HON. WILLIAM H. SEWARD'S
A RGtt MENT
ON AN IMPROVEMENT IN THE
STEAM ENGINE.








THE STEAM ENGINE.
HON. WILLIAM H. SEWARD'S
ARGUMENT,
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE U. STATES,
AT
COOPERSTOWN, NEW YORK,
ON THE THIRD DAY OF AUGUST, 1853.
Mr. Justice Nelson presiding, in the Cases in Equity,
Villiam B. Sickles and others vs. George H. Corliss
and John Barstow, and the same Complainants
vs. Young and Cutter.
PROVIDENCE:
KNOWLES, ANTHONY & CO., PRINTERS.
1853.








The Complainants in these cases had moved for preliminary injunctions against the Defendants, to restrain them from
making, vending and using steam engines which contained
an improvement alleged to be an infringement of a cut off,
claimed to have been invented by Frederick E. Sickles, of
New York, and patented by him in May, 1842. The Defendants denied the infringement, and produced patents granted
to George H. Corliss in March, 1849, and in July, 1851, for
the improvements in the machinery built and used by them,
and they claimed that George H. Corliss was the first original
inventor of these improvements, and that they were substantially different from the alleged invention of Sickles, and
greatly superior in value to his supposed improvement, and
to all other modes of regulating the velocity of the steam engine, and of working steam expansively. The Defendants
also denied that Sickles was the inventor of the improvement
patented by him.
The causes were heard upon the bill, answers and affidavits
filed by the several parties, and was argued on the part of
the Complainants by Charles M. Keller and Edward N. Dickerson, of New York; and on the part of the Denfendants by
Hon. W. H. Seward, of Auburn, and Samuel Ames, of Providence, (with whom were associated Samuel Blatchford of
Auburn and Thomas A. Jencks, of Providence,) for the Defendants.
The steam engines in question were built by Messrs. Cor.
liss & Nightingale, of Providence, and the merits of the
inventions which give peculiar value to these machines are
fully set forth, and discussed in the following argument delivered by Mr. Seward, on behalf of the Defendants in the
above named cases.




ARGUMENT.
MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT: Recent publishers of Tredgold's Treatise, the most recondite that has ever been written
on the steam engine, invoked royal patronage by this significant dedication:
TO HER MOST GRACIOUS MAJESTY,
VICTORIA,
QUEEN OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND,
THESE VOLUMES,
ON THE PRINCIPLES AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE
STEAM ENGINE,
INVENTED AND PERFECTED BY THE TALENT AND ENTERPRISE
OF BRITISH SUBJECTS,
And Essential to the Progress of Civilization in every Nation,
ARE INSCRIBED.
It annoys and mortifies an artisan, prosperously engaged
in manufacturing steam-engines, and erecting them at Boston,
Providence, Hartford, Trenton, Harrisburg and other capitals,
and in Lawrence, Lowell, Lancaster, New York, Philadelphia, and other seats of manufacturing industry, to be brought
before this Court upon charges of trespass and piracy. Nevertheless, the occasion may prove to be one of advantage, if
it shall appear in the end that not only is he not at all a trespasser, nor a mere artisan, but also that he is a philosophical
and beneficent inventor, who has, like Fulton, by real and
eminently useful additions to the perfection of the steam-en



5
gine, so confidently claimed for British subjects, won new
distinction for American genius, and given a fresh impulse
to the progress of civilization throughout the world.
Your Honor knows well the history of the steam-engine;
its embryo in the rude device of the Marquis of Worcester, in
1663, for raising water to a higher level, which drew from that
pious philosopher an ejaculation of "Thanks to God, next to
those which are due for creation and redemption, for having
vouchsafed an insight into so great a secret of nature, beneficial to all mankind, as this water commanding engine;" the
invention by Savery of the atmospheric steam-engine, and its
application to a hydraulic purpose; the accidental, though
happy discovery, by Newcomen, of the process of condensation by the cold-water jet; and the rude state in which Watt
found, and the improved condition in which he left, this great
mechanical agent of Human Progress, when he had defined the
due proportions of the boiler and the cylinder, had disclosed
the laws of latent heat, and of the pressure of steam, had
invented sliding and circular valves, and perfected steampacking, had replaced the atmospheric with the double acting
steam-engine, securing in it a perfect vacuum by a process of
separate condensation, and new economy by working the expansive force of the steam, and had subjected the engine to
imperfect yet useful regulation by the governor. And your
Honor well understands, that it was when the steam-engine
had attained this degree of perfection, that, as a stationary
agent, it went into general use in the manufactories of Europe,
while our own Fulton seized and converted it into a marine
power, and sent it abroad to revolutionize the commercial,
social and political systems of all nations. Our researches,
on this occasion, will call us back to that period.
The cost of fuel is the chief impediment to the universal
use of the steam-engine. Every improvement of it reduces
this cost. Watt's inventions effected a saving of threefourths of the fuel before fed to the engine, and he realized an ample reward by reserving to himself the value of
one-third of that saving, although there was then not one
steam-engine, where a hundred are now employed in the
United Kingdom.  The recently renewed, and: I trust hopeful efforts of Ericsson to substitute heated air for steam,
illustrate the importance of economy of fuel in. the use of
the steam-engine. Although the expense of the fuel is borne
at first by the manufacturer, it ultimately falls on. either the
1



6
producer of the material or the consumer of the fabric; and
so, economy in this respect is a great interest of society.
We bring here into Court the steam-engine as it has been
perfected by Mr. George H. Corliss, and claim for it that it
is far more effective than it was as left by Watt, while it saves
more than one-half of the quantity of fuel that it then demanded. Mr. Corliss's improvements have thus far, however,
been applied only to stationary engines; and, of these, only
to such as use valves having a sliding or circular motion.
His improvements are two-fold:
I. A peculiar device for moving each steam and each exhaust valve, with a distinct and independent motion, by means
of a crank-wrist. There being thus a series of crank wrists,
all of which are attached to a common disc or plate, which
is secured to a rock-shaft connected with the main eccentric;
so that all of the valves are moved, though by distinct motions at the right times, and in the most advantageous manner.
Each wrist operates, through a distinct lever, upon its proper
valve; and all of the wrists are so arranged on the common
wrist-plate, with reference to their levers, that they act like
cranks, each of which vibrates near its dead point, or point of
slowest throw, and therefore imparts but little movement to
the valve it actuates when that valve is closed, while each
moves with its fastest throw, and therefore imparts the greatest movement to its valve, when that valve is being opened.
This device is substituted for the common process, in which
a steam valve and an exhaust valve are rigidly connected together, so that when one is moved the other is forced to move
equally with it, and the closed valve is of course moved with
the opening one, and consequently the whole amount of force
consumed in thus unnecessarily moving the former while
closed is expended to no good purpose, and tends to increase
the wear of the engine.
This new device secures two advantages:  1st, it saves
much of the power which was injuriously expended in moving the closed valve; 2d, it prevents wile-drawing or waste
of the expansive force of the steam, because the valves are
moved with increased speed while opening and closing their
ports.
II. The second improvement in Mr. Corliss's engine consists in a method of perfect automatic regulation of the steam
in its passage into the cylinder, so that by means of a cut-off




