The Evening Post from New York, New York • Page 2

'iMPOttTANT TO MILLERS EWteaetat tU at tba matters dinar kw tt Ouvti Jjv. AJ and frrtaiii MiUerr, t. new hi p.tfcu.i uiprarsmeMs la coUj OEK)RT OITA TRIAL. Oui t.iiiuA Ctut f.r llm Yuurlk Cirguit mf iA 17. S.

MurilttH Dntrici; WO. Tirn, TUU wu an mi km on the Case, fur the inlringe ennt of a oalent rtrht. Tha declaration contained four eounle ther recited the substance of (tie act of congress, emi tied An act for the relief of Oliver Evans. pu ltd lha 21 of January 1808 1 of the petition of lite natcsies in ina secretary oi kmc i oi ui iw ctDCAtionafiddesonpiiuaM the mvcntioa annex mI il Ik nliinn. urt or Ina IM1M1 DMUDI ana ed a cor.eit statement of tbe plaintiff's 'improve 'ikiwk mwm ftraiw inl made lo VNIHIHWni fa.aawa, true rhMMirti the mnn or various mscntaes.

a .1 a ik aa.iSaati.iaiA a ta mxtaca in elevatiitr and cent erinr tba eeiM from f4c to place ia emeil tepenue parcel, i ipteed Iflg, tmftntrnug ana gvntruif yw aanw, vj Regular end eoiwuot motion, to a te eybject the IaiM al WmmW Mil lh lull 1V I na mr to oewl and dry the nme. when Mcenare voIA dancer froia rVrmemailoa end to" prevent 1 l. a. grew oi ipe mawmaeiujw. a iic pmicifNe isti in the application of tte power which movee Uie mill or oilier principal machine to work any anacuinerr, vuicu niaj oe naea afipij vue aane 1 fKinciple or petfora the aaid operatioM Iky eotv r.ani motion ana rouuon to are espeneo ana tor.

It proceeded to Mate that the aaachtoefy in i ui i i a tarn. wrto, an imp ro Tea wum'tpyrr. a iue cwni further altedired that the olaimiff had eomulied with the everal proviaiona pretcitbcu by lle act of i(trtl on the eubject of patent ngliUrr and 1. I t. a.

akaa L. a. tite defeudant'e lu 'g ueed the phuatUTk aaid tm proremen wn hoot a lictoee i tie areettf count raii fl ihd breach to ennaiat in uainr machinea uica were un vmtunen wi rtmmumnKw vi iuuk Inrenled by the pUuti(f. The tMrA atatrd the breach com it in uainR purt ikt.wi rart wkii, to wit, the ilmtur, ftnxyr, kfpcr itg oVty. And llv furtA aUed the bivaah 10 conaiat miicintr marl at nun unrtn Itg.

i Tiie deiendant put unbe plea of DOT owitTT. ko no hc waa gien by ine lele)ulaM an in trniitm 'o prove any apeeud matter i but the waul of notice wa waved by the plaintiff, and ike ranee of teatimony waaareed to bo unlimited. oe puimin ua' ig proaueta in enaeneeine act paased fur hia relief, and the patent inurd in 1 A Is ra .4 I Ih. tWItJWnUa IIIUI ClU, piU'EU IIUlHaB MlCrVUI IV lllf defendant prior tq tbe brrach complained of and lIlBt tli atafta llftiaat tll NMlVHwUi aaltft bopptfbuT, iuvontcd by the plainulf in hia mill in Montgomery county, Maryland, dmiojf one pair of miii atonea, and grinding 12 bamta of flour in 24 houra. The witnetiea on both tidea.

who knew any thine; of (he origin or pregreas of the discore rv. united in Dromr ibe Diainiilf waa the on ginal ineenior of hit patented unprorementi and aifbore testimony (0 the inunerue utiliyr asd ad mirable of the inTWUion. i if :a.L. un Mean. inmyf nvp aw hiuwm mwrm counsel for the plaintiff, Metara.

JMqrtim, FurvUmct Df mud arun. well vuHm iwucicihmhi. Th.a case waa elaborately and el quently The leading caeca 01 pa'ent a i 1 I rigiua lor new inrcniHwa ocn aoaucca i ana ue ik.l au.h.aaaaft Calllaa aaa. to report tome of the ar.eumcms pronounced on the occasion would afford a very inadequate con 1 ematlaa of ihrir fat Cat aiad krittiakieif On lha nut of the pUiniilf, they conrtneed and delighted all ho heard I htm. They demonatraied 'ooncle laivcly hia right, at inventor, to hit patented ia provemaniti depicted in so.

