Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1813-05-06
rRoM THE BALTIMORE FEDERAL GAZETTE.

IMPORTANT TO .ILLERS.
Statement and exploration of the matters in
dispute between OLIVER EVANS and GER
tain siillers, who wish to use his patented
improvements in milling without compensat.
ing him for their use.
REPORT OF TRIAL.
OLIrxR EFANs, P1yc
SAMUEL ROBINSON, Def.
CircuH conTf for the fourth circuit oft u.
s. MARYLAND district, Nou. term, 1912.
This was an action on the case, for the in.
fringement of patent right
The declaration contained four counts-thc
first rccited the substance of the act of congress-
entitled " An act for the relief of Oliver Evans"
passed the 2lst January, 1905; OF the petition
of the patentee to the secretary of state; of tho
specification and description of the invention
annexed to the petition, and of the letters pa
tent and schedule making part thereof 1t also
contained concise statement of the plaintiffs
Improvement in the art of manufacturing -four
-. meal; which comprehend certain prnci-
pes made to operate thro' the agency of vari.
Gus machines. The first principle consists in
the subdivision ofthe grain or any graduated
or pulyerised substance in elevating and con.
yeying the same from place TO place in small sc
Parate parcels. in spreading, stirring, turning
and gathering the same, by regular and constant
motion, so as no. 10 object the same to artificial
heat and the full action of the air to cool and
dry the same, when necessary to avoid danger
from fermentation, and to prevent insects from
depositng their eggs during the progress OF the
manufacture. The I'd principle consists in the
application Of the power which moves the mill
or other principal machine to work any machi
merry, which may be used to apply the same prin.
ciples or perform the said operations by constant
motion and rotation to save expence and labor.
In TN Of tie hcf acbin in,
ed and used for applying the aforesaid princi-
pies consisted OF an improved elevator, an i'm
proved coHvepor, an improved HOPPER. boy, an i'm
proved drill, and an improved Aim Gryer.-This
countfmther alledged that the plaintiff had com
Piled with tae several provisions prescribed by
the act of congress on the subject of patent
rights--and concluded with stating the breach
to consist in the defendants having used the
plaintiffs said improvements, without licence.
The second count stated the breach TO consist in
using machines which were IN limitation and re-
senibLGnce of those invented by the plaintiff -
The third sta ed the breach to consist in using
part Of the said improvements, to wit the eie-
Gator, eorpeyor, chopper boy and drill. And the
fourth stated the breach to consist in using Pa {
Of said Improvements, &c.
The defendant put in the plea of NOT ovIL-
TY.
No notice was given by the defendant os an
intention to prove any special matter; but the
want of notice was waved by the plaintiff, and
the range OF testimony was agreed to be unii-
mited.
The plaintiff having produced in evidsace the
act passed for his relief, and the patent issued
An conformity thereto, proved notice thereof to
the defendant prior To the breach complained OF
and nat the defendant used the elevator, con-
yeyor and hopper boy, invented by the plaintiff
in his mill in Mont gomery county. Maryland,
driving one pair OF mill stones, and grinding IL
harr of a, IN,
both sides, who knew any thing of the origin or
progress OF the discovery, united in proving
that the piaintid'was the original inventor of his
patented improvements aBd all bore testimony
TO the immense utility and admirable perfection
OF the invention. (
Messrs. Pntney, Harper and Williams, were
counsel forst plaintiff.
Messrs. Fltrfin,. Parviance, DorseY, and Pm
.Gieton, wers,coupsel for the de!endaSt.
This case was deliberately, learnedl s., and elo-
quenIly argued. The leading cases cp$patent
rights for new inventions were adducI; and
law on tst subject fully discussed Any at
teIppt 20 report some OF she arguments pfonoun-
ced OH the occasion would afford very indie
quate conception OF their force and brilliarcv
On the part of the plaintiff, they convinced and
delighted aii,who beard them. They demon
stfatcd conciusiTciy bis right, &C inventor, TO
his patented improvements depicted IN severe
and glowing coIors the depravitv and baseness
OF those who had combined to dcfraud him Of
the fruits OF his ingenuity; maintained his
claims and pretcDsions beyond all controversy,
and established his genius and merits ON an ex-
allied and triumphant eminencc.
TIE following brief statement was furnished to
Mr.. OLIVER EVANS, by his counsel for the
purpose OF exhibiting TO the committees of
congress appointed on the subject oflns pa
tent right--thr hon Judge Duvall, in his to-
timony before the committee Of the senate of
the United States, confirmed it-and has OBJ.
served thai I've did not consider this reprcsen-
-, fion 50 full in favor Of Mr.. Evars as the c.
". 1dencc warranted:
4 At the last (November) term of the circrit
court Of the Quilted States, in Baltimore, seve.
raj actions came 30 trial, which had been bro't
by Oliver Evans against different persons for in.
bringing his patent right, by using his mill ma
ciIncry without his p rTniSson.
The miitrs near Baltimore, with tic Ellicotts
pod Tysops Ut their head, made acOmmo1 cause
Mn the defendants The defence set up was
Z that Evans was not the original invcnlor Of the
.achincs for which he had obtained The patent
10 support this defence witnesses were sum.
Inoned from various and distant places. particu
larry from the neighhorhood of Cristiana in the
state of ID lawarc, where Evans resided at the
time when as he alleges, thc invcntioEtoOk place
The gus, were twice continued, ch the sppli
ea,ion Of the q PENDANTS TO give them an oppor.
tunify Of procuring tie attendance ,of all Their
Witnesses An did attend att tho trial.
1'Bc-machinesin question were TIC oonveyor
tie Ell tator and The hopper boy. Euans' patent