Transcript of Record — Standard Oil Co. (Indiana) v. United States

Supreme Court brief1931

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

y, :

4 ‘ . .

re ‘Vol. V : sai?

“TRANSCRIPT. OF RECORD

NARRATIVE STATEMENT OF PATENT EVIDENCE

\ > 4 i ae Ne ak,

: mere Bs, me e

STANDARD OIL COMPANY (INDIANA), STANDARD

-. OIL COMPANY (NEW JERSEY), STANDARD DE-

ts _ VELOPMENT: OMPANY, ET AL, APP!

| {THE UNITED STATES OF ing eae

' ape. ) Yt ; oe

i ‘ ae, 2 4 ] ’ ’ i

mend

APPEAL, Prom THE: DISTRICT couRT OF: ie: p ONEED saves 2

FOR THR Wetiseezneome DISTRICT OF P TLLENORS es J

35, 300).

~ SUPREME COURT OF THE UNI

- OOTOBER TERM, 1930

| bese ame :

| ‘STANDARD OIL COMPANY (INDIANA), STANDARD ‘

_* OIL COMPANY (NEW JERSEY), SFANDARD DE- .

VELOPMENT COMPANY, RT AL., APPELLANTS,

ae Tote

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

_ APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT bones oF THE UNITED STATES.

._FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRI? OF TLLINOES

. net ‘+,

oe 3

Joe bse INDEX

a Jupp & Derwettzr (INnc.), PRntene, WASHINGTON, D.-C., Octoner 6, 1930 3 g

; .

3 5 >

a’

’ .

° °

“ .

. ; %

bd .

oe .

‘4

° , 5

M, . Va

Ne aes

ised rs

oe 5 . paca & ‘ 105. 1

rr “hid 0 oy’ one of those is set forth i in the claims—that :

is, he one where there is no rising of the temperature?

_A.,There is not a specific statement in the claims, that .

the other is not covered. “In fact, in Claim 1, the. question |

_ of whether it is a lower, or a higher temperature, j is not ‘

_ mentioned. It says ‘‘through an enlarged passageway”— —_

[fol. 538] which j is the chamber, I ‘presume—‘* without Lo ee

creasing’’—yes, it is,—‘‘ without increasing the tempera- Be

ture.’’ I correct myself.

_Q. In other words; that is in all the claimst Bak: on

A. Is it? Ihaven’t yet gone through allthe claims. There ~

_are none of the claims that cover a rise of temperature, as &

the invention described in the specification covers.

‘Q. Well, that doesn’t answer the question. ‘They all

3 specify that there is no increase, do they not? ~

A. Yes, sir, they all specify that there is no EES :

..Q. Now, where do you. find in the Pielsticker patent, any

statement: that there is. no increase in temperature in the °.

‘ drum? And, by drum, I assume:that we will agree that the . =

- analog is a part which Pielsticker calls the retort, L?.

A. The retort is L.-

The Master: And in the Ellis patent, Lisa heating tank? ee

.The Witness: No—it is a passageway. HG

The Master: I was asking about the Ellis patent.

The Witness: It is the figure 8. _- :

The Master: But the analog is a drum, or heating tank?

The Witness: Yes... .: nS

_ + Q. In other words, just to make this clean-—ybee ‘pesition:

.is that part 8, of Ellis, corresponds to the retort, ‘L, of Piel-

sticker—is that true? oe |

-° A. That is correct. eA. ‘ ee

‘Q. Now, whére do you find i in Pieléticker’ s pola ‘that

the temperature is ‘not raiged in the retort, L, or drum? 3

The Master: You know‘*this is a sort of an argument | car- ©

: ried on. ‘ Obviously counsel, in putting these patents before ee

- the Court—the Court is just as able to read them, as Dr. |

-McKee is, and this line of argument, and the time taken to

search through, by the Doctor, will stretch this Lonee doa. out

— to nobody knows when.

‘Mr. Wiles: May I say this, on that matter, if the Court

please—in the first place, as cross examination, ae: the ;

170-378 < : | e a

ee ‘Wines ie said that this ind got it all, and I can . find it, I

" certainly have the right to ask him where he finds itt Now,

he has stated expressly that the Pielsticker patent met: the

Ellis patent, and had it. all, and I can’t find it there, and 1

_, am entitled to ask him where he found it.

'. The Master: You can put your finger on the: ‘element i eee

the Ellis patent, which you say is ‘notin the Pielsticker pat- .. :

_ Jent, and if he says he can find it, let him point it out—where

4 /it is.

' (fol. 539] Mr. Wiles That is just what I am ‘after. Where

does he find it? He’ has stated on direct examination that ea

he did findit.

The Master: Well, nik the question: is nnewered.

Mr. Wiles: But I want to know where it is, in Pielsticker.