ere and glowing combined to defraud him ot'the fruiia of hia ge llu.ty maintained his elaltna and pretentions be timi an twtiirvAMwi i atnfi MTk.iHiai.MM ia Maui and ffleriu on a eXalud and triumphant eminence. Tbe lolloelof (irlefMatesient was ftintWiel to Mr. 0b va Evt(t, by bii couiaH, lor ue parpoworexbituUng to tbe ctMivilUyw of congrm appoisted oa tbe aibjeet 1 of bapataut th bun. Judge Uuvell, ia bb twti tny tMrt coiaaUitlr of to 3aat (4 Uiuwe States cootbuied it, and bai obtrrved tbat be did not At the last (November) term of the circuit court the United flutes, in Unltimoiw. several actions Came to trial, which hid keen brought by Oliver Ha.aaaw'.iBiBif aasi.

aaaaiajL Maaa 1 L. 1 1 I a VtfattaA atVAlfflBt If lffAMant narBaft afrit) Hirtltt ISaa. pat 01 ngni, wj uwg iiw nut macniBcry wiiuow his perwuaaion. The millers Bear Baltimore, with (be Ellisons and the Tysons si their head, made a common with tM deiefldaaia. Tba deTence set ud was that Evans was not the original inventor oi the machines for which be bad obtained, the pa tent.

To support this deience witnes were irwui rarnn mnt iwi ant pwecs, uar a' t. nl a ai ute atiKnoni iwi pi wnnanana li. iw of Delaware, where Evans resided atthe time as he ailrges, the invention took The auaee wore twice continued, on the application of tbcMirfimdaqta io give titcm an upportuuiiy of pro rurii tf iliea wititeasess AO auend ai the trial. Jr The machine in question were the conveyor, a 1 a a. I I i.iuc iu ic ujcruwr.

caving paicni included oihcra, but they aru i.ot in grneral use, and kA not been used bv the defenilanta. A in to the invention of Oliv Rvans. had in. venteil anil usta a macfiine SomeUnBtr like tha Evans but it was pt. ved on the part of Evans, ihu his conveyor differed esaentially frni that ol Rltictt, was an improvement on it, much better adapted to the purpose to iwhrctt fcans applied U.

It was also proved that EUicotf had never applied his machine to th. rurtmse. uul the aPDlicauoa ws.made and Drac 'tised by Evans hu consequently, not only iro proved tlie machine in a new ard useful manner, but invented a pew and useful application of wbir so improved i making tliereby a new and urtut improvement in the art of nmoufaUuring flour. The e.eva'or came nest in question Here the is. vc tut.

uv vr a vess n.iia nj auuw iiib Something resembling an ekrator that had formrrlv bren used in or propotcd to be lived l'ir raising water i but it appeared tlil none of these machines bad ever been applied tq the raising of meal or gram, or were flt for that P'irpoe The elevator of Evans was eeten1 tally liifferent, and a great improramer.t, which Was not otilk appltrd to this new purpose tit the menu. faeturc pi fliur, but as extremely hseful for that ptu por Tliey then produced a miller from the stair of Urlaware, of the name of Stroud, who af xrr toin ntm grain iRa wnr supu oe rats Tjy a luaehine, did in tact matcesn elevator si riitar to lha: of Evans, though ns. complete Out i doc tared ib at lie never should have thought a i a a ji ii nv hft we tniormauon am ixceivea irom va, end was pored oa the part of Ersns, thai Uliai ki'vehUd lit nenlor ant! matJe emi leir mixlcl of beve Sitroud'a was On tlus head Stroud was so well Satisfied, fliir he piircha ed a ncease trom Evans to ose bis elevator together sib bis other improvements. A to lbs hopper boy defendants gave evidence that eon. wUlers, in Delaware, of the same of Marshall, ha'mg heard of Evans' discoveries which were jtept eoncealed, intended and at tempud te use a very imperfect macliinr, for the purpose to irtcb Evans applied hia Hopper boy.

Qut the Manhajls. who were produced as witnesses, proved lhat their machine did not answer tbe purpose, on account pf several essential defects, Us principle and construction, and tbat as soon as that of Evans, which was very different and. very complete, made ha appearance, they adopted it by license from him, and threw aside their on AH these machines were admirably combined ill an original and useful manner by the patentee. The defendants thus defeated on the evidence, eext attacked the ease on the construction and even the constitutionality of Uie, act ot congress i but tbe court, composed of Mr. Du vatt, a judge ol the supreme court, add Mr.

