possessing most astonishing intensity, rush from the terminus of the instrument with loud cracking reports, resembling, in general effect, the well known running fire occasioned by the vehement discharge of a multiplicity of small fire-arms. Fluids are

rapidly decomposed, metals are brilliantly deflagrated, and large amounts of coated surface repeatedly charged and discharged in the space of a few seconds." We cannot conclude this notice without suggesting that the publication of experiments, which tend to nothing, should be carefully avoided.

Scientific Adjudication.

CHANCERY COURT,

LINCOLN'S INN HALL,-AUGUST 6TH, 1841.
MARLING KIRBY.

This was an appeal from an order of the Vice Chancellor, refusing an injunction to restrain the defendant from using machinery alleged to be an infringement of a patent, granted to L. W. Wright, in 1824, for making "solid-headed pins." The counsel retained were the same as on the former occasion, when argued before the Vice Chancellor, an account of which case having been given in our last number, we think this decision will be sufficiently explicit without further preface.*

The Lord Chancellor gave judgment in the following words :In this case it appears, that some years ago a patent was obtained by a person of the name of Hunt, the object of which is very clearly explained upon the specification, and was for an improved method of making the heads of pins. The mode in which this was proposed to be effected, was (when the wire, which constituted the shaft of the pin, had been cut into proper length,) to

*We are glad to find, that the Lord Chancellor has clearly pointed out the proper jurisdiction of this Court; for, in some instances, (even lately,) by its interference, it has been the source of much annoyance and unnecessary expense, both to petitioner and defendant.

secure the shaft firmly between two pieces of steel, leaving part of the wire projecting at the top. The upper part of this die, as it is called, had a semi-circular half of a sort of basin, or half globular recess, and the operation of making the head was performed by another piece of steel, coming down upon this circular recess which it occupied, with the exception of a little opening, corresponding with the opening upon the top of the die in which the head was to be formed; the end of the wire projected into this second part of the machine, called the "header," by entering a small hole at the bottom, but which hole was of a larger diameter, considerably, than the shaft of the pin,-it was, in fact, of the diameter of the intended head of the pin. The projecting portion of the pin, intended to form the head, having been inserted into this second part of the machine, called the header, a punch was advanced from the interior of this header, which, coming in contact with the projected head of the pin, had the effect of pushing it down,—some call it smashing, some crushing, and various terms have been applied to it: in point of fact, it had the effect of driving the projected head of the pin into this circular recess, so formed, between the head of the die and the lower part of the header, and by means of this pressure formed the head of the pin; which, of course, therefore constitutes one piece with the shaft of the pin.

Well, this seems to have been open to this objection,-that although it formed the head, it being done by the wire being in a space of very much larger diameter than its own diameter, it formed the head by compressing the wire into this recess, and that was found to form a head, certainly of one piece, in itself, but not to make it of a quality which was very serviceable for

use.

That patent does not appear in that state to have been found available, or to have been acted upon.

A patent was afterwards obtained by the plaintiff; and, no doubt, that patent operated a very great improvement, which does not seem to be disputed, because the same operation has been carried into effect, both by the plaintiff and by the defendant; and the difference consisted in this :-that instead of operating

upon the exposed head of the wire of the pin, so as to form it into the head by compression, and forcing the parts together, which was found not effectual, the whole extent of the wire, contained in one die, and comprised in a tube of the same, or nearly the same diameter with the shaft of the pin, part of the way down, the shaft lower down than the top of the wire before the head was made, a circular recess was made in this tube; the pressure was applied as before at the top of the wire, but the wire being contained in a tube, very little more than its own diameter, only so much more as to enable it to move within that space, there was no opportunity or means of the wire being bent, or crushed, or smashed together; but the effect of the pressure was this:that the lower part of the pin was more effectually secured; and the pressure on the upper part of the wire, it having room to move within the tube, was to cause the metal itself to expand, and to expand in the only space left to it for that purpose, namely, this circular recess, formed a short distance from the top of the wire, in the place of the intended head of the pin; and that appears to have been a very great improvement, inasmuch as it formed a head of one entire substance, the metal having expanded, by its own quality, into this recess, and not having any portion of the wire pressed or crushed together; and that is what the plaintiff effected by the die which he used.

