The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1851-11-11 00:00:00

IN CHANCERT-INJUNCTION

MILNER V. HARRISON.
AN application was made on Thursday, the 25t1
September, before his Honour Vice-Chancellor Sir
George Turner, at Bath, on behalf of Mr. William Milner, as
Executor of the late Thomas 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/6r procuring to he
made, &c., during the remainder of_thf term mentioned in the
Letters Patent granted to Mr, .Thomas Milner, any Boxes,
Safes, or other depositories untae in such or the like manner,
or on the same or the like.principle as the said Thomas Mil-
ner's Invention, or in dnywise counterfeiting, imitating, or
resembling the said. Invention.

Mr. Wetster appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Shebbeare
for the defendant, and affidavits in support of and in opposition
to the motion were read. Milner's invention consisted in the
use of substances, distributed in an absorbent material in
spaces between the outer and inner casings of the Box, which
substances, when exposed to heat, evolved steam or moisture,
the combined effect of the moisture and the material, kept
humid, protecting the 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 plaintiff 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 judee 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 Musprat. whose
analysis 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
their specification

His ilosoun stated the principle on which the Court inter-
fered in cases of this kind, and observed that Tann's specifi-
cation appeared to contemplate only a dry non-conductor to
stop the heat, whereas Milner'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 long enjoy-
ment of the Patent which was granted in 1840, the result of the
trial at law, and the clear opinion in 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 eves y mode by which the liquid. &c., might be em
ployed to moisten the absorbent material: and he concluded
by granting the injunction in the terms of the motion.

PRESERVATION OF BOOKS, DEEDS, &c.,
FROM FIRE.

COURT OF QUEENtS BENCH, JUNE 23RD, 1851, BEFORE

LORD CAMPBELL AND A SPECIAL JURY
MILNER v. HARRISON.

(The latter selling Tann's Safes and Bore:, and advertising
himself assole proprietor of Tann's Patent Safes, Chests, 4e.)
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 moistare
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-
Eiger, Mr. Knowles, Q.C., and Mr. Hindmarsh, for the Defen-
dant. After the 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.
Pilcber, of Liverpool ; Mr. Alderman Bennett, Ironfounder, of
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-
ment of Milner's Patent by the Defendant, who was proved to
have used the very materials in the Safes and Boxes he hail
tested and sold, which he had seen used by the Plaintiff's firm,
when in their service as Shopman, from 1846 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-
tior►-of this patent. 2dly. That Milner, the patentee, was not
the inventor ; also, that it was not a new invention, that it was
not a useful invention ; and that, at all events, the defenda■t
had not infringed the patent. He bad taken the evidence ♦ery
fully, and if the jury thought it would assist them he would
read it ever.

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 as
ordinary workman, in their judgment, would be able to do so.
The next issue was with regard to the novelty of the inten-
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,
and if he gave prima fade evidence that it was so, the defen-
dant would have to show that it was not. Now there was cer-
tainly strong evidence on the part of the plaintiff to show that
it was new. It was for them to say whether it was properly a■
invention for the protection of papers against fire. The papers
were locked in an iron box, having cases enclosed, leaving
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 had been an addition► to the old safe which
consisted merely of a single iron box, a mode having been in-
troduced of having an outer box, the great object was to in-
troduce some non-conducting substance, so that the operation
of heat might be retarded as much as possible; but that there
was nothing until Mr. Milner's patent to moisten the papers
by the operation of steam.
On the part of the defendant, he chiefly relied on,lllyr's.and

Chubb's patents, and it would be for them to say whether those
patents were not confined to introducing non-conductors.
The object of both was to save papers from destruction, but the
mode and operation was the question in dispute. He had bee'
puzzled to know the difference between the two patents of Marr
and Chubb, and he afterwards found from one of the witnesses
that there was no distinction between them. They both bad
non-conductors in the inner case, but neither seemed to have
had the slightest contemplation of any liquid, as their object
was rather to have substances as dry as possible, but had no
notion of a liquid which ;Tip to be condensed into steam to
moisten the papers in the inner case. They had heard the
evidence, and it would be for them to say whether they were
satisfied that the invention which Mr. Milner set out in kis
specification was known before the date of his patent. If they
thought it was, they would find that issue for the defendant
and if they thought it was not,they .”tiff

a lino it for the plait__
The thiid and fourth issues were substantially the same, being
that Mr. Milner was not the inventor, and the invention was
not new. If Mr. Milner was the inventor, the invention was
new; and if he was not the inventor, it was not new. Then
came the issue of whether it was useful, and he must say be
had been astonished to find such strong evidence of its usefal-
ness. Up to this hour he bad no idea that there were any
human means of so effectually preserving papers from the

action of fire. It appeared that; by' means of the condensation
of steam, the papers enclosed in t ie inner box were rendered
moist. It was a comfort for one to know that there was an in-
vention, by which valuable documents might be rendered secure,
notwithstanding the terrible calamity of fire breaking out in a
house. Although the defendant had thought fit to say it was
not useful, he was really at a loss to say what evidence there
was to raise any doubt as to its utility; but the question was
for them alone. Now came the direction he should give them

n point of 1

He thou

rent, alt-hough the de•

fendant aid not use vessels, pipes, or tube
liquid. All the resthe left to them ; but
. .

Whether the evidence v

that respectable v
seminanes of lean

TO THE ELECTORS OF ST. PETER'S WARD.
GENTLEMEN,
FOR the honour you have conferred upon me by
Elec!ing me your REPRESENTATIVE in the TOWN
COUNCIL, distinguished by the very large majority of votes in
myf avour, I again entreat that you will accept my heartfelt
thanks, and be assured that I fully appreciate the responsibility'
of representing one of the mat impurta and respectable con-
stituencies within the borough.
I remain, emen,
Nett respectfully,
Your obliged Servant,
HARNIOOD BANNER.
Dingle Mount, lat November, 1851.