Houston, the) district judge decided against them on this point They thea gave up the defence, and conlk their evidence to the mitigation of tkmages. The jury found a verdict of S1850 for the' plaintiff" in the first case wbo declined demanding the treom asm area allowed bv Tha defeadanta in all the subsequent cases which came to to the num. tcr of tour, esaanea tnemseives entirely so cacu ses in mitltratkm ofdaaujrea In all these cases there were verdicts for the plsintiff 'with ample damsire which pave unlrersal satisfaction. The special act of congress it will be observed, Ainder which the patent in controversy, was grant ed, gives a right of action sgainst such persons only as cave useu, since its passage, or may Hereafter use the machines, without havine purchased license therefor. All who paid under the former defective patent are expressly protected aor can there beanv recovery for usinr tbe machines prior 0 the present patent even without having paid for them, Tbe spccisl.act is not retrospective in ks operation, or in the construction put upon it by the patentee and hia counsel.

Evans, to shew the utility ss well ss originality of hia improvements, produced at the trial many respectable witnesses, and read the follow me cer tificate from Messrs. Elltcotts, near Baltimore, the most skilful millwrights and esperieneed millers in Una or snv other pan oi the unueo sta'es. WE DO CERTIFY. That we havswScted OU tf var Evans new invented and of levaling, eonvayiof eooliar meal, sc. sitvuvt oaa ezswriaacee.

welMvalausdtbmtoaaswsravaliiaJile wirpose. wall worthy the atratioa of aay parsoa eooevroed ia mt' cnam or rreo caiaHaitv cixiquj nuia, wow wit, it, Iowa tbe labor sad ex pens of aianulacturiog wheat into flour. (Sirned) JOM.V EixrcOTT, s' J0.NATH.iN ELUCOTT, GtOROE ELLICOTT, VATBU EU.1C0TT. EUiftf Baltimtrt setmiy, titafg tf MurgUmd, Jtuf. 4, tfSrO.

Kesncctinc the utility of these machines and mv provements, it as fully proved that In a mill which can mannfacture 20 bbls of flour a day, they save at least 300 a year in labor alone, that tha is more perfectly performed and with less waste that mere work oan ue done py the same mill, and a larger proportion of superfine fleur proceeds from a given quantity of wheat, equal to at least SO cents gain to the miller on each barrel, that the wring upon the whole in such a mill upoo the most moderate computation amounts 1200 a year, probably much and thaA. no mill, without these improvements, can be employed competition with such as have Wa wens counsel for Mr. Oliver Evatiila these east. asd hr rivaa tbUsUtaaMatst bis raqiuMt. certify it to be trws, asd have ao doobt tbat ths Judge wbo a.

al a. la a Mll aa Cam nn wewna ifyam wl wLnVi i a. iiianiinm a .1 th nATHi Sahftnotw. Jan. (L 1111 tCbo nfa aokc aMi aavd bv Wm.

PlaktVT. tm. attorney feawrai ef tn vaitea states cue at bvun eouo seussmr. rtiuiam. latUa.lt, IB12.

Daaa Sia I find the itatesicat aigsad by yeo and Mr. arper, raUting te tbe trial at tbe last srwtoe of tit rir ik aaurt far AiUrvland. of Mr. O'lvrr ids' casrs. to baperieetly correct asd you are at liberty if you think to auk as eft his aot aia proof oTmy entiresucur.

rsace in that statement. I am dear tr, 2 fSImn WlLaLalAM. PWaCrtBVa lathaiuel winiaias, Ekj.w In the progress of this cause the defendenfs counsel euntendei befere the court 1 "lbat the letters patent granted in this ease was itct conformably with the act of congress passed for the plaintiff reliefThat the dectaration did uot'eorrcapond with the proo( in the construction of ths, defendant's counsel, the breach was alledg 10 consist ia the use af machines, whereas the patent comprehended the discovery of principles as machines. That tbe plaintiff was not entitled to patent for the conveyor, inasmuch as Ellicott had previously invented a schrew to mix flour, al though plaim Ufa conveyor waa differently con. ttruclul from Elliott's screw and applied to different purposes.

That the de fend ant was not liable to pay for using the machinery in question, it having been erected before the passage of the spe tat act, or the grant of letters patent to the plain tiff; and after the expiation of the former letters uaicnt, wben I' was not unlawful to erect wr use Uie same, And lastly, that the act for Oliver van's relief waa exPsil acts i that it impaired the obligation of contracts and waa therefore unonsti a a a M. I 1 1 a a Ina. (tonal lie naving vo'kincQ letters swcih aayti, for the aasae improvements which had expired be. fore tbe act aforesaid bad passed it nut alter tlae ease that the first patent, was decla red itKaiciaflr tobe null and void, for deft ct of form The cturf (judajes Du vail and Houston) decla red, tbat the letters pstent cotwrovfrsy, were is a a a a a. a.

.1 I a sueu contormaDio to ia. a too uvTiuniim waa rood and sufficient lo maintain the plaintiff's ce. ai established in proof i some of the courts Hedging ihat the defenait used the patented im kenu generally, anaoiner. pan ei ine im prorement. That the plsiatiffs conveyor beings new and useful improvement en the continued spiral screw, and applied to a haw and useful purpose envi led him to a patent for his improved eonve) or.

