A ROYALTY CASE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3736, 14 February 1891, Page 2

A ROYALTY CASE.

Rival "Woolpresses,

D. Donald v. Eoss and Muir, (Continued.)

In the E.M. Court yesterday, James Ross, cross-examined by Mr Beard, stated that he had arranged with Mr Donald to make the Solway wool presses, and he made twentyfive at a loss to himself. He only went on at the wish of Mr Donald as an advertisement.

Mr Beard : Then you turned the presses out at a loss to yourself ? Witness: I did. Mr Beard: And why did you stop turning them out? Witness: Well, Mr Donald's machine went dead. Mr Beard: And as an advertisement to Mr Donald's press you turned out another. Witness: I did. Mr Donald's was theory and ours was practice. Mr Beard: Then yours was different to that of Mr Donald's ? Witness: Ours was the best in the world; although Mr Donald, with his theory, theatened to bring out a better (laughter). By Mr Pownall: I would never agree to pay royalty until I saw how the thing " panned out." The construction of the presses required a lot of labor, and they would not pay until they could be duplicated.

To Mr Beard : There is no eccentric motion in the new Solryay press. William George Smith, foreman for Messrs Ross and Muir, deposed that he had had a good deal to do with the Solway wool press. On being informed what the labor and material would cost, Mr Donald said he would expect a royalty of £2 on each press. No agreement was, however, come to. A press was constructed from Mr Donald's model. This was the eccentric press, but as it did not work a second press was made called the "New Solway." These were designed by Messrs Ross and Muir, By Mr Beard: The flax dressers were substantially the same as Mr Donald's press as regards the iron work. No eccentric gripper was put on the new press, but it was worked slightly by eccentric motion. The plaintiff, re-called, gave evidence as to the number or presses supplied; His Worship p-nnounced that he wsuld reserve his decision for a week.