at the steam valves, only, the entire expansive force of the
steam is saved and applied. This is effected by combining
the governor, all its sensibility being completely preserved
through the agency of stops or cams, with the catches that
liberate the steam valves for the purpose of cutting off the
flow of steam into the cylinder,
Mr. Corliss's engine, then, is the stationary steam-engine
with sliding or circular valves and with a new gear, adapted
to perfect automatic regulation and to the saving of fuel by
applying the entire expansive force of the steam. If it is
useful at all, the public have a deep interest in it, because
stationary engines are coming now  into more general use
than heretofore in every department of the arts-no less than
two thousand being in operation on Manhattan Island alone.
The usefulness of Mr. Corliss's engine is implied by the
conduct of the Complainants in regard to it. They have already brought two actions against those who were making or
using it in the District of Rhode Island, one in the District
of New Jersey, and three, of which that in which we are now
engaged is one, in the Southern District of New York.
The utitility of the engine can be established, moreover,
by scientific authority:
Tredgold, Art. 524-" The action of a steam-engine is variable; conSequcntly, when an equable motion is necessary, its action must be
equalized."
Art. 535-" An equable motion is desirable in almost every kind of
machine, it being strained much more by an irregular, desultory one than
when the motion is equable. *  *  *  *  While the strength of the
machine must be adapted to the greatest strains that occur, the quantity
of work done is equivalent to the mean action only, and more is not performed by a desultory motion than by one at a mean rate and uniform."
Art. 543-" An engine is frequently applied where the work to be done
is not constantly the same; and when the machinery of a part of it is suddenly stopped, or suddenly sent on, if the moving power were to remain
the same, an alteration of the velocity must take place-it must move faster or slower. This change of velocity would, in most cases, be very hurtful to the work, and cause considerable loss. Besides, there is always a
velocity at which a machine must act with greater advantage than at
any other. Therefore, the change of velocity arising from the above
cause is in all cases a disadvantage, and in all delicate operations exceedingly injurious."
Art. 545-Concerning the regulation by the action of the throttle valve,
(which is retained in Sickles's stationary engine and is discarded in the
Corliss Engine) "An axis [throttle] valve of this kind has much advantage over a valve of any other form for a circular pipe, because it
contracts the aperture without being difficult to move, or presenting
more than the necessary obstruction. But it is by no means an economical mode of varying the power of the steam-engine."




8
The utility of Mr. Corliss's improvements admits of easy
and simple demonstration.  The regulation in his engine,
differing from all others, is purely automatic and practically
perfect.
The object of all mechanism is to substitute perfectly accurate mechanical action for the functions performed by animal power, and by human labor, skill and care. The regulation of the power of the steam-engine is always to be made
with reference to two things: 1st, the change of heat in the
furnace; 2d, the load, which varies with the different degrees
of force exercised under circumstances ever-changing by the
machinery propelled by the engine. It is manifest that the
engineer can only conjecture the extent of the changes in
these conditions affecting the motion of the engine, and
therefore can adjust the regulation only with proximate accuracy.  But in Corliss's engine, the adjustment is always
made by the governor.  The governor is the very sensorium
of the engine, and must, if properly organized and effectively combined, perceive the changes of condition in the very
instant of their occurrence, and adapt the regulation immediately and with full effect. So that the engine, instead of
running at varying velocities, as it does when the adjustment
is made by hand, runs practically at the same velocity through
all changes in the conditions by which its motion is affected.
Observe the nicety of this automatic adjustment of the
point of cut off in Corliss's engine. The adjustment takes
place twice for every revolution of the main crank. In the
the largest engines, those which make thirty revolutions in a
minute, the adjustment of course occurs sixty times in a
minute; and in small engines, making sixty revolutions, it
occurs one hundred and twenty times in a minute. It needs
no demonstration to show that delicacy of adjustment, like
this, could not be attained by the human hand, nor has it
ever before been attained in any mode of regulating the engine. Mr. Corliss, then, has the merit of having perfected
the mechanism for regulating the power of the steam-engine.
Observe, also, the great excellence of the process of regution in Corliss's engine. Watt invented a method of regulation by combining the governor with the throttle valve and
that combination has prevailed in nearly all the engines since
and is found in Sickles's engine. Corliss, on the contrary,
uses no throttle valve and effects the regulation altogether by
combining the governor through the agency of stops or cams
with the steam valves.




9
When the governor is combined with the throttle-valve, it
is in fact converted into a connecting medium, and made not
merely to indicate the point of adjustment, but also to perform the labor of moving the valve; and it has to perform
this duty after reaching through steam-tight packing. This
labor exhausts its power while it makes its proper functionthat of a regulator merely subsidiary to its office of a motive
lever.
Now, it was just for the reason that the elastic force of
the steam was greatly diminished by the combination of the
governor with the throttle valve, that some new device, with
appropriate mechanism, was necessarily introduced, to regulate by means of a cut-off at the steam valves, and so graduate the supply of steam according to the wants of the engine,
and then it was found necessary to return to the throttle
valve to restore the sensibility of the governor. Among such
devices were those in Maudslay's engine, described in Tredgold, at page 262, and certain French engines which have
been mentioned here. None of these devices, however, attained a satisfactory automatic regulation. They could not attain
it for the reason that either they wasted the expansive force
of the steam in conveying it through the throttle valve or
else, abandoning the throttle valve, and regulating altogether
by a cut-off at the steam valves, they converted the governor
into a lever to move the steam-valves and so far exhausted
its sensibility that an adjustment by hand was necessary as it
had been before.
These inconveniences resulted from a conflict of antagonistic elements in the engine as thus organized. The governor must necessarily be throughly senstiive; and, whether
the regulation was to be effected at the throttle valve, or at
the steam valves, if the two duties, to wit, of regulation and
of actuation, were assigned to one agent, either the sensitiveness of that agent must be reduced or its power must be
impaired; and so, the result was at best a compromise.
So, again, a cut-off cannot accurately produce the desired
effect of regulation, unless it is adjusted by the governor.
When a governor works a throttle valve or the steam valves,
it either imparts or it resists a force, and this so far exhausts
its sensibility that it cannot accurately fix the point of adjustment. Or, if its sensibility is preserved and the valves
are worked independently of the governor, the cut-off is not
regulated without great sacrifice of steam, according to the




10
demands of the engine.  And thus under the one arrangement of regulating at the steam valves the superintendence
of the engineer is necessarily invoked, while in the otherthat of regulating at the throttle valve-there is a waste of the
expansive force of the steam.
In Corliss's engine, on the contrary, there are no antagonisms, and so there are no compromises.  The governor is
simply a regulator, the valves being moved by a force distinct
from it, yet subjected to its regulation; thus, the regulation
is not only adjusted according to every momentary change in
the demands of the engine but is also effected with absolute
precision by agencies purely automatic.
All this is seen in the model here. The governor no-where
performs any labor, and, on the contrary, only indicates the
change required to the levers which move the valves. This
does not task its powers. It puts forth only the force necessary to move either a small cam or a stop. This movement
is attended with the least possible friction and the cam or
stop presents absolutely no resistence to the governor except
at the very instant when it is in actual contact with the lever
constituting its fulcrum. This momentary resistance by the
bearing of the lever on the stop as a fulcrum occupies in an
engine which makes sixty revolutions in a minute, only the
fractional part of half a second, and this period compared with
that during which the governor is left free to move the stop
or cam is practically infinitesimal.
Again, the stop or cam which constitutes the fulcrum of
the lever that moves the valves in the process of detaching
them, is not rigidly attached to the mechanism, but is
separate and free, and yields to the slightest touch of the
finger of the governor.
Once more, the traverse of this adjustable stop or cam is
inconsiderable; ordinarily less than half an inch; and such
is the sensibility of the governor in this combination that
this traverse may be reduced by leverage within infinitesimal
limits. It is manifest, therefore, that the adjustment is absolutely perfect. The movements of even the strongest combinations may be interrupted and broken by an almost inconsiderable force, and they may be promptly restored again by
delicate mechanism when the interrupting agent is withdrawn.
The improvements of regulation in the steam engine which
I have described have been made by carrying out this principle with great attention and constancy. These improve



