The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1851-11-04 00:00:00

Society, Liver

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 had
tested and sold, which he had seen used by the Plaintiff's firm,

Tvice as Shopman

m 1846 to 1849. This
or the Defendant, who

followed by

tnesses, but whose teitima

nation, completely established tl:

Plaintiff's Ca:

liy 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 defer dent set up
several defences, which he would not take ex

ly in their

lit. He

id that there was no properjspec

iion of this patent. 2dly. That Milner, the pitetitee, 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 defendant

t infringed the patent. He had taken the evidence very
and if the jury thought it would assist them he would

Lord CAMPBELL then said, he should shortly direct their
ttention 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' he thought
this issue was hardly disputed, they must consider whether au
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 or 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,
and if lie gave prima facie evidence that it was so, the defen-
dant would have to show that it waa 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 an
invention for the protection of papers against fire. TI
were locked in an iron box, having cases enclo

papers
leaving

chambers between t c 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 shies, 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 Marr'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 been
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 bed
non-conductors in the inner case, but neither seemed to have
bad 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 was 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 his
specification was known before the date of his patent. If they
bought it was, they would find that issue for the defendant;
,nd if they thought it was not, they would find it for the plaintif.
third and fourth issues were substantially the same, being
Er. Milner was not the inventor, and the invention was
___w. If Mr. Milner was the inventor, the invention was
w; and if he was not the inventor, it was not new. Then
ne the issue of whether it was useful, and he must say he
been astonished to find such strong evidence of its useful-
his hour he had no idea that there were any

leans of so effectually preserving papers from the
ire. ]t appeared that, by means of the condensation
the papers enclosed in the inner box were rendered
: was a comfort for one to know that there was an in-
y whiclivaluable documents might be rendered secure,

11though the defendant had thought fit to say it was
1, he was relly at a loss to say what evidence there
ise any doubt as to its utility ; but the question was
ame the direction he shoo d give them

net use ve

alt be an infringement, although the de-
easels, pipes, or tubes for containing the
le left to them ; but he only said that it
c necessary that the defendant should use

Copy of

Kirkos, Ch:mist , 7, Prescot-

sired, Liverpool, dated 6th June, 1851.
To Professor HOLLOWAY.
SlR,—Your Pills and Ointment have stood the highest on our
sale list of Proprietary Medicines for some years. A customer,
to whom I can refer for any inquiries, desires me to let you
know the particulars of her case. She had been troubled for
years with a disordered liver and bad digestion. On the last
occasion, however, the virulence of the attack was so alarming,
and the inflammation set in so severely, that doubts i►ere en-
tertained of her not being able to bear up under it; fortunately
she was induced to try your Pills, and she informs me that
after the first, and each succeeding dose, she had great relief.
She continued to take them, and although she used only three
Boxes, she is now in the enjoyment of perfect health. i could
have sent you many more cases, but the above, from the seve
rity of the attack, and the speedy cure, I think, speaks much
in favour of your astonishing Pills. (Signed) It. \V. KIRKUS.•
AN EXTRAORDINARY CURE OF RHEUMATIC FEVER,