That tbe second proviso the act tor Evans relict, patted the twenty first of January eighteen hundred and eight, protected tbe defendant from a ny liability to pay ilamages for using the machine, ry without license, previous to the granting of the. patent, but not for any subsequent use. And that in the opinion nT live court, the act rtf trrd to not an expost Tactolaw, for that relates to criminal cases only that does not impair tbe obligations of contracts or interfere with any righis previously acquired by the community that on the contrary, the legislature has evinced its intention to individ ual rights, by exempting, ia a special proviso, ait person from the obligation to renew a license, pirctused under the former patent that congress nave ine exclusive rigDt oy the constitution, to limit tbe times for wbich a patent right shall be granted, and ace not restrained from renewing a lateut or prolonging the time of its continuance i more especially the present case, where the patent gnmed the first invtance had been decided, by judicial authority, to be no U. and void, on account of some defect ia tbe pateot. Tbe J'iry brought in a verdict ef tiflttn iaw erear mnMjLfrj aamages.

If. B. These dam res were riven for four yean I and oine owoUa UK of the ouchincrf, weriog aU I the timrjby ctftwil ef pite tWeA oftriair id fcrthe iftgUtouMthl iacl.inery a future without tnri'at'ioa of time. The second cause Which Was tried, was against Charles a Jones, in whic the verdict was Tor damages with tho sms agreement, as to licensee as in the preceding verdict y. Tt lAe Stat4 ad Jfrpreseaiertwe JlM Tbe memorial of Oliver Evans mpewtfully your memorialist has been favour ed ith a copy of the ax mortal of John Worthing ton and others, and of the evidence accompany ing tho same, which he haa read with surprise i and your memorialist beg seava to declare that he believes ha can yet prove evervstatement ia the said memorial and evidence, tending to shew ihat your jnemorialist is not the eriginal inventor of all and everyone of the machines in their improved state, tbeoriginal combiner nd applierof tbem.te produce the nseul result of his great improvement on the art of manufacturing flsur and meal, as pa tented to him to be erroneous.

But your memorialist did never expeel be put on this mere especially be I We congress, seeing that courts are appointed by law tor deciding on such 1 untried mints. Yet it'reauifed by Ue honorable con of his intimate friends, to whom he eommunicAedhis discovery years beibre hemadalt oublie. are dead, be believes "he cart find Queen Anna's county, eater shore of Mary Un where your memorialist lived wben he made (he discovert, one living ia New Castle coun ty Delaware, one, Mifflin county, Penn. and one ia the aity of Washingtonvia. Evan.

Bans. I And to Drove that Me set ae 4M machinery i his mUlm part, oa Red Clay Creek, N.CStlr county, and thth made it public by presenting a subscription' piper, setting forth the whole tm. improvement, stating (hat in ease the neighboring, millers would subscribe a sufficient aum, vour memorialist weald make tha impro vernent, which ha hss since dooebut that on millers refu sing to subscribe any thing, sad on being advised by James Latimer, Eq now deceased) to. apply to the sute legislatures jpr exclusive rightshe took down his machinery. 'and secreted the un til he should receive those exclusive rights that itwtsaf erall this tbat Stroud discovered the el vatoe and Marshall and Stroud attempted to make the bopperboy.

He ean find witnesses in tha state ot Delaware, and in Philadelphia, to support the testimony of Evan Evans, to whom all ia well known. In corroboration he may procure copies of his petitions to tha legislatures of Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and New. Jl amp. shire, petitioning for the exclusive right for twen. ty Ave years, not only for his improvement in manufacturing flour, but for the steam carriages of his invention knd also copies of the acts in bis favor of Permsj lvania and Delaware for the mijl improvement only, Maryland New Hampihire for steal waggons also for 14 yevs rtoa short a time, bad it beet! for thirty years steam boats and steam carriages might frave been to use twenty years ago.