II
ments are exactly an equivalent in the steam engine to the
watch made by substituting the lever in the place of the improvement in the old crown wheel.  In the old mechanism,
the governor performed the duties not only of the pilot but
of the man at the wheel also; while in Corliss's engine the
governor presides and directs only, and the changes are made
by the lever as promptly as their necessity is indicated and
extent defined..
We pass now to the parts of Corliss's engine which are
concerned in working by the whole expansive force of the
steam in the cylinder. The use of the throttle valve in the
old engines-including that of Sickles's-was always attended
by a wire-drawing of the steam.  This wire-drawing is, in
other words, a reduction of the expansive force of the steam;
and so, every form of cut off before used in engines having
sliding or circular valves, for the purpose of working by that
expansive force, was an imperfect one. But Corliss's arrangement dispenses with the throttle valve altogether and causes
the steam valves to be opened suddenly; and thus the steam
while admitted into the cylinder, has practically the same
tension as that which it had when generated, and the whole
expansive force of the steam is saved and used.
In puppet valve engines the valves must be started from
their places of rest at the moment of closing or opening their
ports. In Corliss's engine, on the contrary, the sliding or
circular valves have a rapid motion at that point, resulting
from the fact that their motion begins before the ports are
covered or uncovered, and so he gains some advantage in
this respect. He gains, however, a crowning advantage by
his automatic method of varying the periods of closing the
steam port-that is to say, the periods of completing the cut
off. By means of these advantages Corliss's cut off becomes
a perfect one. On comparing it with the engines using the
throttle valve for regulation we'see this difference. In the
engines regulated by the throttle valve, the steam valves close
always, at a fixed point, whatever may be the pressure of the
steam qr the load on the engine. If, then, we suppose the
pressure to remain the same, and the load to be reduced one
half, as the same volume of steam must enter the cylinder, the
pressure of the steam must be reduced by a strangling process at the throttle valve to prevent excessive motion. Again,
if the pressure be reduced while the load on the engine rewains the same, then we fail to obtain the necessary velocity.




12
Corliss meets these emergencies thus: In the first case, by
closing the ports the instant one-half the volume of steam
has entered the cylinder; and, in the other, by keeping the
port open until double the quantity of steam has entered
the cylinder.
Again, the new arrangement prevents a wire-drawing of
steam at the closing of the valve, by means of the suddenness of the motion; a result which cannot be attained in an
engine having puppet valves, because the descent of the
valves by gravity must, in such engines, be checked at some
point to prevent their slamming on their seats.  This checking of the descent of the valves has been effected by means
of a piston, a plunger and a dash pot, of which we shall have
occasion to speak more fully hereafter. But in Corliss's engine no such retardation takes place, or is necessary. The
valves are suddenly brought over their ports, and so all wiredrawing at the closing of the valves is prevented, and the
whole expansive force of the steam  is secured.  Here, also,
a compromise between antagonisms found in all other engines
is avoided. It is important in all engines to save the whole
tension of the steam; but it is equally important to prevent
the concussion of the valves against their seats. Both objects
are secnred in Corliss's engine; and this, also, is a new and
eminently useful result. To sum up the matter, the regulation of the engine is made perfect by the peculiar way of
combining the governor with the cut off, and the cut off is
made perfect by the automatic adjustability secured by that
connection.
Authorities on the steam  engine show the importance of
this new result:
Tredgold, page 337 — The apparatus for opening and closing the
passages is of more importance to the perfection of the steam-engine
than any other par of its mechanism. In the present state of the engine the action is either very complicated or imperfect."
Palge 204, Art. 435-" When valves, cocks or sliders are to be moved
to admit steam to a steam-engine, the motion should be as quick as circumstances will admit, so that the passages may be wholly opened or
wholly closed at the proper time with the least delay, for it may be easily
shown that a considerable loss of effect arises from valves opening or
sihutting with a slow motion."
The question raised on this motion is, not whether Mr.
Corliss is the inventor of these great improvements, but
whether Mr. Frederick E. Sickles invented them; and he by
no means lays claim to the invention of them  all. Neverthe



13
less, it is due to Mr. Corliss that he should have his true
position here, as claiming in good faith to be the inventor of
the engine which is thus brought in question. He submitted
this engine to the "Patent Office, and it was duly patented,
That patent is strong presumptive, but not conclusive evidence of his title to the invention.
While we admit that others have devised improvements in
regulating the power of the steam engine, by lifting the puppet-valves, and have combined the governor with other parts
of the machinery to effect that regulation, it is equally certain that neither now nor in either of the two trials at law
through which Mr. Corliss's patent has passed, has an engine organized and arranged like his, working in the same
way, and producing the same results, or any description,
model, or drawing of such an invention, been found, after
the most thorough search which must be presumed to have
been made in the machine shops, manufactories and libraries
of this country and foreign countries.  Thus much may
suffice for the excellence of Mr. Corliss's engine, and his
title as its inventor.
The Complainants allege that certain parts of it were invented and perfected by Frederick E. Sickles, and patented
to him in the Letters granted May 20, 184'2. Our first task
in regard to this question is, to ascertain the true construction of that patent.  The parties differ on the construction
of each of its two claims.
The Complainants insist that the first claim is not merely
for the precise mechanical arrangement of certain particular
elements, which are described, but for a new method of effecting the cut off, by lifting and tripping the valves to cut off
the steam, and so that it includes the principle of all arrangements made for the same purpose, and effecting the same
ends in substantially the same way.  On the contrary, the
Defendants insist that it is a claim merely for the combination of particular elements, found only in engines using puppet valves, which elements are: 1st. The valve stem; 2d. The
spring on the lifter; 3d. The adjustable sliding piece, with
its wedges-all these working usefully, only when combined
with the water reservoir, which is the subject of the second
claim.  We think that our construction is sustained by a fair
and just collation of the passages in the patent, which bear
on the question.
Thus the recital:'  have invented certain ilnprov'emnts
2




14
in the manner of constructing and arranging the apparatus
for lifting and tripping the valves of steam engines, and by
which the steam  can be more readily cut of at any desired
part of the stroke than by the means heretofore adopted."
This language manifestly implies the previous existence of
means, viz.: apparatus of the same general character, producing the same effect, but less readily than the new device,
and the application of the new improvement to that apparatus which so previously existed. In other words, it implies
that steam  is already cut off at any desired part of the stroke,
by an apparatus, which lifts and trips the valves, to which
existing apparatus the improvement in the manner of arrangement is to be applied,
So, the description of the improvement:
" In the accompanying drawing AA, fig. 1 represents a valve box containing the puppet valves, which are to be ifted and closed, the construction of this part being such as is well known to engineers and machinists.
B is the valve stem, passing through a stuffing box, C, on the bonnet D
of the valve box. The valve stem is to be raised by the lifter E, which is
acted on the usual way."
The usual way here referred to is evidently the usual way
in which the valve stem is raised by the lifter, in the designed operation of tripping the valves to effect the cut off of the
steam.
So also the claim:; Having thus fully described the nature of my improvements in the
apparatus for lifting and tripping the valves of steam-engines and of thereby cutting off the steam at any required part of the stroke, and also of my
improved apparatus for regulating the closing of the valves, what I
claim therein as new, and desire to secure by letters patent, is: first, the
manner in which 1 have combined and arranged " [what evidently before
existed] " the valve stem, the spring upon the lifter, the adjustable sliding
piece, I, with its wedges and inclined planes, and their immediate appendages so as to co-operate with each other, and to effect the tripping
of the valves and the cutting off of the steam substantially in the manner' [that is to say, the particular manner] " set forth."
It seems clear that the claim confines the patent to the
manner in which the patentee has combined and arranged:
first, the valve stem; second, the spring on the lifter; third,
the adjustable sliding piece, with its wedges or inclined planes
and their immediate appendages, to wit: the standard and
setting screw so as to co-operate with each other and effect
(what had been effected by some other combinations and
not in the same manner,) the tripping of the valves and the
cutting off of the steam.




