vious, be mainly, if not entirely, dependent for propulsion on her oars or paddles; and the flat-floor construction will, by drawing the least possible water, give the greatest facility in passage through the water, as offering the Isast resistance for weight.

The stability of the flat floor is beyond denial, and is demonstrable both practically and theoretically. We have a good practical example of this in the case of the Thames punt, before alluded to, which is rarely, if ever, known to be upset, even in very rough weather. The possibility of such a casualty cannot be denied; but all practical men that I have put the question to, declare to the firmness of the punt, and the improbability of accident from upsetting. We cannot insure certainty in any case, as accidents unforeseen may occur; but our business is not the consideration of providing against impossibilities, but of ascertaining what construction of life-boat is the most firm and safest, and that in which the fewest casualties are known to occur, -and this appears to be the case with the flat-floor construction of the punt; we may instance, also, the flat floor of the sailing barge and sailing lighter of the dockyards. Whoever heard of the capsizing of one of these vessels? And here we may observe that the trial of the flat floor is witnessed in the roughest weather, and that it has to encounter waves of the heaviest character of our coast; which is evidence that the flat floor, while firmest and safest on the smooth water of the river, is equally so in the waves of the sea. We do not say, we repeat, that the upsetting of the flat-floor build is impossible. We are not considering impossibilities, but what form of vessel is known in practice to possess the greatest amount of stability, and to be the frees from the danger of upsetting.

This firmness in a flat floor is attended with other advantages well worthy of consideration. It gives a greater bearing on the side while hauling-in persons immersed in the water, and while stepping into the boat, than any other form.

As regards the comparative advantages and preference of the flat-floor build over all others, it may be observed, that the weight of such a construction for the particular service of a life-boat, is no objection. It may be heavy from the

strength required in the timbers and planking of the floor; but even here the weight of the floor is in some measure an advantage in point of acting as ballast; and weight in a life-boat is not of itself an objection, as, for the purposes required, it is unavoidable; and if that weight is so placed that, from its position, it affords least resistance to progressive motion, it becomes the most advantageous in point of utility that can be attained. The flat floor resting on the water, offers scarce any comparative resistance to progression, and may be said to slide over, more than divide the water; and, with efficient propelling force, gives less resistance for weight than any other

form.

Boats or vessels built with bends are lighter in construction, and stronger for the quantity of material used; and being, from their lightness, more easily moved, they consequently row better than flatfloored punts. But, again, I may observe, we have not to consider lightness and fast motion from that cause alone; we have stability, bearing, and fastness for weight, to consider; and, for the reasons assigned, I submit that the flat floor in these points exceeds all other constructions for the purposes of a lifeboat. And, under these considerations, I do not hesitate to say, that a boat built on the bend construction, with the weight of the additions required to render her safe, with the qualifications as a life-boat, will not row lighter than the flat-floor construction, but, on the contrary, will pull heavier, from the circumstance that she will be immersed deeper, by which the greatest opposition of the water is incurred; while the flat floor, by resting with least depth on the surface of the water, will, weight for weight, pull far more easily than a life-boat built on the bend construction.

There is yet another reason to be assigned in favour of the flat floor as compared with the rounded bearing or sharp-built row-boat, which is, that while the rounder bottom rolls with the motion of the wave till the side bearing begins to act, the flat floor from the first, by its peculiar bearing, begins to act in restoring the equilibrium* of the disturbed

I would not have this expression taken in the sense of quieting the waves, but that a flat surface keeps the liquid down, and smoother than a

The advantage of this mode would be to give the vessel greater power of floatation on her sides, and render the cork more efficient as ballast. Both kinds of these air-boxes would give an extra power of floatation equal to about 20 cwt. or 30 cwt., or between 1 and 2 tons. These modes of construction are shown in the diagrams annexed. In figs. 1, 2, and 3, A represents the cork floor, and B the air-boxes as thwarts and bulkheads; and in figs. 4 and 5, A is the cork floor, B air-boxes supporting thwarts, and C seat or foot-board for steersman.

The observation that I will here finally make is-risk and danger are unavoidable, if we would render assistance to those shipwrecked in a storm; but humanity dictates to offer every aid in our power to our fellow-creatures in distress; and God forbid that the feeling should ever be subdued in the heart of an Englishman, or of any human being. All we have in this case to consider, is the best and safest means of construction of a vessel that will accomplish the laudable purpose to which our attention has been attracted, and to which so much public attention has been directed by the example of the nobleman at whose instance the Life-boat Committee was appointed. G. G. V.

London, Dec. 1, 1851.

ROYAL MAIL STEAM-SHIP "AMAZON."

On Wednesday last, a trial took place down the river of the Amazon-a splendid steam-ship built by Messrs. Green, of Blackwall, for the Royal Mail Steam-packet Company, and fitted with engines by Messrs. Seaward and Capel.