i Thus your memorialist could shew what have' been his pursuits, sndhsbegs leave to refer io tbe Secretary of State's office, to the specification be has filed there of several other great discoveries, and 4.e declares be has several ethers yet to file, which be fears he will not be able to put into operataoajToadeMhs present palest laws and cad Ices litigation. Theser troujd shtw" to JW honorable. body tho great improbability of those mea having been the inventors, Wto now begin te claluT the original discovery of your tnejnoriaUst's patented improvement, as soee at the great pro its thereof begin to 'V' Vbar rae'moV'isf aekne wledgev that he has rats ed the price of tits license to use his Inventions ksd impTOveteent, rthetr value became known, from bestowine them rraiis, with bis thanks to those who would accept then to make then utility known to R33, git), glOO, up to hi present demand, which tfthe eum saved to the user in wages and boarding of hands to one year only, rating the we pes and board of a miller at 300 per year; which is sot more than one ttgh part of the full gain by the Use for one year, for hia license to use for and during his patent term. That is, be price of license is g300, the esin by the use per year will be R3.400, and for 14 years 33,600 1 out of which they pay g300 for Ueence. Tour memorialist may defy John wor tb'mgton and others to produce an instance, in the world, of so low a charge for so great a beflefi' made by any patentee i and he denies their charge of having demanded 3,600 for license for oiu mill, alttiourh he has heard that Elisha Trsosrssid so i he can rave thai be demanded only g330 per mill fir i6 inills of said, Eliaha.

Tour memorialist conceives it impossible for him to produce hie. proof in due time before your honorable body, qot could congress devote the time necessary to hear the great mass of testimony, that would be produced. lie therefore prays tbat tbe report of the recent trials io Use circuit court of the United Slates, beld at testimony voluntarily given by James Si round and Edward Marshal before a notary public i and the tea limony of Co) Enoch Anderson taken before judge, accompanying tbia memorial, he deemed and received as part of the same i and that he and John Wnrthington and others be referred. with their cases bt to the courts of the U. States i and your memorialist will with the consent ef those of the memorialist who are Infrmrmg bis patent right, commence suits sgainst them to give them an early opportunity at prortnw in court that he is not the origiiytl inventor, and your met oralis TH a.a..aa I4JLYEREVAKS.

1st. The agent ef Oliver Evans la Baltimore, uixier sutnonty Irom atm, onered te sell a license to Elisha Tvsoe to use Evan' machinery com plete lor six pair of six feet staaea, ias merchant I a. a. a aa. muim uie muse approvsxj ptan, ior jtjmn tsVsd ilUAsre.

ft was to rate as live pair ef stones, though the marfitnery was to be applied tw all sis because it was suppnssd all wwuld not ordinarily run at tbe same time feut It wwe expressly stated, (hat no further claim should be made, even if all ill did sWtstiae run teeereK. He cAber de mand was ever made Of said Tysee, or any of his sons, by Erana'agent'i nor is st believed er pretended, that saw ever was made thiwegh a differ ent cnannet. Tbia certiOcate as given by the a rent, he "has i Tyson's and EvanV letters befort him on the subject and which are the foundation of all that passed thereon. 2d. Evan Rvawsie his testimony, in the ease of Eavana KUDHison, aiatea inac ui or 1703, while his brother Oliver Evans tired on the Eastern Shore of Mar) land, the latter told him he had eoocelved a mode of elevating eaeal, as fast as it fcU from the mil stones, by a anachinev consist ing of buckets attached to a strap i which machine was be moved by the water wheel i that his brother soon after mads a model of his elevator.

of paper, and that he witnessed its first private esperiments in a mill which OQversnd his brother built la Delaware I and that tha wu long anterior to any elevator being use sa Stroud and Marshall's milL That his brother having long before te ITWtO. Evans Detitioftoi the reneral aavtablv or plaryliad. tor a patnat to aceure aa eichkiwe property in and steam earns(te a4 at April aowon. 177. the a aembl oas rd aa act antillMi an ui I.

MTmt ftaarkiiaa a al 1 1 rxA ie rirM ofiaak.iD.aaH aePitw viihin th aantry hertis dejcriard." tiescrilsi it io Mm else put Into crerittipc, hin iherrfiliwasbuilS a hopperboy, which was coo cealed from the public the doer which led' to ir being kept.lucked, and this was previous te ay machine of the kind being set up in any neighbor, inr tnilla or elsewhere lo his kuowledee I and tht when hi brother was advised to apply be legis lautre of the adjoining a ates Tor exclusive nguts to his disooverie which was before the adoption of the federal constitution be tok down his hopperboy i the elevator had previously been kept concealed. "That the first conveyor which his brother Oliver invented and combined with hia ether machinery was not a continued spiral screw but was a succession of ploughs placed traverselysV cross the spiral line i and this conveyor wss applied to convey tha flour from where it falls from the mill stones to the elevator and that this conveyor, so constructed, and applied, waa not io operation in any other mill that he oversaw or heard of, before it was so invented by his brother Oliver. Evan Evans lived with his brother when the machines aforesaid were invented. 3d Samuel of Delaware, wbo was a witness in the suit sgainst' Robinson, testified lhat be lived with Oliver Evan when bis Irst hup Cerboy was In op ration that he, bung the door which led to the left where the hopper boy was placed, which wu kept locked, and the kev confided to his ehanre. He also stated, lhat said Evans bad then the model ef ae elevator, which was riot put up.