15
But our construction of this part of the patent involves
the further proposition, that this improved manner of making and constructing the apparatus mentioned in the first
claim operates usefully, only, when connected with the water
reservoir patented under the second claim.  We proceed  to
prove this.
The inventor recites thus his second invention:
"And also an improved w'ter reservior and plunger, which serve to
prevent the slamming of the valves in closing, and consequently to preserve them in good working order for a great length of time."
Again, he closes his description of his second invention
thus:
" By means of this apparatus, the valves may be made to shut so
silently as scarcely to be heard, while the retardation is so perfectly graduated as not to be accompanied by any sensible loss of time as it takes
place in the last moment of their descent only."
It is evident that this effect is not only subsidiary but absolutely essential to the main purpose of the first inventor, viz.:
the lifting and tripping of the valves more readily than was
done by previously known arrangements.
And  then, in  his claim  of the second  invention, the
patentee says:
"I also claim the manner of regulating the closing of the valves, and
of effectually preventing them from slamming, by means of a water reservoir, furnished with a piston or plunger, attached to the lower end
of the valve stem, and operating within an adjustable cup or secondary
reservoir, so as to effect the purpose intended upon the principle and
substantially in the manner herein described."
It is thus clear that the apparatus covered by the first claim,
and the apparatus covered by the second claim  were intended to be combined, and that they must be combined, to effect
the main purpose, viz.: the cut off by lifting and tripping
the valves.  For, if the valves, when tripped, (as described
in the first claim,) should then fall to their seats, without being  checked  by the device covered by the second
claim, the slamming of the valves would be a defect outweighing all that was gained by the new manner of tripping;
and so, the whole apparatus would be practically useless.
Again, the newly invented water reservoir is entirely useless, except when it is applied to the lifting and tripping of
puppet-valves in the apparatus before known to machinists
which it was intended to improve by the invention of a new
manner of arrangement.




16
This latter point, in  our construction of the first clause,
has been judicially sanctioned.  His Honor, Judge Betts, in
an action on the patent several years ago, instructed the jury
to inquire, " Whether the plan of picking up the valve and
catching it, as described  in  the patent, in connection with
the second reservoir, was the invention of the patentee."   So
also His Honor, Mr. Justice Woodbury, in an action on this
patent in  the Rhode  Island  District, instructed the jury as
follows'
" The plaintiff's patent is for a combination of particular elements,
namel —the valve stem, the spring on the lifer, the adjustble sliding
piece, wvith its wedges, arranged in the manner described, working usefully
oirl''chen combined with the water reservoir described; and to find an infringement the jury nmust find in the defendant's each one of these elemlents, or a mechanical equivalent therefor, and they must be- arranged
and operated substantially in tlie same way as described in the plaintiff's
specification."
The construction thus adopted  by the learned Judge is
sustained by the experts on  this occasion.  Truman Cook,
one of the Complainant's witnesses says:
" These two parts cannot be used separately and produce a beneficial
result-I mean an equally beneficial result.  The tendency of the separation would be attended with uncertainty of action and increased liability to derangement of the parts."
William  C. EHibbard, one of the Defendant's witnesses,
says, (p. 3, quest. 6):'Will the first part of the combination of machinery of the three elements referred to, work usefully except in connection with the waterreservoir?"
Answner-"Not as combined in the engine described  as the valves.
would otherwise strike so hard upon their seats as to destroy them in a
short t'm e."'
So, also, William  Raymond Lee, one of the Defendant's
witlesses, (p. 41) answers the same question thus:
It will not, as exhibited in model B.  The arrangement involves a
drop valve; and, without some resistance, fluid or otherwise, the valve
would suffier material injury in being permitted to drop into its seat."
Thus we have sustained our construction of the first claim
in Sickles's Patent.
The Complainants contend that the second claim  (which
need  not be  repeated  here) covers a method of preventing
the striking of the valves, by means of a reservoir, containing water, or any other fluid, compressible or incompressible,




17
into Which a plunger or piston, to which the valve stem is
attached, enters, and, preventing the escape of the fluid is
itself thereby arrested. On the contrary, the Defendants
insist that the claim is for a mere technical combination of
the piston or plunger attached to the valve stem with a reservoir of water, oil, or some other fluid, like them incompressible, applied and operating for the sole purpose of checking
at a certain stage the descent of puppet valves in cutting off
steam, and thereby preventing them from slamming on their
seats.
We think that our construction is the one that is legitimately derived from  the language of the patent.  First, the
recital:
"And also an improved Mater-reservoir and plunger, which serves to
prevent the slamming of the valves in closing, and consequently to preserve them in good working order for a great length of time."
So, in the description of this invention:
"' The reservoir J. is to contain water, oil, or some other fluid, say to two'
thirds of its height, more or less. Through the plunger K holes G G are
represented as being made for the passage of water and  1 is a valvelike piecei* which slides upi and down in the lower end of the stem B. This
part of the apparatus, however, may be varied' in its form in numerous
ways the intention being to cause the water to offer a determined degree
of obstruction to the descent of the plunger, and to admit of this being
regulated. This I have sometimes done by making the plunger K a
flat disc, with a sufficient space between it, and the cavity of the cup L
for the passage of a portion of water sufficient to allow of the descent of
the plunger, while it shall be so obstrueted as to take off the force of
the blow of the valve. I have, in fact, essayed the action of the plunger
and of the parts within which it operates, in different forms, and in all
with good effect, that which I have represented being one of the best.
An opening furnished with a stopper may be made through the reservoir,
as at I, to supply water when requisite."
So the claim, as has been already seen, limits the invention
of the reservoir to a water reservoir, &c., with an " adjustable cup or secondary reservoir," operating upon the principle of regulating  by the provision for  the  supply  and
escape of water, the resistance offered to the descending
plunger or piston.
The term fluid, in its generic meaning, embraces compressible as well as incompressible fluids, not only water, oil,
alcohol, and quicksilver, but also atmospheric air, the electric fluid, and (if there be such a thing), odyle or odic fluid.
No one can read this patent without seeing that a cushion of
air, with its appropriate devices, was no more in the minds
2*




18
of the mnvlieutor than an electric cylinder, a galvanic batte'y
or a sp'itiiual medium.
XWe close our remarks on the construction of the patent
by observing that the broader pretensions made by the Compiamiarits, cannot safely be upheld, because, as will appear in
the sequel, methods for cutting off steam  by lifting and trippingc the valves, as well as for the employment of a water
reservoir to check the descent of the valves and prevent their
slamming, were well known in the arts, and were applied to
the puppet-valve gearing in use when the patent was issued.
Ass:.mi-ng that our construction of the patent will be sus,
tained, we proceed now to show that it is not infringed by
the Corliss Engine.
1st. The pupplet valve gear is essential to the use of
Sickles's improvement. His patent is not infringed; because
the puppet-vaive gear, of which only it is an infringement by
beilr combined with it, is not found in Corliss's engine:
WThile the devices of Sickles's are expressly combined with
the customary puppet-valve gear, and have no features of
adapfation to engines using sliding or circular valve-gear, the'
-rfrmer is absolutely excluded with all its parts, and the latter
alone is found in the Corliss Engine.
dd. Analytical comparison of the two engines will show'tot only that Corliss has not adopted all of Sickles's parts, in
their combinations, but even that scarcely one of those parts
is found in the Corliss Engine; and so, on the contrary, that
not one of the parts essential it the Corliss Engine is found
performing  the same function with the same result in the
steam engine as organized by Sickles.
Certainly in Corliss's Engine there is, first, no "valve.
box," (such as Sickles's patent requfires,.) "containing the
puppet valves, which are to be lifted and closed," and the
construction of which is well known to engineers and machinists'"  But there is, on the contrary, a steam chest, contatin,-i n sliding or circular valves, which- are not to be lifted at
all at any time, and cannot be lifted from  their seats, but
can be removed from  them  only by a horizontal or sliding
motion, and which are closed,- not by falling on their seats'
by pressure or gravity, but by a horizontal or circular motion.
Again, there is in Corliss's engine' certainly no' valve
stem  passing through a stuffiing box on the bonnet of the
valve box,' constructed in, the manner known to engineers