The defendant it seems, now, from the description which I last received, and I must say, it received great assistance from those very intelligible drawings which Mr. Wigram supplied me with at last, and certainly gave me better means of understanding than any thing I received before, what the operation is. The defendant, it appears, does this :-he leaves the die very much as it was in Hunt's patent. The die, properly speaking, that is to say, there is a part of the wire of the pin projecting beyond the head of the die, which in the plaintiff's it does not; then it produces the same effect as the plaintiff produces, but in this way;—the header has also a corresponding recess, a little opening, corresponding with the half opening at the top of the die. The wire also projects into the header; but that opening in the header is of nearly

the same diameter with the shaft of the pin, very nearly the same diameter, therefore, with the tube in the die; so that when the two parts of the machine come together, they form the same opening, for the purpose of the head being made; and there is a tube below, and a tube above, of nearly the same diameter each, namely, both being as nearly as possible the diameter of the shaft of the pin. The punch is then made to act in the same way, and the two parts of the machine being then together, the punch operates upon this confined wire, (confined not in the die, but in the header itself,) and it is made to expand into that recess, half of which is formed by the die, the other half of which is formed by the header. Now it is quite obvious, that performs the same operation, and it is also clear it is free from the objection which is found to attend Hunt's, because in one and the other the operation is performed by causing the metal to expand, and not by crushing the wire in it. Now, that is beyond all doubt the effect of the improvement, as used by the plaintiff and the defendant.

I will now refer to the specification of the plaintiff, to see how far he has explained that which is the object of his improvement, and the effect which is produced by it. Now, the patent was for a machine which embraced a very great many of these operations, independently of, and in addition to that which I have now described; operations which attend the formation of the pin from its commencement to its final completion.

Now, in the specification, he divides by numbers the different objects he had in the improved machine; the one in question is the fifth. He says, "the fifth is the manner of forming a head at one end thereof;" that describes nothing. It is for some improvement in making the head. He then goes on and describes the use and application of the different parts of the machine, also by numbers; and after he has described the modes in which he lays hold of the wire of the pin, for the purpose of undergoing the subsequent operations, he proceeds in this way he says then "hold the pin very firmly between the dies." The dies opening and holding the pin in this small tube so closely

as to be held firmly between the dies. "When the pin is thus secured in the dies, the cam h, fig. 3, acts upon the friction roller." All this is merely to describe the means by which the other parts of the machine are put into operation, which is not now the question. Then it states how the heading apparatus is put in motion; and then it proceeds,-" and by driving it forward, causes the steel punch 20, to press the end of the pin wire into the circular recess, seen in the dies at figs. 14, 16, and 17, by which means a part of the process of heading is effected." He therefore explains by drawings that part of the machine to which this refers, and states, that "the wire being enclosed within these dies, and in the small tube which is comprised in the die, the punch operates on the wire so enclosed, and forces it into the circular recess." What benefit there is from that; how it operates on the metal; or why it is an improvement; those who are looking at this specification would have to form an opinion of for themselves; for I do not find in this specification any other explanation of the object of this altered mode of dealing with the wire beyond what I have now stated. He again repeats at the end what he claims as the patent he specifies; what the object is for which he claims it, by repeating again in substance, shortly, what he had before said more at length." Fifthly, he claims the invention in the improved construction or method of making the dies, and the employment of two dies."

That is not in question; it is therefore in the improved means of making the dies. The result therefore is this,—that he states "I claim a patent for an improved die;" and he states the mode in which that improved die is used. The improved die is used by enclosing the wire, the whole extent of the wire, in the die, and then, by a punch, operating on the extremity of the upper end of that wire, and the effect of which is to make it fill the circular recess below.

Now, after considering all the parts of this case, and all the evidence before me, having come to the conclusion, that there is enough in this case to prevent me from seeing, with absolute certainty, that I should not be doing justice by granting an injunc