He didn’t give any line or page, but he simply stated that it —

. was in Pielsticker, and I want him to tell me where it is. © -

Where a patent is long, it is an immense saving of work if

. the witness will take it up—and, normally, i in his direct ex-

amination, the. witness takes and picks out the important

things in it, and he has not chosen to do that in this case, *.

but, rather, to make broad assertions, and I think we will

- have the record in such shape that, while it may be very -

. long to read, it will be infinitely easier to handle m briefing,

-. if we get these-questions answered. :

Mr. Rauber: Sometimes those features. _ are ‘shown.

S throughout the context of the patent.

A. I fail to find any statement that it-is either raised or

: lowered. We do havea heating. scheme for it—just as we |

‘ have in Ellis,. though of a different type. In other wonia,

-it would agree with the Ellis specification.

Q. That i is, it either might be raised, or it might not be :

‘A. ‘Yes, a ae

-@ And you cannot tell, huis the patent?

A. You could operate it in either way, of course. .

_ Q. And there is no statement in n the patent as to which

way he does operate it? ae :

A. There is no detailed stibiecant ‘in the: mehenk as to

which his preference i is, just as there isn’t in the case of

me a.» in: ‘the — Ce Chee ee

nn en re ee gee rn

2107

Q. Now,,. what peodie: is it that you understand Piel- .

sticker was trying to make? That is, in the process de-

- geribed down to line 130, on page, 2—and having in mind, ~

: of course, the date of 1890, when he was working? — 3

age sy presume that he was trying to make kerosene of that

dain, as his primary product, and, incidentally,. he would,

of course, get certain other Products, such | as gasoline and . Be

- gas-and carbon, and so on.

Q. Now, I find, beginning at line 130; of this patent, Te ee

the manufacture of permanent gas, or very light oils, is

: intended,’’- -that he then resorts to another process, which *

is a vapor phase, hot tube process. Do you understand that

’ [fol.,540] to mean that if he wanted any such product as

* gasoline he would have used the other process—that is,

the alternate process, beginning at line 130, page 2? - es

' A, I would understand that he was making gasolirfe and

kerosene: with ~~ original. process, and that, this concerned.

here with page 2, is: similar to -what Ellis discloses in\ his

_\* original specification, was—that is; a vapor “phase pro-

cess—and that, in Pielsticker’s original one, here, Mis

inet

largely a liquid phase. process.

Q. Yes, but I am trying ‘to get at the _purpose~-when Me:

says if he wants very nent oils, dogs: he mean by that, gaso-

A. Iw uld think that it would be what we would call the.

light ends of gasoline—as other urged phase a E

- make a quite light oil.

oe _ Q. Then; light ends, made in that way, are not gasoline?

_. A. Yes, sir; they may. be considered as gasoline, but. they. -

are: particularly important as putting in when a’ blended

_ gasoline is made—say, by the Burton process—it needs a

. light gaseline to go with it—such as a casinghead gasoline.

' ‘Q. Your understanding of the Burton product is that it.

a requires enrichment in its light. ends—is that correct?

_ A. My understanding is that if you add light ends to it .

‘you ean: take off more products from the Burton process

than you could if you did not add your light ends. In other

words, that you will i increase your yields more than corre- ‘

_ sponds to the light ends that you have used.

" Q. Now, T want to get just your position-on that.

A. On which —the sees siwre. or Ellis, or Burton

here.

_-for_a fact. 1 didn't miske an analysis of it at that time.

Q No on.this Burton matter, that you have brought in

Mr, Wiles: 2 Xo bronght Barn int eee o

Mr. Wiles: No, he used it as an illustration, your Honor— im

- he said, ‘‘just as in the Burton process.”’

Q. What is your understanding of the mE Sa of

light and heavy fractions, in the. normal product of the’ / :

Burton process—that is, has it got an over-plus of light, oe

‘or an over-plus of heavy? - e

A. It has a shortage of light—if you take.the run as a a

whole.

_Q. That is, if you cut the Burton product to: proper end

points, to meet specifications, it will be short on the: light

_ fractions?

[fol. 541] A. I don’t know this Sei peracnal kno wiedae.

- but I know that that was a A satemnens that was made some e =

_ - years ago.

_Q. Who made it?. :

A. I think that this was the occasion, hesames: of which

your. Company—the Standard Oil Company of Indiana,— - *

was interested, at one time, in, possibly, taking over tlie

_. Greenstreet process, in order to add to and supplement the

’ Burton product. .

_Q. Where did you learn that we were taterested | in tskite

- . over the Greenstreet. process—that the Indiana Gompany’

“wart.

- - A. Idon’t remember just where it was.

“The Master: Was it common rumor?

_ The Witness: Yes, your Honor.