19
rid machinists; that is to say, with one steam valve and oni
exhaust valve moved at one and the same time, and with a
corresponding motion.  But, on the contrary, each steam
valve and its corresponding exhaust valve has its own separate
and distinct lever which moves it by a separate motion and
opens and closes it by a sudden movement, while the lever
itself is never at rest; and which movements are not vertical
and rectilinear movements, as in Sickles's engine; but, on the
contrary, proceeding from different centres, act laterally and
logitudinally, and not in a right line in any part of their operation.  And thus the movements of these levers produce
results not attained by Sickles's valve stem, to wit, the sudden opening and the equally sudden closing of the valves.
Of course, in Corliss's engine, " the valve stem  is" not
" to be raised by the lifter, which is acted on in the usual
way;" for, in that engine, as there is no valve stem  to be
lifted, there is no lifter to raise it in any way.
Again, as there is in Corliss's engine, no lifter at all to be
Upheld, so, of course, there is no " spring," " attached to the
shaft of the lifter," with " outer ends " " which embrace the
sides of the valve stem."  As there is, indeed, no valve stem
at all, in Corliss's engine, so there is of course no " upper
end of this stem," "flattened, or having projecting edges or
feathers which, while the valve is being lifted, rest upon the
upper edges of the spring where said feathers terminate."
Again, as there is in Corliss's engine no spring at all to
open or shut, and no stem at all to be maintained or to be
let fall, and no valves attached to any such stem, and to be
closed by its motion, so there  is no  meaning at all in
the  words of  Sickles's  patent, " when  the  spring  is
opened the stem will no longer be sustained by it, and will
consequently descend," if they are applied to any part of the
mechanism  of Corliss's engine.
Again, there is in Corliss's engine no " standard rising
vertically" (or in any other position) "from the valve box
or bonnet, so as that its upper flat end shall be nearly in
contact with the out ends of the springs."  And, as there is
no such standard at all, so there is no " adjustable sliding
piece" sustained by that standard, which may be shifted to
any desired height, and then held in place by means of a set
screw.  Nor is there any set screw, nor any equivalent for
it in the whole engine.
Again, as there is in Corliss's engine no adjustable sliding




20
piece  at all, so, of course, there are no' two projecting
wedge-formed pieces or inclined planes, which serve to open
the ends of the springs on the lifter, and thus to liberate the
stem."  And, as the sliding piece is absolutely wanting in
Corliss's engine, so it is absurd to apply to that engine the
directions contained in Sickles's patent for reversing the position of "the sliding piece, with its wedges or inclined
planes," and so producing the same effect in a different form
of operation.
Again, as there is in Corliss's engine no standard at all, so,
that absent standard cannot be graduated at all.
Again, as the valve stem and the detaching spring and the
lifter described by Sickles are all wanting in Corliss's engine,
and as there is no equivalent for the lifter, so there is in that
engine no "spring" "situated on the upper side of the lifter
to which it is attached by one end, while its other end bears
upon the stem," and operating to cause the stem to descend
when the spring is opened.
So as there is not only not found in Corliss's engine the
entire combination of the elements used by Sickles for effecting the cut off, but not even one of its parts, not one of the
effects obtained by means of the apparatus devised by him is
produced in the same way, or in the same degree, or to the
same extent, The valves are not " tripped at any time during the ascent or descent of the lifter," (there being no lifter,)
and the steam is not "cut off at any part of the stroke of the
piston;" but, on the contrary, as we shall see in the sequel
is cut off only during the half stroke, and by an apparatus
entirely different.
So again, as-there is no standard and no adjustment by the
engineer, in Corliss's engine, the cut off is not and cannot
be adjusted instantaneously, or otherwise, at any required
point-that is to say, any point determined on and fixed by
the engineer; but, as will be seen in the sequel, the regulation being purely automatic, the cut off has no such adjustability, but operates at points continually varying with every
change in the heat of the furnace and the load of the machinery, which are the two ever-varying conditions by which
the velocity of the engine is affected.
So of the second part of Sickles's patent-the water reservoir and its combination. There is in Corliss's engine no
water reservoir. As there is no valve stem, so there is of
course no " continuation of the valve stem" having affixed




21
to it on its lower end a plunger or piston.  Nor is there any
plunger or piston at all.
As there is no plunger or piston to descend into a water
reservoir, and no water reservoir at all, so the absent water
reservoir has not " within it a cup, or secondary reservoir,
which may be raised or lowered by means of a graduating
screw, said screw being furnished with a nut, by which it is
held in its place."  Nor is there a graduating screw or a nut
or an equivalent for either in the whole machine.
As there is no water reservoir, and no plunger or piston
to descend into one, so the absent reservoir does not " contain water or oil or other fluid," "to two-thirds," or any other
portion " of its height."   Nor has the admitted plunger
" holes for the passages of water " nor a "valve-like piece
which slides up and down on the lower end" of the omitted
stem.
Consequently, as this entire device, with all its apparatus,
is wanting in Corliss's engine, no such operation takes place,
and no such effect is produced there as those described in
Sickles's patent. No valve-stem descends by means of any
spring, or by force of gravitation, and so none is retarded in
its descent near the point where the valves reach their seats.
No slamming of the valves is prevented by the combined
plunger and reservoir; and although none takes place yet
it is because, from  the very organization of the machine,
none ever could take place.
On the contrary of all this, the valves in Corliss's engine,
being sliding valves, are moved over their seats, not by a
spring, or by their own gravitation, but by weights, with a
motion not retarded by any water reservoir and plunger, or
any other device, but accelerated and sudden; and this motion continues until after the valves are closed, and then the
jar which would result from  the sudden stoppage of the
weight is prevented by air-cushions which receive the weights,
and for which an India-rubber bed would be an exact equivalent.
Two things that are each equal to one and the same other
thing are equal to each other. No one denies that Corliss's
engine is described accurately in his patent. If that engine
contains Sickles's elements in the same forms of combination,
working in the same way, and working out the same results,
we shall find them described in Corliss's patent.
Look at his recital:




22
"In that class of steam engines in which the steam and exhaust ports
of the cylindar are opened and closed by slide valves, whenever the
valves close the ports, the steam presses them upon their seats with its
whole force, and they cannot be moved without the expenditure of a
considerable amount of power; but when the valves do not completely
close their ports, the steam pressing upon both sides of them, does
not tend to hold them upon their seats, and at these times the valves
can be moved with but a small exertion of force. When a valve has
closed its port, its office is performed; and hence the force exerted in
any further movement of it while the port remains closed is wholly lost.
Now it is customary in this class of engines to connect the valves rigidly,
so that when one is moved the other is forced to move witli it to the same
extent; the closed valve is therefore moved with the opening one, and consequently the whole amount of force consumed in moving it while closed,
is expended to no good purpose, and tends only to increase the wear
and tear of the engine. To avoid this sacrifice of power, and at the
same timne to retain the advantages which result from the connection of
the valves, is the object of the first part of my invention-which consists of moving each of the steam and exhaust valves of an engine independently by means of one crank wrist, of a series, which are all
attached to a common disc, wrist plate, or other equivalent device which
is secured to and moved with a rock shaft."
Here are described a class of engines and a valve gear to
be improved, entirely different from those which Sickles describes, and to which he applies his improvement.  The
defects to be supplied and the advantages to be gained are entirely different from any of those which are the subject of any
of Sickles's patent, and the manner indicated for supplying the
one and governing the other are equally different. Sickles's object is to obtain a cut off at any part of the stroke, by lifting and
tripping the valves of the puppet valve engine, and at the same
time prevent their slamming on their seats. Corliss's is to save
the power which is wasted in opening and closing the sliding
valves by reason of their rigid connections. Sickles proposes to effect his purpose, by improving the rigidly connecting valve gear, which operates by the same and an equal motion on both valves at the same time. Corliss invents a new
crank wrist with a separate lever, and a distinct motion to
operate on each sliding valve.  Mark, now, the operation.
Each crank wrist is fixed on a different centre of motion,
and imparts to the lever a motion that is neither vertical nor
rectilinear, and which expends different measures of force at
the same time on the two valves.  Sickles's valve stem  has
but one rectilinear vertical motion, and imparts exactly the
same measure of force to the two valves at the same time.
In Corliss's engine"The several wrists which work the different valves are arranged upon




23
the wrist plate in such positions with respect to the  rods and levers or
other devices which connect them with the valves, that they shall act
like so many cranks, each of which vibrates near its dead point or point
of slowest throw, and therefore imparts but little movement to the valve
it actuates, when the latter is closed; while each moves with its fastest
throw, and therefore communicates the greatest movement to its valve
when the latter is open."
Contemplate, now, the effects thus obtained by Corliss's" Two great advantages result from  this method of working the
valves. In the first place, much of the power heretofore expended in
moving the closed valve is saved: and secondly, the wire drawing of the
steam is reduced, because the valves while opening and closing their
ports are moved with increased speed."
Here are two new and useful results, neither of which is
produced by Sickles, in his arrangement, or was ever conceived  by him.   Thus far, certainly, the  inventions  are
entirely different.
Take, now, Corliss's second invention:
"The second part of my invention relates to the method of regulating
the cut off of the steam in its passage into the engine, and consists in
effecting this by means of the governor, which operates cams, so that
when the velocity of the engine is too great, these cams shall be mored
by the action of the regulator to such positions that catches on the valve
rods may the sooner come in contact with them to liberate the valves,
and admit of their being closed by the force of weight or springs, and
thus cut off the steam in proportion to the velocity of the engine; this
being done sooner when the velocity of the engine is to be reduced and
later when it is to be increased."
Here follows a minute description, by which it is seen that
while in Sickles's engine the engineer makes a fixed adjustment at pleasure without the aid of the governor, or of any
combination of it, and leaves the governor to regulate by
wire-drawing the steam at the throttle-valve, Corliss's has an
automatic variable adjustment, by withdrawing the governor
from the working of the throttle-valve, and, indeed, dispensing with the throttle valve altogether, and by combining the
governor with the catches that liberate the several levers
which work the valves-a new  combination, not found  in
Sickles's engine, working in a way entirely different from
his, and producing results that he has not attained, nor even
conceived.  I read the description:
"In the Steam Engine represented in the accompanying drawings,
the steam and exhaust valves 1, 1, and m, mi, are situated in steam chests
n, o, at each extremity of the steam cylinder; the chest n, at the top is
formed in the cylinder head, while the other o, is let into a' recess in




24
the bed-plate. Each exhaust valve m, is attached to one extremity of a
valve rod p, which is fitted at its opposite extremity with a sliding head
q, that is linked by a connecting rod r, to one arm s, of a bell crank t.
The other arm v of the bell crank is connected by a rod with a wrist pin
w on the wrist plate x. The latter is secured to a rock shaft to which
the requisite vibratory motion is imparted by an eccentric a through the
intervention of an eccentric rod and an arm y secured to the rock shafts
"The wrists w of the two valves are in this example a quarter of a
circle distant from each other, and the two connecting rods extend in
opposite directions from  the rock shaft-hence, when one wrist is at its
point of greatest throw, the other is at its dead point; and when one is
imparting to its rod and the valve connected therewith, the greatest
movement, the other is imparting to its valve the least. Each valve is
therefore moved alternately fast and slow; and the fast movement of one
is effected during the slow movement of the other; nearly the whole
movement or throw of each valve being effected while the port is either
partially or wholly open, at which time the least power is required to
move it; while as the small remnant of the throw when the port is closed
is effected during the slow movement, but little power is then required,
as the distance to which the valve is moved is now very short. The steam
valves 1, 1, are worked in a manner similar to that of the exhaust valves,
with the exception of an arrangement by means of which they are made
to close and cut off the supply of steam at any required portion of the
stroke. The valve rods b of these -valves are double, and instead of
being permanently linked to their appropriate bell-cranks, are each connected by a detachable link h' with a rack g', whose teeth engage with
those of a tooth sector f on the bell-crank.  This detachable link h' is
hinged at one extremity to the cross head c' which unites the two members of the double valve rod; it has a shoulder i' at its opposite extremity which engages in a corresponding socket on the rack, and is kept in
place by a spring i". This link h' is also fitted near the rack with a projection j' which is struck at the proper moment to detach the link from the
rack by a revolving helical cam k'. The helical cams which detach the
links h' h' of the two steam valves 1, 1, are both secured to an upright
shaft 1', which is caused to revolve by the movement of the crank shaft,
and is arranged at the same time to move freely up or down in its boxes.
This shaft is connected at r' with the governor (which in the present instance is of the centrifugal variety, that being the kind I have used,
deeming it the best,) so that it shall move up or down as the balls of the
governor rise and fall. When the governor balls s' s' are at their lowest
position, the shaft 1' is depressed so far that the helical cams k' k' are
below the range of the valve link, h' h', and consequently cannot detach
them; hence in this position of the governor balls, the steam valves,
being connected with their wrist pins throughout the whole length of
the stroke, are opened and closed in the same manner as the exhaust
valves. As, however, the velocity of the engine is increasec, and the
governor balls rise under the increased centrifugal force, the upright
shaft 1' is correspondingly raised, and the cams being now revolved within
the range of the valve links, strike the projectionsj, and detach the links h'
from their racks. The helical cams extend round the shaft in the same
direction as the latter is turned, consequently the higher the shaft 1' and
its cams are raised the sooner will the cams strike the projections and detach the links. As soon as the links are detached, the valves being
entirely disconnected from the mechanism by means of which they are