The machines were kept concealed until Evaea could obtain the Slate legislatures he concurred with ether that it was notorious then that Evans was the inventor of the mill machinery. i Sth. Thos. Philips, of Delaware, testified ai to the Aaiversal belief that Oliver Evans was. tbe inventor of the mill machinery i which lie Said was in use In his mill, arid was ao sniuial sav ing to a am aa a a a.

.1 rum ot in laoor, ana, dcskics oinpr proms and advantages, produced a gain of fi cyp 50 io 6j) cents on each barrel, in the superior quantity end quality of Qio Btfnr rnanufaciurcd, 5th. Levi Hollingowortb, formerly of Cecil county, Md. now of Baltimore, gave evidence, a meng other things, that it was the general opini en through the country, at the time the improve, events ia question were introduced, that Oliver vans was uie first inventor iheteoC 6th. Joseph Marshall, brother of Edward" Mar shall, wa) witness en behalf of the defendant, in the.case of Bob ins and gave similar testimony to his brother's, whose deposition, is inserted at 7th Cel. Enoch formerly of Delaware, now of Penasylvtnia, in a wrifen deposition, and orally on the trial aforesaid, stated that he was intimately acquainted with Oliver Evans from 174, lhat be lived near ie him, and had al most daily intercourse with him that in that year, Evans told him be ceuld elevate, convey and cool meal and Sour by machinery, as fast as it fell from the millstones, which machinery ceuld be worked without manual labour i that he told him this before any machinery wu set up in Stroud ft.

Marshall's mill, or any other (hat he ever beard of i that when he saw machinery in the mills of Stroud and Marshall, they admitted it waa oririn ally invented by Evans, and said they had his per diiwiou io use H. iu too aniLwni Hia icaiiiuouj many other and minute circumatkneea relating to the progress of the invention. Sth. Oliver ia fie OfreanY CVurf iht "Vi of Me lnttesj SU Bobmson, kej'. tricl iMoryUmm Jawis STBoeo.

a witness stimmoaed en tbe part of the defendant a. in euitsenueace ef the ae joernmentof the court voluntarily testifies, and upon his solemn anvmatioa solemnly a cc Lares mat he is sn inhabitant, of New Castle county; in the state of Delaware, about fifty three years of age, and has for. near thirty years pursued, tbe business of a miller, with only occasional interruptions, and understand the mechamm of anils for grindM? wheat and other grain i be says tbe first be ever heard of eteva ors and bopperbays, for which tbe plaintiff has obtained a patent, was to tbe best of his recollection, in the year, seventeen hundred and eighty four or sevealeea hundred and eighty, five i that the first time he ever heardof the inven. lion of elevators and hopperboys, he understood they were invented by the plaint iff, Oliver Evans and that the second time he eo nversed about such an, invention, wu with the said Oliver Evans, who said thai wu not only practicable to raise flour, but (hat it wu thea in operation although the deponent had never then seen the nor had he ever heard of any other person inventing such machinery peforvythe sakl Oliver Evans. 1'bn the first eleta'brhe ever saw was ia Marshall and Stroud's mill in N.

Castle soon after the invention waa, made known; probably in tlve year seventeen hundred snd eightyve, that this'elevator was principally erected under, tbe care and direction of this affirmant, who bad. die covered, as be believed, the principles of the plaintiff's discovery, for which be (the plaintiff had then no patent i that in the same mill be first saw a hopper bov, machinery resembling a hop. per boy, soon after the experiment of the elevator aforesaid this hopper boy was the produc' lion of the Joint labor and invention of William Marshall ad Samuel a.roud, the owner oTsaid mill, and of the two anna of said William en experiment ir wu found not ta answer the de. sired purpose. Seon lterwards, this affirmant hatha conversation with Oliver Evan about his in.

ventioa ef the hopper boy and one was made by this amrtnant according to bis (the said Oliver aans's) ptaa and another wu put up aocerd mg to the same plan in the mill of aaid Marshall and Strand, and ware found te an awrcr better than, any other invention or machinery that bad ever been previously discovered, or made aecerdmg to tbe best of Lis knowledge and ee baa since been discovered to the best ot tut knowledge being the same now ia general. Vise. The affirmaat further solemnly dsclares, that front his own knowledge and observation. and from all tbat be has heard front ethers oa tbe sub ject, he verity believe Oliver Evans wu tbe first inventor of both the elevator am the hep. per ooy now in eomraon use ta mills tor manuue luring flour from wheat! and so believed at the time be.