QQ. Tht Ge tank ection vomsor thas you bese the

~~ belief that you expressed here, as an expert, that the. =

. Barton B

cp at ayes if ent to proper end conan for Fosoline, is . 2

TE ae er terete, Ae 1 iA, I don't know it

Q. Do you know enough about the product, really, to have

am opinion, now, an to whethet it is lean in its light ends, or

heavy ends, or where it is lean, -* anywhere?

ae * My i impression is 5 that it is. lean i in its light eid; and

_ that you use in it, by preference, a casingiead gasoline, in

it is obvious, that it is lean in its light ends.

a blending. Jf you used casinghead gasoline ip anne mae

Q. And is that a common characteristic of like. pressure e

” distillation. products—that they tend to be lean in their :

light ends—the modern gasoline? | :

A. What process do- you refer to as like. pressure pro-

cesses? :

Q. You have said that the several that : you have talked

about are just like the Burton process—is it the general ne

= tendency of those-to be lean in their light ends?

A. I think that is- probably more true of. Burton, than of

the Dubbs, for example, but I think, in general, that we are a

finding it desirable, with liquid phase cracked. gasoline, to

usethem as blended products, preferably using some casing- :

head gasoline, | or similar-light. terial.

, [fol, 542] Q. The blending is in order pitch the light -

.. ends—that is what I.am trying to get at. i don’t question

‘that all of this stuff is blended, but I want to be sure that y

' you mean that it is blended to eririch the light ends.. -

A, When it is blended with casinghead gasoline I think:

_ there is no question but what that is the purpose. —

' Q, And, of course, ‘condensing under pressure ery as

greatly helps in the direction: ‘of enriching the light e

A. If there is sufficient of the light ends there. ve

__Q. It would. be much worse, would it not, if you did not ae

condense under pressure? -

A. The much would depend on how much - was present.

_ It would be not so good. - |

—Q. The gain, is‘in these very light ends that you say are

already deficient, or are still — in _ - the prem: :

sure ‘egniiensing? :

he ‘The Master : Youn mean the light ends are then more prof .

ae able? | af

Mr. Wiles: No, i moan the poelanie: ‘cntishutiloss in.

creases the light ends—the proportion of the light ends— __

and that is the very point where it is deficient, according =

% cohicaia retinas SOE, eae ae

Q. Now, in ecasidering this Eljis cracking process, Pat-

ent No. 1,415,232—and, perhaps, other patents—you drew,

in your direet testimoriy, a sharp distinction between vapor

phase and liquid phase cracking, did you not? —

__ A. I drew a distinction, and I should say that it was fairly °

sharp, yes. - | : et : vi ss

The Master: And by sharp you mean that it was plain?

The Witness: Yes, sir, that you would have no trouble

' in distinguishing between which ones were which, normally. ...

Q. Now, I want to develop that whole matter in much -

| greater detail than you went into it in your direct testi-

mony. I want to know just what: these distinctions are,

as fully as you can state them, with reference to products,

the nature of the chemical changes involved, the difference —

in\mechanism, orwhat happens, clear through, just as fully

as-you can tell us. And I think, perhaps, I had better let

you give your full theory of it.

The Master: It might be well to start with a definition. es

_ Of what is meant by a liquid and a-vapor phase. .

A. By a liquid phase cracking we mean a process in. which

--.[fol. 543]. the molecules which are undergoing decomposi-

tion, are primarily within the mass-which is in liquid form.

There’ is, in such a case, probably some cracking of the

vapors which are above the liquid. This is relatively minor

in amount, however. | fos aa |

In the vapor-phase cracking, on the other hand, we are

concerned, here—where most of the cracking of the hydro-

carbon molecules, takes place among those which aré in

_ the form of vapors, and not liquids, aa

We would ther say, in a liquid phase the major portion’

‘of the oil passes through the cracking apparatus, in the

form of liquid. Whereas, in the vapor phase, the portion

which is being ‘tracked, and which, normally, is the major

portion, passes through in the form of a gas,

; vapor. ;

2711

Mr. Rauber: Do you mean Snare of it, or all, you get into

the form of vapor? ; :

_ The Witness: The part which ie i in the form of va r,

decomposing by the heat which is applied to it, at sabes,

we would speak of that as a vapor phase cracking. . A

_. In vapor phase cracking, i in most cases we heat to a hig er

temperature ‘than we do in. the case of liquid phase crack-

ing. That.is necessary, inasmuch as we want the/materials

to be in a vapor form, for that particular pressure. -

' ’ The extremes, perhaps, would be such a patent as that .

_of Palmer, patent No. 1,187, 380, in which it is heated under —

- conditions in which there i is little or relatively little vapor

present—and practically, all is a liquid. ~~ ;

The extreme case in the other direction, might be, for

example, such .as' the Ellis application was, as it was. at_

the start, before the successive amendments—in which the.

oil vapors were heated and the products obtained are es-

sentially in the form of vapor, plus a little carbon, and only — |

a relatively small volume of residual liquid, carrying this

carbon‘ obtained. 5

- Liquid phase processes were originally run at atmos- .

pheric pressure. .They were later, in many cases, run ‘under

super-atmospheric pressure of considerable amount. .