25
opened, are consequently free to close. A convenient mode of arranging
the several parts when the valves move parallel with the axis of the
cylinder, is represented at Figs. 8 and 9, in which the letters indicate the
parts corresponding with those indicated by them  in the arrangement
before described. I wish it to be distinctly understood, that in the mode
of regulating the cut off by the governor, I do not limit myself to the
use of the particular kind of cams described or represented; as the form,
position, and operation of these, may be greatly varied without changing
the principle of this part of my invention; as for instance, stops or
cams connected with the slide of the governor by levers, may be made
to slide in the direction of the plane of motion of the valve rods, to
vary the periods of liberating the catches of the valve rods; or, wedge
formed stops or cams may be substituted for the helical cams and attached
to the cam mid, which, in that case, must not turn."
Proceeding  through the description, the reader finds the
devices of weights, a socket and an air cushion, which present a faint resemblance in form to the plunger and water
reservoir of Sickles' engine. But it appears, on examination,
that the devices are entirely different, the mode of operation
equally different, and the effect attained as different as the
checking of a motion  at a point which  involves a loss of
power to the engine, is from the giving the motion full way
until all the power has been effectively applied and then providing for its sinking to rest. This part of the description is
as follows:
" As the steam valves in the steam engine represented move horizontally they do not tend to close by their own weight, and are consequently closed by means of weights o', o', which act through the intervention of bent levers, or bell cranks, m' upon cross-blocks n", secured
to the respective valve rods. In order to prevent the jar which would
result from  the sudden stoppage of the motion of the weight, each crossblock, n', has a cylindrical socket formed in the face near the steam
cylinder, and a piston, p', is secured to the engine frame which enters the
cylindrical socket and compresses the air within it to form an elastic
cushion to prevent the jar. As the racks g' are moved back by the
action of the wrist pins and the bell cranks, the shoulder of the link reengages with the socket on the rack, so that the valve being now
re-connected with valve mechanism, is opened by the wrist pin at the
proper moment to admit steam into the cylinder."
This contrast of the two engines cannot be more effectually completed than by presenting in parallel columns the
claims of the respective inventors:
3




26
CORLISS.                          SICKLES.
What I claim as my invention    Having thus fully described the
and desire to secure by letters pa- nfture of my improvements in the
tent is, first, the method substantial- apparatus for lifting and tripping
ly as described of operating the the valves of steam engines, and of
slide valves of steam-engines by thereby cutting off the steam at any
co, necting the valves that govern required part of the stroke and also
the ports at opposite ends of the of my improved apparatus for regucylinder with separate arms of the lating the closing of the valves;
rock shaft or the mechanical equiv- what I claim therein as new and
alents thereof; so that from  the desire to secure by letters patent is,
motion thereof the valve that keeps first, the manner in which I have
its port or ports closed shall move combined and arranged the valve
over a less space while its port or stem B, the spring IF on the lifter,
ports is closed than the one that is the adjustable sliding piece I, with
opening or closing its ports, and its wedges or inclined planes and
vice versa; while at the same time, their immediate appendages so as
the two arms by which they are co-operate with each other and to
operated, have the same range of effect the tripping of the valves and
motion as described; whereby I am  the cutting off of the steam  subenabled to save much of the power stantiallv in the manner set forth.
heretofore required  to work the I also claim the manner of regulatslide valves of steam engines, and ing the closing of the valves and of
by which also I am enabled to give effectually preventing them  from
a greater range of motions to the slamming, by means of a water revalves at the periods of opening servoir furnished with a piston or
and closing the ports to facilitate plunger attached to the lower end
the induction and eduction of the of the valve stem, and operating
steam as specified.                within an adjustable cup or seconAnd lastly, I claim the method of dary reservoir, so as to effect the
regulating the motion of steam en- purpose intended upon the principle
gines by means of the Regulator, and  substantially in the manner
by combining the said Regulator herein described and made known.
with the catches that liberate the
steam valves, by means of moveable  FFREDEnRICI ELSWORTH SICKLES.
cams or stops, substantially as described.  GEORGE H. COIRLISS.
If Corliss's engine contains Sickles's improvement, and if
each of the two specifications be sufficient, then it follows
that a mechanic ordinarily skillful in the art of constructing
steam engines could, without any exercise of invention, produce Sickles's devices, in pursuance of directions contained
in Corliss's patent, and Corliss's engine by following the
directions  contained  in  the  patent of  Sickles.   Where,
among all the complainant's experts, men of extraordinary skill,
has been found the one who is willing to say that, following
the directions of the one patent, he could, without invoking
invention, produce the engine described in the other? There
is not one. And well must it be so, for it has been seen that,
from the main eccentric to and including the valves, and in



27
eluding everything which concerns the working of the valves,
everything in Corliss's engine is new and different from that
of Sickels, and from the steam engine as modified by his improvements.
The complainants, however, insist that in Corliss's engine
they find, in the wedge like position of the levers which
move the valves against the regulating stop, the equivalent of
the adjustable slide, with its wedge-like faces or inclined
planes of Sickles.  On the contrary, it is seen that those
levers, although they are in an inclined position, do not at
all act as wedges.  When acting so as to liberate the hooks,
they move in exactly the opposite direction from that in which
the wedge moves when in action, and they liberate the hooks
as levers by coming to a bearing on the ends of the adjusting stop as a fulcrum.
Let us now briefly bring into more distinct view the radical differences between  the inventions already described.
Sickles's cut off is one adjustable by the skill or manual interpositon of the engineer, and invariable except by readjustment.  Corliss's is variable and purely automatic.  Sickles's
cut off is imperfect because dependent on the engineer, who
can only approximate to accuracy.  Corliss's cut off is practically perfect.  Sickles's cut off uses a governor to regulate
at the throttle-valve.  Corliss's, on the other hand, combines
the governor with the steam-valves.  Corliss's brings the
valves, when detached, quickly and suddenly over their seats.
Sickles's retards the movement just before they reach their
seats. Sickle's loses part of the expansive force of the steam
at the throttle valve and further parts at the steam valve.
Corliss's, by dispensing with the throttle valve, and opening
and closing the steam valves by quick and sudden motions,
saves and works the whole expansives force of the steam.
Sickles's cut off may be adjusted so as to take effect at any
part of the stroke of the piston, which may be a desirable
improvement in marine engines, in cases of stormy weather
and rough seas, while Corliss's can only be made to take effect
during the half-stroke, which is all that is desired in stationary engines.  Finally, as might be expected in engines organized with a view  to results so widely different, the mechanism of the one is entirely different from that of the other.
So it results that, regarding the parties with equal favor,
there is no occasion for complaint by one against the other;
no ground of conflict between them.  They are competitors
for a prize that both may win.




28
Here, if the  responsibility of counsel would  allow, we
would rest.  But this responsibility requires us to show, further, that Sickles's alleged improvements were not new.
In the first place  let the construction of the patent be as
insisted  by the complainants, viz: that the patent is for
methods of cutting off steam  by tripping  the  valves or detaching them  from  the mechanism  which moves them  and of
checking  the descent of the valves, so as to  prevent their
slamming.  Then the patentee was not the inventor of these
method;, for such methods existed and were known before.
Here is our evidence as to the first claim-Tredgold, Art.
478.," Modes of opening and closing valves, cocks and slides. The motion
may be given either from  the reciprocating or fiom  the rotary parts of
an engine. In engines which have no rotary parts, motion is communicated to the valves by a rod or beam, called a piug tree, attached to the
engine beam near to the end moved by the piston rod. This plug tree
is provided with certain adjustable projections called tappets, which
strike the levers or handles of the valves, and thus open or shut them
at the proper intervals as the beam ascends or descends. These handles
turn on axis and act as levers to move the valves, slides or cocks - 
>, When valves are employed they are generally opened by weights.'
(See plate 9, fig 3, where is exhibited the device described
in the text.)  The author proceeds:
" The descent of the weight which opens a valve is regulated by an
ingenious method. It either descends into or forces a piston into a vessel of water (see C. Fig. 3, Plate 9,) while the aperture by which the
water escapes from under it may be increased or diminished at pleasure.
The weight, therefore, acts with its full force to open the valve, but as
soon as it begins to move, it is retarded by the water until it is finally
stopped. During the ascent a valve opens inwardly at the bottom of the
vessel, and therefore the engine had not more than the weight to raise
again."
Certainly this was a method of checking  the descent of
valves and of preventing  their slamming  by the device of a
water reservoir and piston.
Again, here is a valve gear used by Watt.  Stuart's Anecdotes of the Steam  Engine, p. 366, Vol. 2:
"The different construction of Watt's valves required a new arrangement of the hand-gear to move them. In the atmospheric engines the
weight or tumbling bob at the end of levers, called the Y piece, was
placed there, so that its fall should open the sliding valve or the injection
cock with a jerk. It exerted no influence whatevcr in keeping the valves
in their places, at least it was not introduced for that purpose. Watt
also sometimes attachcd a weight to the spanners which opened or shut
his valves. But it was necessary in some arrangements of these parts
that they should be gradually shut to prevent the injury that would be
occasioned by a sudden j.l-rking of thec vailvcs into their seats. Thi,