the. was HJakirri' such machinery in the year 1784, or ed the first Uca or nodosa ef tbe same, was derived from him. the aaid Oliver Evan The affirmant fur, her Mtys, that the invention of the a levator and hopper bey, with ether improve tnentt in making flour, for which the plaintiff dm a pa tent, in his eptnio sees one hall the labor which otherwise would be weeessary for Carrying en the milling business i an.t else are causes of great aa vtng, and da the work better thaa eooid be dene by manual labor, ia the mode practised before such inventions. That be bath knowo Oliver vans ever since hit ia Kalians aforesaid, and wu acquainted with the first trials sad experimeai of such inventions id said Marshal's at Eifeud'a mill. and knows treat eaimber of sail! which thev are used, and that his the said Oliver Evaa'.) claim te the originality ef aaid Inveatins waa never disputed fat the nesgtiborhood whero tVy were so Irst tried, te this attrssani'S kaowledra.

aoc elsewhere tha this afirntant knows of. sjatii the case now under trial, (Signed) JAMES STltOUlX and aimed before awe. thi tail. November IS 11. i STESETT.

KaUaryrshl, Baliaaxe. Edw. Wafsiari, of KsWaCtiile Conntyi slate of being solemnly affirmed. speak the truth, declares and says, tfiat he is a bout 48 jfears of sge snd wss instructed in business early life, and pursued tl.e isms griwrally as his profe avion tkat about (tin. jeartirWor 178fl, this affirmant's fatlier asked tliirurmnt" what be thought of a machine that would take Hp the flour as fast was prouwV to which this affirmant answered that be thought it impossible when affirmant's father replied thai Oliver Evans said he bad invented such a machine.

Ileuys this is the Crsuime he ever heardof elevator that about ibis time James Stroud, wbo rented the lower mill r.f Tm. Is James Marshall, and near to the mill of affirmant's father, said tbat he had found oul 'the principle of the clevstnr, snd supposed it to be Oliver Evan's plan, and this affirmant aasisted in nuknig one according to such discovery that at the fim it did not work well. but it wu altered so as to answer better The af. firmant say! that after snaking such elevator, Samuel Stroud invented a bopperboy wbich on trial did aot answerthe intended purpose. That that atfirmsnt then altered the machinery of said Samuel Stroud, but still it would pot answer alt tbe purposes required although much improved i he says that be nevef saw enopperboy befoaL.pn: ver Evans's plan, and he veribly believes be afrT was bath done, that the said Oliver Evans is the eriginal true inventor of the hopperijojr now eem' monly in use and he also belives that the said Oliver Evans is Uie first, invembr of the elevsior aow likewise ia common use in mills for manufacturing flour.

1 The affirmant further says hie father paid Oliver Evans a certs' sum for the. privilege of using his elevator and bopperbOrVi. the loer mill belonging to bis said utber, thai receipt for which now is or Intel wu, ia tits pos aion of this affirmant's brother. (Signed) EDW. MARSHALL.

Affirmed and signed before me tbe lOtb. No (l. SAMUEL STEItRET, Notary Public, 10th. The following eertificata wu fumishrd tt Oliver Evans without his prat ious knowledge or but from the spontaneous motion 4' tbe person who signed for the purpose uf correct, tng Htue inadvertent, expressions ubich had been drawn from them by tlie persons nrntd in it. It hu been affirmed to by Mr.

James Sil oud, in Pl.U ladelphia, in the absence of Mr. Edward Marshall. StauHttn, A'ev Cuttle, County, Dl Jon. S3. This is to certify that on the 5th day of January, i tut.

Isaac M'Pbersnn, Samuel Stroud and Thorn. Wetherspoon called on us to certify that 8amtt el Stroud a statement of the mill machinery waa correct and prepared a certificate for us to sign wbich atter some alteration we did sign, but it being done in too Jnuch tualr, and not knowing' what use it wu to be put te, we were not so par ticular as we should have beeh and npoo more deliberate consideration, since we got a copy of our certificate unexed to Samuel Stroud's state, ments, we find some points not agreeable to our minds, which we beg leave to correct to prevent injustice from taking place. in uie nrst piaoe appears innamuei strotia statements, that Oliver Evans called at the mill to see it, and said that he had planned in bis head a similar set we declare Uiat Oliver Evans had uid that such a thing to hoist the meal hut as the mill ground It, to convey it about the mtly cool, be. could be done and be would do it this he aaid before James Stroud made the discavery of the elevator from the screen strap, and before a ny bopperboy wu made by Samuel iUroud or Ed wara Marshall i which, ww mm not cenaider to be. on the same principle neither will it answer the VaavaaaftjaaU.

RaaaJaJ tl. A. Jf Ma. IV ar.ianaw mm w.Maaw if believe, and it always appeared to be the belief ef William Harshau deceased, that Oliver Eran wuthe first inventor, and that we Monk from his saying that it ceuld be done and he could do it. For any thing else we refer to our depositions, given in Baltimore, which are correct we could not obtain a copy or Samuel Stroud's statement" snd our certificate, until yesterday brere tid have wrote sooner.