_ The vapor phase processes have been run—as in the case .

[fol. 544] of the original Ellis disclosure, as he says, on

page.7, line 8, of the original specification—‘ preferably

at slight pressure.’’ But others, such as that of Rittman,

‘run at higher pressures—super-atmospheric pressures. —

The heat and fuel requirements are,- -of course, greater, in

working a vapor phase cracking. process, than i in working

a liquid phase cracking process. ; :

The vapor phase cracking processes havé the additional |

_ trouble that any scheme for the removal of carbon whicli

_. might remain in the vapor phase cracking apparatus, is

likely to give trouble, because of radiant heaf—that is,.the.

Ba chain, or scraper used, absorbs heat radiated from the walls

of the retort, and, as such; it, itself, soon gets carboned— ty!

- that is, coke is deposited upon it: - ee

__—.-, In the vapor phase process, unless the speed of the vapors |

__- is quite-high, we will have difficulty in keeping the carbon

__. deposited, from adhering to the sides of the pipe, or retort.

i In the case of the liquid sas this Lathe Tess ‘oes,

\ because the liquid will carry away, suspended in it, a cer-.

_ tain amount of the carbon. Wale creo grant | ne,

' Do you. really mean, by that question, fo have me state as —

__ fully as I can? If you do, weare in for another hour,

_ Q. I really want it rather fully, Doctor. J don’t want:

@ any unnecessary material in here: Of course, I want to.

know the chemical mechnisn, and I want to direct: your

tention, particularly, to the fact that frequently these.

processes run, or can\be run at the same temperature—for . -

shots llis runs at a minimum temperature of 752, anid,

of course, we know that some liquid’ phase processes run —

over that. I want you to give your conditions in a parallel

' way,\ and teil me just what the distinctions are, chemically

mum. .I am quoting now, not’ from the specification, but

_ from the claims. = ees FE eae

Considering, now, the products formed, we find that while

: than in the vapor phase cracking. ie ? oe:

. So that, as to the products we can say that the extremely. \\

_ light products are more likely to be formed by vapor pliase. |

eracking-—including considerable amounts of permanent \.

When making gasoline by the two processes, the vapor

: phase process would, in general, be expected to give some- ; :

- what larger percentages, not orily of permanent gases, and _

of carbon, but also of olefinic materials—that is, unsat- |

“ urated materials—and of the lighter fractions of gasoline, —

The liquid phase process would, on the other hand, nor-

— a

}

t, in ae

mally give more of the kerosene fractions, and less carbon;

'- more of petroleum residues, which, however, might be re-

distilled, say -by atmospheric pressure, and then recracked. ©

i _ Iii each case, however, it is possible to operate the pro-_

% eéss so that it will vary from this general and normal pro- |

wee @OGure, we Sia ee Prete

i One of the biggest difference- between the vapor phase

©» cracking. and liquid phase cracking, is in the question of e

time of exposure of the hydrocarbon, to the heat. In the |

ie vapor phase cracking it is no

time—even running into hours.

rmally a very short time ex-

y ordinarily, is less than a single min- .

=. Are there an phases of those that you would care to have. aes

',.me go into, further? WF ta tes Peers fe :

_ '__Q. I want to put one question, to bring out. some details.

_ You have, in your answer, given the conditions of opera-

¢:

ee tion, which you say are general—that is, they generally ap-

ply to this type of process. Now, it is perfectly possible to’

- “run a liquid phase process at, we will say, 760, isn’t it? :

; A. Fahrenheit? | mpeg EA 38

Gee: 7

eS EO RW a hae pee Te peas

__ Q. And, also, to run a vapor phase process at 760—and ~

I call your attention; particularly, to the fact that Ellis has

752 for his minimum. |

eo A. My understanding is that this 752 was put in by hing

when he was later considering liquid phase work. .

-Q. Well, it is possible, isn’t it? ae eae Taree

_, A. I don’t believe so, because here you would have a. gas

- oil, for’ example, whose’ upper boiling point is distinctly

|. above 750. , Or, if you were working with a crude oil, the

_ _ boiling point—you would not have it-as a

|" you were working youf vapor, possibly, at a vacuum,

+» _ Q. But I want to get a condition which can be paralleled. _

_- You can find a stock which will all vaporize below 750, _ -

without any difficulty, can you MOET Che ee eee

_ A. Yes, you could use kerosene and crack it to get gaso-_

line. ae 7

. Q. And the light -half of gas oil? vate :

"voc Sag pI age ey Ur Pia Pe hea

Y. Now, if you take that for, your cracking stock, you. -.

- Cor ; run’ either liquid, or vapor phases, at 7601 ei |

: \

vapor—unless —

ame |

ean Yes, if you run up to 800 you can run. either one of

Pid them with normal gas oil, approximately? ..