The Amazon is the largest steam-ship which has been yet built on the Thames, being of no less than 2,500 tons burthen. Her length over all, 310 feet; beam, 42 feet; depth of hold, 34 feet; draught forward, 19 feet-aft, 19 feet 9 inches. The saloon is most capacious, and comfortably and tastefully fitted up; and abaft of this is a ladies' cabin, of a still more sumptuous character. We were much pleased with the arrangements for ventilation; but it seemed to us that there was a deficiency of light in the saloon.

The Amazon is propelled by two beam engines of the collective (nominal) power of 800 horses, driving reefing paddle-wheels each of 39 feet inches diameter. The cylinders are 96 inches diameter, and are

fitted with Seaward's patent induction and eduction valves; the length of stroke is 9 feet. At the measured mile, with a slight tide against her, the Amazon steamed at the rate of full ten miles an hour, the engines making 14 strokes per minute. Mr. Mills, the able and experienced engineer of the company, expressed no doubt that, after the engines settle in their bearings, the ship will steam upwards of twelve miles an hour.

PATENT LAW.-THE CASE OF USER BY A
FOREIGNER OF AN ENGLISH PATENT
INVENTION IN ENGLISH WATERS. (SEE
ANTE P. 453.)

Vice-Chancellors' Court, Tuesday,
December 9.

(Before Sir G. TURNER.)

Caldwell v. Rolf.-Caldwell v. Vandlissengen.Caldwell v. Verbeek.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL and Mr. BAGGALLAY proceeded with their arguments against the application for an injunction to restrain the defendants in the second of the above causes from sailing their vessels with the screw-propellers made in conformity with or in imitation of Lowe's patent. They contended that Lowe's patent was invalidfirst, because the invention was not novel; secondly,, because the specification claimed too much; and thirdly, because it did not sufficiently describe the nature of the invention. It was not novel, for it appeared that Bramah's invention in 1785 was on the same principle. It was assumed that the screw-propeller had no analogy to the vanes of a windmill or of a smoke-jack, which was Bramah's invention; but this assumption was quite unfounded, and not supported by the testimony of any scientific witness. Upon comparison of the models, it was very difficult to say that the principle was no perfectly analogous. Then the specification was too extensive; he claimed a patent for the curved blades of his screw, but he did not limit it to curved blades of a screw-like form; that was only one mode of making the screw. The specification did not claim a patent for sections of a screw; but, according to the claim, the invention might be a perfect unbroken screw. The description went further, but it had been repeatedly held that the description could not be imported into the claim. The claim, however, if not distinct, was too broad. It claimed not only the blade, but the axis of the screw. Now, it was clear that the axis was not new. The specification was also defective in not giving such a description of the invention as would enable a workman to construct it. The invention was described as "the section of a screw, which if continued would make a perfect screw." Was it possible to say that any artificer from this description alone, could, with any certainty, have constructed a machine having the properties of the propeller in question? Next to the objection to the validity of the patent, came the question of user or possession. The trials which had taken place had in no respect established the right of the plaintiffs. In fact, they rather tend to throw doubt upon that right; for in every case where a verdict had been obtained, affirming the novelty of the invention, the Court had set aside the verdict as against evidence, and granted a new trial, and, in every case in which the specification had been under the consideration of the court of law, that court had expressed doubts upon its sufficiency; and it appeared that the plaintiffs, instead of inviting any

ultimate decision on these points had in all cases avoided such a decision by settling their claims with the defendants. Many persons had, no doubt, submitted to the payment of a small royalty rather than incur the expense, delay, and annoyance of a suit in Chancery. The engineers, Maudslay and others, had willingly submitted to an arrangement by which all the claims of the several patentees, Woodcroft, Smith, Ericsson, Blaxland, as well as that of Lowe, were settled; and, for a certain payment amounting to £1 per horse power, they were allowed quietly to prosecute the manufacture;* for the same reason they had paid over to the plaintiffs, as representing all those patentees, the guarantee fund which they had received from the Government. It was quite obvious that this might be a very wise and prudent arrangement for the engineers, without in any measure affirming the validity of Lowe's patent, any more than it established any one of the other patents which were vested in the plaintiffs, The next point was the fact that the defendants had been for two or three years in the habit of using this invention, publicly, without any concealment; and, believing themselves to be justified in so doing, they had, as the affidavits showed, expended large sums of money in fitting their ships with these screws. The fourth objection to the motion was one of great public importance,-whether the Court would restrain the departure of a foreign ship, owned and manned by foreigners, because they happened to have fitted to the ship an invention which was lawfully placed there in the country in which it was built, but for which a patent had been obtained in this country? The principle did not apply to ships; if it could be maintained, it must be extended to every article of manufacture. Take, for example, Minter's chairs. Suppose a person to buy chairs according to that form and model made in Paris, and that there was no French patent to prevent them from being made by any person, might not the purchaser bring the chairs which he had so bought to this country, and use them in his own house, or in a coffee-house, if he was a proprietor of such a place, without being subject to any injunction? The case of a carriage made abroad had been suggested in the former argument, and a multitude of similar cases might be supposed. If this right were to be insisted upon as against foreigners, there was no part of a foreign ship of which the owners might not be deprived of the use. One patentee might claim to restrict the use of the sails, another of the cordage, another of the rudder, and another of the anchor; the ship might, as soon as it was unfortunate enough to enter a British port, be dismasted and broken up by all these several claimants. The consequence would be that foreign countries would retaliate. They would grant patents to their own people, which would operate equally in the restraint of our shipping in their ports. The defendants in these cases would be advised to procure patents in Holland for these screws, and the result of the plaintiffs' success would be that they would prevent the use of the screw by the defendants in this country, but they would only exemplify the fable of the dog in the manger, for they might in like manner be restrained in Holland from using it themselves. Where would the interference of the Court end? Suppose a foreign vessel fitted with the screw were stranded on our shores; the accident would make the parties amenable to the law as an infringement of the patent. In the case cited of "the University of Oxford v. Richardson," Lord Eldon had expressed himself to the effect that there might, from the necessity of the case, be a user of a patent article which would not amount to an infringement. The words of the patent did not extend the restric

