OCR Text |
Show INTER-MOUNTAI- MINING REVIEW. N 5 on the fact whether they had discovered the brought before the German judges and they general public some time before the patent selective action of cyanogen. They had decided against the pat- was obtained that cyanide of potassium could discovered that a weak solution of cyanogen ent. The small addition of the carbonate of be effectively used in the treatment of quartz, produced a better result in treating gold than ammonia did not affect the process at all. and, further, that the patent was not of a other ores. He said that the only use made He should endeavor to show by authorities sufficiently specific nature. of The question for the Court to decide was, prior to the use made of it that this process did not involve any inventive skill, and was not a patent in England was the process an invention or not. The by this patent was in connection with This process of dissolving gold or when tried before judges. Simpsons patent patents were for the treating of quartz by siver by means of altogether was not brought on in England. A patent cyanide of potassium. The Court had very differed from this process. The learned could be introduced from another country, good and able evidence given in several cases counsel then went through the different pro- but not so in America, and he contended that by experts. The Court was considerably ascesses in vogue prior to the MacArthur-For-res- t a rule which applied in America held good sisted by th; evidence of Dr. Hahn and othprocess for extracting gold from its ores. here. He would be prepared to prove that ers. Professor Raymond, an American exHe referred to the chlorination process, and the mere fact that a weak solution was bet- pert, stated that the treatment of quartz by then to that of quicksilver, in both of which ter than a strong one as a medium of solution the cyanide process was public property long he contended that the processes had failed to for gold, was no evidence of inventive skill. before the dates when the patents were obtain the finer portions of the gold, particu- He would show that, to speak of the propor- granted, and that the fact of the solution belarly in the cases of refractory ores. In re- tion of cyanogen to gold was absurd, and ing made weaker did not constitute a new ferring to the method of treating gold over that the selective action was not selective at discovery, as it was only following the naplates with quicksilver, he said that in some all and not patentable. He would be able to tural order of economy in utilizing expensive ores, while they passed over the plates, a thin prove with experiments on a large scale, no ingredients at the least possible cost. Mr. layer of something appeared on the plates, mere laboratory experiments, with both the Caldecott, who possessed a practical knowlwhich prevented the gold being taken up at MacArther-Forres- t process and Simpsons edge of the treatment of the quartz, said that all. This was known as sickening or process, that, in treating large quantities of the strength of the solution should depend on had gold Simpsons process was the better pro- the quality of the quartz. Mr. Newberry, flowing quicksilver. been used to clean the quicksilver, but he cess and produced purer results. He would an Australian expert, held the same views. had never been show that selectiveness existed as much in Mr. van Gander said that his solution was contended that of the strength as specified by the f used as a solution in which to dissolve gold Simpsons and in Raes processes as in that Dr. Loevy of the defendant company. Then the ques- MacArthur-Forres- t or silver. process. Advocate Esselen said that the case was tion would arise whether the addition of car- said, on the other hand, that a stronger soluefreally a simple one, and required no chemi- bonate of ammonia gave the defendant com- tion of cyanide of potassium had a better cal knowledge to adjudge it. He read from pany the right to contend that Simpsons fect on quartz. Mr. Mac Arthurs evidence taken on com- process was not an anticipation of theirs. All the evidence went to prove that the mission before Mr. Fox in London, in which He would show that, while it is well known use of cyanide of potasHum in the treatment fact prior that gentleman explained how ht and the that carbonate of ammonia was not a medium of gold quartz was a Messrs. Forrest experimented with Cyan- - for the solution of gold, it was well known to the date when the patent was granted. T11 Calcium till thev arrived at that combination that the cyanide of potassium was He would 1884 one Simpson took out a patent in further contend that, if cyanogen was known the United States for the treatment of quartz which foimed the subject of their patent. Advocate Wessels: With regard to the as a medium of solution for gold, the fact by means of cyanide of potossium and carthat they did not state this in the specifica- bonate of ammonia. In the Court of Aputility of the process, the MacArthur-For-res- t of their patent, and their process was peal in England, the Judges of Appeal held process is not used on the Rand at all. tions This I shall be prepared to show, and also only an improvement, was sufficient to damn that the Simpson patent was not an anticipa- tion of the MacArthur-Forres- t patent. That was known and used be- their patent. He would show that that and the Forrests must have known Court also held that there was an invention fore that patent as a medium of solution for The success which in the MacArthur-Forres- t treatment. This gold. He said that he would analyze the of the previous patent. better advertising and the ex- judgment of the Court of Appeal was conspecifications. Then he would prove the attended the state of knowledge that existed prior to iSSS, tended use of the process was not in itself a trary to the judgment given by Judge Romer, when the patent was taken out. He would fact which made it patentable. Further, he whose decision was supported by a decision degiven by the German Court of Appeal. With show that in the early part of that year it was would prove that zinc was used, as they could be used scribed it in Patent No. 7 4, to precipitate all due respect, to agree with the judgment well known that from other solutions, and the fact that given bv Judge Romer and the German as a medium of solution for gold. He would of Court of Appeal, which held that the Mac- show that gold which exists in ores, and that this was not set forth in the specification and that this was merely an im- - Ai that process was anticipated by is patent, different with compounds, gold mingled It was known in provement, would settle that patent; and the patent of Simpson. The question for soluble in that Patent No. 47 was itself an an-- ; the Court was whether the treatment of 1SS7, and even before, that gold was soluble further, process 'quartz by the MacArthur-Forres- t Rae had a ticipation of Patent No. 74. out of ores by was the opening argument, and for was something new; and could the treatment Such for medium his in which precipitatprocess technical evidence and chemical )e patented. He did not think so, for the days many would He was the by electricity. gold ing of cyanide of potassium in the treatment were before the Court. ue experts one which the by Simpson patent, quote fact previous to said that this was a case of quartz was a Chief The combiin Justice used was of pound the defendant company to have two the date on which the patent was taken out. nation with one ounce of carbonate of am- against H claimed that he used for some monia. In this, Simpson was well aware patents, Nos. .7 and 74, cancelled on the Van Gander a solution of cyanide was ground that the said patents contained noth- time previously weaker that the main MacArthur-Forres- t process. This He would show that the same question was inrft new, and that it was well known to the than the Mac-Arthur-Forr- Cyan-Calciu- est m silver-electr- Cyan-Calciu- o. m Cyan-Calciu- m Cyan-Calciu- one-hal- well-know- n i Mac-Arth- Cyan-Calciu- ur m Cyan-Calciu- m a-ol- thur-Forre- j Cyan-Calciu- st m. Cyan-Calciu- m. ( wt ' well-know- n Cyan-Calciu- m re-age- nt Cyan-Calciu- m. |