A. Yes, approximately.

Q. Now, I want to get, and Iam saieicilaahe indented

in getting the differences which arise, not from differences’

jn temperature, or differences in time, but those differences i

which arise because of — difference in phase. Now, sup-

semai take a ‘liquid phase process and ‘a vapor phase pro- oe

. ©088, an ve no difference, other than the difference in

[fol. sett phase, and the difference in pressure which is

required to produce that phase—then, I want to know just —

what the mechanism of the‘ difference between the two pro-.

“ceases, is—the nature of the difference between them..

The Master; He means. physiochemical reaction, I think.

Mr. Wiles: And the result, as well. That all washes out

in the process; and—— — ides

The Master: You may proceed.

WieeS idem. | Now, assuming that we have only the differesise’ in

_ phase and pressure necessary to produce it, I am trying to.

get down to what difference the phase’ makes. G9

‘The Master: I understand that both phases rout! in the )

decomposition of the oe molecular, structure of the.

-. Mr. Wiles: Of course. — oe

- ‘The Master: Resolving them into atoms of liydrogen and ©

_ hydrocarbons. Now, you want to know, after the process

_ Of decomposition has been reached, what are the differences ~~

in the combinations of atoms that result i in the one, as dis- rae

Pel from the other? me

Mr. h shore ‘Yes, your Honor, and the kind of products.

‘that I mean the chemical mechanism. I

‘reduced, as closely as possible, to——

think I asked him the question, hire, if ‘oe

know what took place inside of

etl sO u

| the Master : neehen we itis fired pean at | you Pa give

ing to know, and I would be glad to know; if you can give ; Ore

- an answer that will meet our desire. — pote

__. A. As you have so much less material oeescal off: cubic .

i foot we would expect the decompositions.to take place to a

greater extent, because we are furnishing, as I understand

it, the same heat supply, and everything else exce

+ Q. Well, the. temperature is the same, of «

will not feed it so fast, because you have n

there, but the temperature is the same. ~ |

fol, 548] A. Oh, in your vapor phase: ‘cine, you will

* have particularly local overheating at the walls, compared —

. with what you would in the of liquid phase cracking,

but the most obvious thing would be the output. Onecase

.would have about 200 times the output of the other, the -—

‘vapor phase being only a small amount, the liquid phase a

much larger, possibly 150 times. The figure 200 is only a

rough figure. : an

The vapor phase, of course, is, becausé. of. its small

ee capacity, subject to a great deal more in the way of varia- *

tions in the operation. ‘I would say that chemically it

~-would be a question of the local and possibly irregular

= superheating in spots on the wall of the containing vessel,

which would not occur so readily in the case of liquid phase.

-Q. Let me suggest this: That fora pound of material,

the same oil is held for the same time at the same tempera-

aan, the result will be the same—substantially the same,

* whether it is liquid ister or vapor tea is that your posi- -

tion? gal

A. No, I think we would. have somewhat different. We -

_. would have,—because of your local heating in the case of

-- your vessel, and it would depend somewhat on the shape —

a of the- vessel. If. the. vessel was, say, of the same shape, —

one case a small drug so big (indicating), heated; and the

‘other case a large drum so big, heated, each holding a pound,

one of liquid arid the other of gas, that iri the heating of the

‘big drum-you. would have local spots; that is, the bottom ee

Tid Ne hotter kad the top would not be uo bot. aa

Q. That can be obviated by a lead bath or an oil bath, aS

it not? . ae

A. No, it would not, Mr: Wiles: You will ‘have,. even

an o—. Lage tenner | heat. ‘You have got some sens

you a comprehension of something that Mr. Wiles is want- . as

ee ee ‘ . =e ote

heat dissanbaie in;-and that at the surface, that i is, at sar edge a

of the drum, will be hotter than it-is inside. ae ae

— What I am trying to get at-—— - ee 2 ae

_ /The Master: Given: a certain process, and another cer:

tain process, how can one tell that one is a vapor process - _

and the other:is a liquid phase process? What determines ” ee

it? How can you say whichis @hich? — e

The Witness: You have in the vapor. phase process .

tempetrature high enougli—by. measuring your tempera-

‘ture and your pressure you could easily determine if you =

are above the boiling point of your hydrocarbons, and if

- you: were, you would have the hydrocarbons in the vapor ~~ _

-phase-and you would be heating the - ‘vapors. * Actually, ie

{fol. 549] there is no difficulty to one who js at all familiar,

in looking at a piece of apparatus operating and telling:

which it:is. : : ' oe

The Master: I want to know——

The Witness: I would say that you can perhaps get

pei. some evidence——

The Master: How would you classify this Cross ‘process

that I saw this morning, where’ the oil is pumped through ©

the coil, heating the coil and re-pump through it, cirenlated

through it until it reaches 800 degrees Fahrenheit under a

pressure of about 700; then it is allowed to run into a re-.