29
weight is therefore sometimes formed like a piston which rose and fell in
a cylinder with water. The weights or plungers are made of cast iron,
and cylindrical, each fitted into a hollow cylinder in the condensing
cistern, and covered with water. The plunger is made somewhat less
than the barrel to allow a small space, by which, when it descends, the
water may rise between it and the barrel. The lower end of each barrel is closed, except a small hole, which is covered by a leather valve
opening inward. When the plunger is drawn up, the water from the
cistern flows through this valve into the barrel; but when the plunger
descends the valve closes, and the water which is displaced rises between
the plunger and the barrel, and the resistance which is thus occasioned
to the descent of the weight prevents the concussion which would be
produced by its uninterrupted fall."
Then follow references to a plate giving a full view of the
machine.  Thus we find here the machine actually used by
Watt, so far as any principle is involved, containing the two
identical methods of effecting the indentical purposes contemplated by the patent of Sickles, for which, according to
the broader construction of the complainants, the patent
issued.
At most, the only difference between Watt's and Sickles's
respective methods for checking the descent of the valves
by a plunger and water reservoir is, that Watt's began the
retarding motion at a point in the stroke somewhat earlier
than Sickles's.  But the combinations and effect were the
same, and both were applied to substantially the same purpose, viz.: to prevent the slamming of the valves in closing.
In fact, it may be assumed that ever since Watt invented the
weight to detach the puppet valves from the mechanism  that
moved them, substantially the same method has been used to
prevent them slamming on their seats.
Again, still considering the patented things as Ymethods,
both were known to and used by Phineas Bennet in 1838.
Your Honor will please notice that Sickles, before obtaining
his patent, on filing his caveat, knew of Bennet's device,
whatever it was.  (Deposition of Phineas Bennet, pp. 54,
55, question 23.)  But, moreover, the devices known and
used are the same as those of Sickles. (Bennet's Deposition,
p. 52, questions 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11.  See, also, the Deposition of Livingston S. Bartholomew, p. 62, question 3 to
8, inclusive.  See, also, the Deposition of Ezekiel Williams,
p. 68.)
These were not experiments, but a perfectly successful
and established result, as all the witnesses show; Bennet's




30
differing only in mechanical arrangement, but the methods, as
we see, were the same.
And now, assuming, according to the Defendant's construction, that the patent covers only the technical mechanical combinations, and not the method or principle, even then
the inventions are not new. Exactly the same were known
and used on the South America, built in 1840 and 1841 by
Hogg & Cunningham. (See the Depositions of James Hogg,
beginning at p. 70; of George Hawes, p. 88; of Cornelius
H. Delamater, p. 94; of Joseph Belknap, p. 105; of Joseph
Birkbeck and of Robert Robertson, p. 132.)
The only difference between Hogg's cut off and Sickles's
was that Hogg used a standard of different form and had not
the same adjustable sliding piece as Sickles's has, but effected the disengagement of the valve stem, by a fork that rested
on the lifter, and worked into notches on the valve stem, and
was drawn out of the notches by a stationary cam  as the
lifter ascended and was pressed back into notches by a spring
on the lifter, as the lifter descended and the mechanism for
reversing lacked, so as to cut off on the last part of the
stroke in which respect it is like that of Corliss's.  But I
need not argue this, for the reason that the complainants
admit that Hogg's device is identical with that of Sickles's.
The water reservior was the same, and had a secondary reservior operating in the same way. While Hogg shows that
he made the invention in 1838, all the witnesses named show
that it was completed and successfully applied in April, 1841.
Sickles's patent is dated May 20, 1842, and the letter by
which he claims that he suggested the improvement to Hogg
is dated in May, 1841.  It is apparent, moreover, that at the
date of that letter, Sickles had not conceived the secondary
reservoir described in his patent, for this letter does not mention it. Sickels's earliest date of his invention, as proved by
William B. Sickles on the Rodman trial was in 1838.  Benjamin R. Brown says, in July or August, 1839. Frederick
Sickles says in cold weather, 1839.
Moreover, it is apparent that Sickles obtained his patent
through a gross mistake of facts or by perjury. For the
patent was refused at first on the ground that the inventions
were used on the South America (before she broke down) in
April, 1841; and then his partner Truman Cook sent a supplemcnitl  ffidrl:vit:,rltinr'  thl-t theiv were not,r) ulsed




31
on the South America before she broke down. Cook testifies that the patent was issued on that affidavit, (p. 2, vol. 1)
whereas it is now shown by proof that the devices were in
successful operation on the South America before that accident; and this, too, is established by the following witnesses;
Peter Hogg and Cornelius H. Delamater; George Birkbeck,
Jr., steam-engine builder; George Hawes, formerly engineer
of People's Line of Steamboats; Robert Robertson, Chief
Engineer of U. S. Mail Steamship Baltic.  And, by comparing Robertson's testimony with Sickles's caveat, it is
manifest that Sickles must have obtained his ideas of the
invention from the South America.
Surely I need not dwell on the point that the Complainants
have not established their title by a verdict, or by undisturbed
possession.  Their verdict against Rodman was not on the
present issue.  If it was it is balanced by the effect of the
patent of Corliss afterward granted. And in a trial since,
in the Rhode Island District, the Complainants failed to obtain a verdict altogether, owing to defect of pleading or to
deficiency of proof, or errors in the conduct of the case, they
obtained a verdict against Rodman, in 1843, sustaining the
Complainant's title; yet Hogg & Delamater have been making and selling the devices covered by Sickles's patent; and
that, too, unmolested.
In conclusion, even if we have not conclusively established
our defense, we have, at least, established it sufficiently to entitle us to a trial at law on a feigned issue. And to that trial
we challenge the Complainants, who alone can give it, unless
the Court shall see fit here to order it, for the purpose of ascertaining the facts necessary to guide its conscience on the
final merits of the controversy.
It may well be doubted whether in the entire course of
the administration of the Patent Law, a bolder experiment
was ever made to pervert it to the purposes of injustice and
oppression. The Complainants, without the full title which
the law requires, without that undisturbed possession which
the law requires, without having established the title to the
invention before a Jury as the law requires, and without
having established the fact of infringement by the verdict of
a Jury, as the law requires-prosecute a party on a patent,
which, if construed to cover the method of cut off by tripping the steam-valves, as they claim  it shall be, is as old as
Watt; and, if construed as a patent for a mere device, was




32
invented, matured, and perfected by two citizens of this
State, eminent in their business, a year before the patentee
claims to have made his invention and whose title to the discovery, although not presented by themselves at the Patent
Office, was ascertained there, and made a ground for rejecting the Patent, and was only set aside and overruled there,
on an exparte deposition of an interested party, now proved
to have been erroneous and false. To indulge apprehension
in such a case would be to impeach by our doubts the wisdom
and the justice of the tribunals of our country.