PORT OF LIVERPOOL.
NOTICE TO MARINERS.
(ALL BEARINGS BY COMPASS.)
rprlE TRUSTEES of the LIVERPOOL DOCKS
_l_ and HARBOUR DO HEREBY GIVE NOTICE, that, OM
WEDNESDAY next, the 12th instant (weather permitting), s
BLACK NUN BUOY, marked C 1, will be placed on the N.W.
Spit of Taylor's Bank, in 10 feet at low water, ordinary spring
titles, on the following Marks and Compass Bearings : namely,
FORMBY LIGHTHOUSE, its breadth North of Victoria
Beach Mark.

WALTON CHURCH and WALTON INNER MARK la
one, a little open West of Seaforth Church.
FORMBY LIGHTSHIP bearing S.W. 120_,Fathoma, C 2
BLACK NUN BUOY (at present C ack) S. 660
Fathoms.

V 3 BLACK NUN BUOY . yN. N. 650 Fathoms.
The BLACK NUN B C 7 will be removed and discon-
tinued, and the BLA 'UN BUOYS C 1, C 2, C 3, C 4, C 5,
and C 6 will retain-t eir present positions, but will be marked
C 2, C 3, C 4, C 5; C. 6, and C 7.
WILLIAM LORD, Marine-surveyor
By order of the Dock Committee,
DANIEL MASON, Secretary,
Dock office, Liverpool, November• 5, ISM
CITY

OMNIB U S E S.

SCOTLAND-ROAD, MOUNT-PLEASANT,
QUEEN'S DOCK, AND GREAT HOWARD-STREET,

FAR ES 2n

Cards of the Hours, may be hnd the Office,
22A, DALE-ST T.
CORNS NORTH JOHN-STREET.
The PROPRIETOR begs to e, that the greatest regard to
punctuality will be obs , and care taken that all the Drivers
and Guards employ e civil, attentive, and obliging to Pas-
- JAMES T. GALLOWAY, PROPRIETOR.

sengere

CHURCH OF ENGLAND SCRIPTURE READERS'

SOCIETY FOR LIVERPOOL

A T a MEETING, held in the Clarendon Rooms,
"I on Monday, the 3d instant,

The Veneiable Archdeacon BROOKS in the Chair,
It was moved by EDMUND MOLYNEUX, Esq., seconded by
JOHN Moss, Esq., and unanimously resolved,—
That a Scripture Readers' Society be formed on the basis of
the accompanying plan :
That a Society be formed, to be entitled "THE LIVERPOOL
CHURCH OF ENGLAND SCRIPTURE READERS' SOCIETY."
That the object of the Society be, to promote the diffusion of
Scriptural knowledge throughout the town.
That the principal means for the attainment of this object
be, the employment of Scripture Readers under the superin-
tendence of a Clergyman licensed by the Bishop ; the issue of
suitable publications;
i and the arrangement of sermons, lec-
tures, and classes for instruction.

That provision be made out of the funds of the Society for
the employment of a proportionate number of _Scripture
Readers, versed in the Romish controvers —able to speak
the Irish language, whose labours sha be confined to any
particular district, but extende enerally to all districts
where they maybe required e Incumbents. _

That the Society be co cted by a President, Treasurer,
Committee, and two Cl al Secretaries. _

That the bomiereConsist of the two Rectors, twelve lay
members of th urch to be elected annually by all the mem-
bers of the SoCiety contributing a donation of five guineas or
upwards, or subscribing two guineas per annum, and all Clergy-
men officiating within the borough, being subscribers to the
Society: five to be a quorum. _ _

That the appo►ntment of the Clerical Superintendent and
Scripture Readers be vested in a standing Sub-committee of
five Clergymen. _

That twe first Sub-committee consist of the two Rectors, Rev
Dr. M`Neile, Rev. F. Barker, and Rev. W. Pollock.

That the vacancies in the Sub-committee by death, resigna-
tion, or otherwise, be filled up by the general Committee, who
shall have power, if found expedient, to increase the number
from five to seven ; but no alteration of any fundamental rule
shall be made, except by a meeting of those members of the
Society who shall have the power of appointing the general
Committee.

That the Clerical Superintendent be instructed to communi-
cate with the Clergy, and, with their consent and cooperation,
to furnish the Readers in their several districts.

That the Scripture Readers be communicants of the Church
of England, and that they be not appointed except after exa-
mination by the Sub-committee.

That an annual Salary of not less than .t2OO be given to the
Clencal Superintendent, whose whole time shall be devoted to
the operations of the Society.

Thit the Scripture Readeis shall be appointed at a Salary of
not less than .€6O a-year each.

That every person contributing a donation of five guineas, or
swards, at one time, or an annual Subscription of five
tidings, or upwards, be a member of the Society.
It was further resolved, That Edward Jones, Esq., of 2lt

Wm. Pollock be requested to act as Secretaries pro tem.
Moved by JOHN Moss, Esq., seconded by the Rev. Dr.
M`NEILE,—That the thanks of the Meeting be given to the
Chairman.

The following Gentlemen, who were nearly all press
come Subscribers to the amounts placed oppos

nt, have
to their

£ s. d

e. s. d.

Cropper

Wm. Casey

0 ojßev. J. H. Stafford

James Hanle ...
Wm. M•Cormick
Thos. B. Horsfall

130 0 0 Rev. Wm. Pollock
30 0 OT. T. Glazebrook.,
20 0 0 Edward Higgin ..