_.. action chamber where. it is held during a certain period, =

~ and then the material from that blown out into. an expan-

- gion chamber, where it expands:to many times its volume, | ~

-. and frem there conducted into. a bubble tower; is it vapor,

or is it liquid phase? . ~ a

The Witness: That is liquid Si becaus acking oe-—~- — i

‘curs while it js in the tubes, and while it is in the digestion

chamber, and when it expands there,. the. cracking is ‘es- -

. gentially through and they are Temoving the vapors. | «=.

2, The Master: When it expands in ‘the re-action shambet ae

° oy in the expansion chamber? — is

_ A. Expansion.chamber ;-the cracking has been done...

eee Master: There it is no longer ‘under the high. ieee 2

> gure.

Ss ee. Witness: I aay, at that time the cracking’ is essen-

tially through, and as cuch only while it was in the liquid,

e ms was be sarin to mre opnsidhrable extent. Be

Se in p 7

_- The Master: And not. the differences | in the ratio of the

) 5 if

£ ‘

e ts - ‘ .

Q I am not — e that I od any definite answer . the be

_ question. What I am trying to get at, and I am: trying s

“deal with this in a practical way, Doctor-——

A. I pinderstood you wanted it in a theoretic way.

Q. Iam glad to know the mechanism that makes the prac- ies

‘ tical difference, but I am. really most interested in is

_ whether the difference in phase makes a practical difference See

- in the nature of the product; the mere differnce in phase, . .

not — in local hastings : whether the mere difference :

- products, either; weer you the same Kind of pro-

duets. :

Q. Whether you get the same kind of prodnets, then i

want to know about the proportions, because that is-of the

greatest commercial impertance. Are they essentially acts

- same or essentially different?

A. The products are essentially the same; their propor-

tions present will not be the same.

[fol.550} Q. Will .they differ to a. commercially substan-

fial extent?

Mr. Rauber: It seems to: me there i is\a sniaenphasialaiia

4. here. Are you speaking of high temperature vapor phase

' process? ~~ 5

Mr. Wiles: I am.talking about-——I want a comparison be- .

‘tween a vapor phase and a liquid phase process, where the

sole difference is the difference in phase and the pressure

necessary to maintain the liquid phase when that is used.

Mr. Rauber: Assuming there might be such a process?

Mr. Wiles: Oh, it is conceded by the witness there can be,

- and it is obvious ‘physically that there can. be, Mr, Rauber;

because you can take light gas oil and crack it ‘either-——

~The Master: Let us assume it is. -F am striving to be

— helpful in arriving at. some understanding with the wit-

ness. I assume that this Ellis process with the electrical |

- heater-——. | |

r. Wiles: Externally fired coil.

i The- Master: What?

3 Mr, Wiles: Itisa fired coil, -

_ ..Mr. Rauber: That is Adin.

_ The Master: I meant Adams,

“Mr. Wiles: Ellis is a fired coil.

2718

* Mr. Wiles: But we are yikine about Ellis.

The Master:. Practically a flash.

- Mr. Wiles: Adams.

‘The Master: Yes. .

Mr. Wiles: That, I suppose, will desea upon he pres- _

sure but that was’ not: the patent I was on now. -

The Master:.Take the two and compare. them, for in-

' stance, the Cross and the Adams. There, one is liquid phase

and the other is a vapor phase, is it not?

_ The Witness: Yes, as I recall the Adams. The Adaras 3

with electrical heater-——

The Master: I want to know how te distingnish which is

horse and which is cow.

‘Mr. Wiles: Now, I.do not know that I-have had an an-

swer to my last question, Dr. McKee?

-'Q. Where there is only the difference ‘i in phase between

the two processes and the pressure necessary to maintain

the liquid phase. Of course, you have said that the products

would be of the same kind but different in proportion. Now, |

_do you understand that they would be different in propor- _—

tion to a commercially noticeable, practical amount?

A. Yes, one would be roughly 200 times as much ‘as. the =

other, for apparatus of the same——

[fol. 551} Q. I do not mean in output, I meant the propor: -

tion of products -with reference to each other, per pound of |

stock.

A. By products you mean: constituents?

Q. Yes, the constitutents of fhe resultant products, would

they be the same for prectical and commercial purposes, or

.-: different?

A. I wonld say that they. would " different. .

Q. Towhat extent? — ~

A. To a moderate extent. The vapor phase’ cracking, for

example, will tend to give more carbon. It will, in general;

_ give less residue liquid. It will probably give ; slightly more

olefinic materials. Of course, I am not able to judge from »

the particular casé that you mentioned where a cracking

. : process is run on the two —, emind only the fight half of ae

the gas oil.