* For some explanation of this combination of parties, see Lowe's Petition for prolongation of his Patent, given in another page.

the fabrics to be printed, and of which there may be any desired number, and while in this position the blocks or printing surfaces are subjected to pressure from a platten over the table actuated by cranks on a revolving shaft, driven by the same machinery as is employed to rotate the tables. The fabrics after being successively printed on by each of the blocks in the series, so as to produce on them a perfect pattern with any number of colours therein, are removed by means of a triangular frame, which has a suitable intermittent motion, and is so constructed as to remove from the table at each partial revolution a length of fabric equal to the repeat of the pattern.

The second arrangement differs from that just described in being of a rather simpler construction; in this arrangement the printing tables, instead of being fixed and acted on by pressing surfaces, are caused themselves to press the fabric against the printing block or engraved plate during its passage in juxtaposition to the fabric.

In the third arrangement, the printing is effected by the employment of engraved rollers, which are supplied with colour by other rollers dipping into colour troughs, and the pressure necessary to produce an rmpression is obtained from a third set of rollers, between which and the printingsollers the fabric is caused to pass on a uitable blanket or carrying band.

Claims.-1. The making or production of carpets and similar fabrics by means of the peculiar mode of weaving described.

2. The adaptation of engraved plates, locks, or printing surfaces, together with colour rollers and troughs, and their appendages, to moveable rings or tables, which are made to rotate round a centre, and bring each of the said engraved plates, blocks, or printing surfaces consecutively over the fabric to be operated on, and whereby the different colours, or shades of colours, may be successively applied thereto until the pattern is completed.

3. The arrangement of apparatus described for printing carpets and other similar fabrics, or any mere modification thereof.

WILLIAM BRIDGES ADAMS, of Adamstreet, Adelphi, engineer. For certain improvements in the construction of roads and ways for the transit of passengers, of materials and of goods; also, in buildings and in bridges, and in locomotive engines and carriages, parts of which improvements are applicable to other like purposes. Patent dated June 3, 1851.

Claims.-I. The application to the per. manent way of railways of stone-block sleepers with bolts passed through them to

hold down the rails or chains, or both, and with or without the intervention of timber, or other similar elastic material. Also, the application of longitudinal or transverse sleepers secured to stone blocks by bolts passing between the blocks and secured to timber or other material by bolts passing between the blocks. Also, any similar arrangements substituting masses of brickwork or cement, or concrete, or masses of cast iron or metallic slag, or loaded boxes of timber or iron in place of stone blocks, to secure the rails firmly, and when required elastically, to a sufficient mass of weighty ballast. Also, the use of side clamps to secure the rail ends bolted below the rails, and forming a chair if preferred. Also, certain sectional forms of deep single T iron rails and timber combined for permanent way, and of laterally corrugated or grooved rails. Also, the construction and application of various forms of rails for the permanent way of railways to produce lateral and vertical stiffness, formed of cast or wrought metal, or of both combined, and combined with wood and formed of one plane, or of several pieces combined or bolted, or riveted together, and laid in concrete, or in ballast, or with or without sleepers beneath them, and which are called "Girder rails," such girder rails having a continuous vertical or partly vertical support lower than the horizontal, or partly horizontal bearing surface on the sleepers or ballast. Also, the application to girder rails of cheek plates, and angle cheek plates on one or both sides, or tongue plates, or saddle or channel plates, or girder bearers, or break joint, for the purpose of connecting the girder rails, or parts of them, together, and making them continuous, and combining them in any new form required. Also, a mode or modes of making curved rails by forming the holes of the separate horizontal plates in curved lines. Also, the application of hollow girders, or rails as water pipes, or perforated as drain pipes, and of the various other forms capable of this arrangement, by adding bottom plates. Also, the application of elastic girder rails, and other analogous constructions, to permit elastic yielding of the rail without disturbing the ballast below. Also, the application of longitudinal or other timber bearings beneath the broad horizontal surfaces or plates of metal, to give vertical stiffness. Also, the construction and application of channel rails and of steel, or steeled rails, to form such girder rails as are described. Also, the application of zinc or tin, or other metallic or galvanic covering, or asphalte, or bituminous substance, or mineral, or other paint to these girder rails, or parts of them, to preserve them from