glasgow,
(screw-steamers,) may be considered as having
settled a question most important to the country,
and established the fact of an approaching triumph
for England in ocean navigation. With our com-
mand of iron for shipbuilding, our admitted supe-
riority in machine and engine making, and with the
screw as an auxiliary to sails, we may still defy
much of the ruinous competition with which we are

now assailed. To lay Manchester alongside the
plains of the Mississippi was the declared object of
Free Trade policy. The enterprise of British mer-
chants, however, and the science and skill of the
British engineer, promise shortly to achieve the
more important boon of bringing the splendid
colonies of this country to our own doors. In a
few years the antipodes will be within less than a
couple of months of screw•steaming from Great

Britain, and become more intimately connected
with each other. New facilities will have been
created for pouring their rich and varied products
into our markets ; and our expatriated brethren,
who have gone out to apply their energy and in-
dustry to these distant lands, will feel themselves
drawn once more under the shelter of the protecting
power of the mother country. With a wise and
fostering colonial policy—such a policy as we hope
for from the Government of the Earl of DERBY—
what height of greatness is there which the British
Empire may not shortly be enabled to attain ?
Blessed with such aids, who can doubt the mission
which is cast upon the Anglo-Saxon race as the
pioneers of civilization throughout the world ?
Reflecting men already see in this and kindred
achievements of British energy and science the ap-
proach of a new era in England's and in the world's
history. They see already the spectacle of these
once insignificant islands, the ultima thule of bar-
barism, having become the central point of civiliza-
tion and Christianity—the great emporium and
mart of a globe whose richest spots are our own,
and whose hardy sons, speaking a common lan-
guage, may some day be gifted with the glorious
privilege of advancing from east and west, from
north and south, to the protection of the mother
land which nursed and sent them forth. Yet, but a
a few days ago as it were, we heard it said by the
men of Manchester—" the centre of intelligence"—
of what value are the colonies of England ? Get rid
of them I They are costly to maintain ! By the
men of Manchester and the West Riding this was
said ; by the very men who are now crying out to
us to send out men and money to Australia to
prevent the direful calamity of their mills being
stopped for want of wool! The selfishness of
Liberalism is truly short-sighted.
The prospects of the " independent" or anti-
League candidates for Manchester are, we are
assured, most flattering, and justify the expectation
that one, if nut both, of the present members will
have to look out for new quarters. On the first
announcement of a contest for the borough, Mr.
joHN BRIGIIT pooh-poohed the idea, and pro-
ceeded in his obstructive opposition to the Govern-
ment as ardently as if his seat was his own free-
hold. It was found necessary, however, by their
friends, that both the honourable gentlemen should
show up, and accordingly, on Tuesday last, they
did so at the Free-trade Hall, which they had packed
to the best of their power. The reception, however,
was a cool one. " Old familiar faces" looked
daggers, especially at JOHN BRIGHT; and although
the assembly had been admitted entirely by ticket,

moral " Three cheers for HUGH
rowE given much too heartily to he pleasant.
ut " the unkindest cut of all" is the desertion of

.e were - sex

,tchester Guardian. Our
contemporary intimates that he shall take no part
but he speaks out tolerably clearly,
Mr. GIBSON, he tells the electors,
ether a mind nor principles of his own, but a
,lay in the hands of the dictatorial

ie car

es. by the

3 ntest

BRIGHT wills, that Mr. GIBSON will do