Q. Tr only picked that to se you the same conditions of

A. Yes. I think it would apply even. in that case. a am os

: not ws | that it would Te oF ees, secty ae

————

aed

od Dus

Pee 2719

Q. You have referred in your testimony at times to the

rate of conversion; would the rate of conversionbe the ..

same at the same temperature in the two phases or differ- -

ent? ~ - oe AS biatch x ee

* . A. I do not know. © en , Os eee

- _-Q. Now, the Master has spoken of the Cross process which

he visited this morning in which the temperature is 850, in.

» a process which yon have said ‘is essentially liquid phase.

Now, that could be run and to do that the pressure is about

600 or upwards.: That process could easily be run on the

same stock in the vapor phase with a lower pressure?

‘A. What stock was it run on? 7

Q.Gasoil.. aa

A. What is its range of boiling point? Haas

Q. Well, 850 will carry it over, will it not, at atmospheric

pressure? — one ee: vengreese aos :

A. Largely. |

The Master: It was done at enormously high pressure. ° .

Mr. Wiles: Yes. ) 7 |

Q. But for the same apparatus running at atmospheric

pressure, it would be-all gas phase, would it not,. with the

same stock? : ee areal

_ A. Essentially so, if it was at 850 Fahrenheit. |

~ Q. And your judgment is. that if so run, would be: sub- |

tantialty and noticeably different in the proportion of the

[tt 552] products, I mean in the constitufion or the rela- _

_/tion of the constituents of the finished products to each -

/ other? | ee < og

Z »_ A. Or given the number of pounds pressure, I think you ~

' would get, for example; more carbon ‘and probably more »

' permanent gas. shai oo en a -

Q. How would the gasoline comparé in percentage pased

' on the stock and in its quality? as Bee

___ A. I would expect slightly more olefinic, if given the same .

_ time exposure. — = mo eaeen eaees

A. How is that?» 7 Pry eg Ae Be.

Q. About the same amount of gasoline per gallon of stock

_-used, or more or legs? -

Q. And about as much yield on the stock as you would oa

A, I feel on these questions that it is hardly a fair-thing

when I have not.seen the process and have not seen the -

2720. ’ os ss NG : , bes

~ layout for it, to ask me quite that kind of a question. Ican > |

only airswer in connection, essentially, with the mations

in the’patent. — 3

The Master: Of course, you are ay lad: to answer

-what you expect theoretically from the laboratory side.

-! The Witness: Yes. 2

The Master: As long as you cee. not actually cers it.

- ‘That i is the way you are atiswering the aypeone, is it not!

. The Witness: It is: :

Q. One of the points: made i in this Ellis product patent,

_ which is No. 1,318,060, is that this product is free from”

' gummitig or. resenifying olefines.. There is, is there not, a-

- standard gum test laid-down by the Government in its meth. :

ods for testing motor fuels? ;

A: I presume you are. referring to the reside’ left on-

“evaporation, say, in a copper dish. I do not recall whether

that is a Government specification or not.

Q. Well, the gum test is déscribed ‘in the Bureau of Mines

Bulleti s for testing motor fuels, is it not?

so; lam not certain. |

Q. Just to avoid any possible: question, I call.

. your attention to the Lefax abstract of Bureau of Mines.

Technical aper No. 214, which describes the gum test on —

+ page 4.

A. That i the copper cup test which I have referred t to.

‘in my answer \to the previous question. | ,

Q. And that rovides for a maximum of gum, on the gum

test, of .03 |

A. Ii is .03 percent, as I recall it.

Q. Well, it is 1 bi ae “3

A. Yes, if you start with 100 cubic centimeters it would ‘be: a

03 grams.

Q. And the Government specification for gasoline inaludas

that requirement, does it not?

ee According to the Lefax abstract which you showed

me, which is not itself a Government publication, of course, —

Q. Now, how long has the gum test been known-in the art; ~

I mean.as a method of testing motor fuels? How long has eo

anybody appreciated the need of a gum test? .

- A. I think it has been appreciated—the need of it has

_ been appreciated since gasoline was first made; gasoline,

- for example, which is ased for: pleaning payee, rade |

: We oe ‘ e

: : 2721 foe :

- ~ +

Ae naphtha for nialeiaa purposes annie soe to be tien from

gum, even more so than eeoeie that is used for motor

a “spirit.

The Master: In the’ dy: dying industry would it snide a dif- es

ers. Ww

ference? —

‘The Witness: Yes, whore: the cloth was. washed after-

. wards j “6 gasoline; but I am referring particularly. to clean-.' -

take our suits and give them a dry cleaning, or, _

2 _ more particularly, the ladies’ apparel which i is of light color. « :

- .Q. Well, in those days, i in the early days of gasoline, what

was there that would gum?

A. There was very little; if the gasoline was carelessly -

made and some other Products splashed. over, it would, of

course, gum.