't (Signed) EDWARD MARSHALL. JAMT.4 BTsntm A true copy from the duly examined and compared. BENJAMIN NONES, Not. Pubr filadclphia. 11.

The subscriber, unsolicited bv and unknowa te 0. Evans, feels It due tntmtb aad jtisdea, tostatr his teeoUetr taoa of the anil machinery. lis veil rmrmbers w1mS at the Brand vwiae mi.la.4hev used to hoist the flottrfrow tlie lower story So tbe loit, in large buckets er tubs, tied by sUavelt from Ui chests into wbich tbe ftourfeliwcni toe mill stones he has also freuumtly area a was aw ployed at the mill, io heaping tb flour over the hopper to let it paw into (he cloth Mow. Born as lot neighbourhood of these mills asd pasaiDC bit infancy youth at WibntDton, within halfe'niila of tbestt; sni goinf titer to swim and to skate as well a for other venile aanwetneats, the piece pveseotioj dclirhau. sSVtw me ftw tbek rnjojnaMt, be has passed thfotieh tboe inills or some of tliem, aiaay hundred times, beiore i since the tnioravpmeots sfere iotraduced.

His reuse mind was muett pleased to obatwvatbe little buckets (ttw .1 a 1 Maaa alaM a.f.1. ttaaa ncviiiu imtyyij Ul( pum ww aw d. mvv dei to, and was stock aanicd to ar tbe ban of tb bopperboy, that pi sad collected the asesi. without manual la.kor.ta totbenml srhera it Was waatrd aorwuhwlewaereeablv suranivd at tb onrrstMaof the eoaveyer, tbat wUUe ttce assd tae nour naiwed it the place wber tb elevator caught it. He abereeal kcted to have heard stated that the introduction of machinery wauls' throw moutii ptMutHiwt of esipioy at Brandy wine and always ewtielrstood tbat tbest itu vatiows oa the old mode ot muaiuacturing aour were oaa fail writing Hi above aa old arhool avaie at my bow has precisely tb nme nrollectwoa.

KritUer vim pretend ta know foot Oliver EvaasreaMy invented tbol things butar very eertaia (bat eoamo tame'tave bra tbe riwditof Usemal lit tilts Hxf warn iutn? tt the Braudywia aulh. H.MIM 12. OUVER EVANS, having teea to httbe pubb pen some rsprtts atatoa going To abjw tout Be dvriiw bis invention of the eonveyerfrota Jojatlisa rJUfoCttcrr (ussd by the latter mis Boar in a ctWst) is Wwto a friend ia this dty, utUrly denies thsaMetJ tforive ft, but declares that Is lavested tbe without aayamistaDce trem Jeeatbaa ilicott, other person, asd says he caa and will prove tltat be vented tlie oaveyor, mad models ef it, ad taught tut SUB to stbart loot before he sa Ellhrolt's seSw. I A0T1CGTO MIUavERS. 1 THOSE whe sre uriag, aad coatwua Xe.tm my saur ted imprsvvmeats without sy liceotw, iai who have muy KalllVlVW Ita, PtIaiCH WW9 pay, (eaiting tbere ultof Uwsuits,) wiU sw cbmiro; terest on tbe wlnlesua mved te Unas io aef od ding of miller, by tbe am of my impwemetit, uwia a after the 22d day of January, 1813, or trout the titsetM oegMto utt tbeas, it alter tbat Sate, we suwt lata ut ia tn mtafa.nt Brier, WOKS i tbesum wvediawageiSaid bokMingof asiUerslaiv wy with the Intertut that amy have accrued.

AUt for every barrels of flour that tb milr wili ia teeuty fount, eo baad at lao is mved, ami rstw" wages aad boaidiigat 0 dollars per year, a mill one hand and a hfilf ss ssvedV Thru ias aa.ii a al I J.lKaa aarla. (KMC I. 1 1 Mi aaa; nil ICa. HilwlHia. ii aaHal jow aousrs or aouars tor eaca i added the laterM op to January 22d.

lift 1W tm January xztt, id mere win ne to i eed, Uie tntrfrrt prtnint lov wm I 'year, aod on 300 dolls, mved tlut ye ot1, sja aioftjOO dolls. 'J ha. nrlr.rl;aana a iH lh ka i Jaawary 24, 1815, there wUl adJed, the ie for aad ee 6BJdvJlat saved la two jrears, The urlee of Breoee wUl men Jawaary Z2d. IslS, there wilt be added 4. urastostJeuus.

maamV mmUi nwaees swenaaew aubp. it al rt art for i. at i Co: Ol ne tbt .8 fir.