Q. Ordinarily straight run Seales will not run more.

that five or ten milligrams on the gum test, would it; ever?

-. [fol.554] A. A shale oil gasoline, carelessly made—— 33

Q. I said a straight run gasoline.

A. No, it would not. You asked me the question of what

‘would.

QA straight r run gasoline ‘would? —

A. A. straight run gasoline, properly made, would not,

normally.

Q. And nobody would sell shale oil online f for cleaners?

handling?

eee understand. that they did and that it was the com- —

mon gasoline for-Scotland and England for that use in i the ae

periods of say 1880. a

Q. Now, did they have a gum test there? | ee ee

A. They undoubtedly would not want a gasoline. carry- 3

ing any- gummy material when used for that purpose,

Q. Can you not answer my question? -

_._ A. (continued). Or whether they used ‘the copper cup

test, or anyother gum test, I do not know. I do not know

the hi ory of the methods of testing for gum. -

- Do you know, as a mattex of fact, that there ever was

any gum tests at all until recent years? :

A. I recall fairly early statements on the question of put-

ting light oil, such as gasoline or naphtha, on to white blot-. -

- ting paper and seeing if it would leave a. colored residue.

4 _That would be, essentially, a gum test, That was before the _ :

mse oe ae

days of the ntesiank cracking processes to supply motor

_ spirit for the present day automobile. .

Q. If it was done on blotting paper, that involved no heat?

A. How was that?

Lugs * Being done on blotting paper, that aid not involve any

heat?

' A. No, not to ad to anything.

Q. Just let it soak up?

_A. And evaporate.

Q. Now, how important is this. gum test waich is made

nowadays, as to motor fuels?

‘A. Moderately important. - It depends upon die patbu- |

-_retors, with the better grade of carburetors, it is much less’

important; or rather, put ‘it this way, with some carbu-

retors, it is much less important than it would be with .

others. Itisa question of clogging tlie orifice. Tf the orifice |

is a fine orifice it might clog easily.

Q: You can take gasoline that has a very high iow: ‘gum

[fol. 555] test, and it will not. make very much trouble; that

- is a fact, is it not? - :

A. It depends, as I said, sonientat: on the carburetor that :

is used.

-Q. I mean, if it goes out on.the market, a high-gum gaso- }

. . line will not make trouble very often, and it will not. make

it very bad, either, will it?

| gasoline on the market in this respect...”

Q. Do you know that there is on the iat: a gasoline

- made by one of the leading refiners i in this country" that runs

about 500 milligrams gum test?

Av Iti is new to me, 80 far asa particular. figure i is con-

cerned. |

Q. But if wash a gasoline were in -_ it would < by most

; of the time, would it not? ane

‘A. Oh, yes. .

~—Q. But it might ‘make trouble orice in awhile.- -

AL Tf used in a particular type of carburetor. and for a a3 :

: : continued time.

Q. And when it did make trouble, : it would not be an ex- o ‘ :

fe Se eer ta Veet ee. driver? _

f Saaee

A. T think they get away with a good deal in the way of ;

<a Master: waits trouble is + extremely eanpying to the Es

| _Q. Well, this kind of trouble would not even let him limp —

~. -home;-he would have to take his carburetor apart and clean.

it on the road, would he not? ECE te ba

‘A. I do not know eno heliabout carburetors to tell you or ~

answer you that. a ; ; a

Q. Now, as I get your .testimony on: this Ellis product’ :

paterit, you cited (and I want you to check with me) the ©

Thorpe and Young reference—— ait Mes |

’ A. T have not the copy of my testimony, so I cannot say.

.. Q. Have you not memoranda on which ones you used?

' A. Only in part. 7

(Document handed by Mr. Rauber to the witness.) _

“Q. Now, these are the references that I have abstracted

__. from that evidence: Thorpe and Young, Engler,‘ Williams,

_ Riebeck, Walker, Bassett and ‘Boynton, and ‘three refer-

- ” ences to Allen’s book. Now, will you check and see if that is

all that you had against that patent. Ag ogee ee

When I said ‘‘Williams,’’ I meant Williams’ publication

in the Chemical News,’by the way, Doctor. Mr. Dearborn

~ [fol 556] has called my attention, Doctor, to the fact that

I omitted. that note by Cabot in the Chemical News. That -

will make another one..’ oy Se ey ae

A. Did ygu mean to include Armstrong and Miller, page —

gee nee aS PETE AM aie ae

. Q. Well, that is one question I want you to answer. You

cited some on the treating and I was not sure whether you. |

"were citing them against the product or not.

a aS OO SL A oe Ae gale! Boe

_ Q. You did not, in terms, cite them against the product?

+ A. Lwould say that— ’

- do with the product?

- Q."You did not mention them, in the question that had to

_ A. (continued). If we’ add Armstrong and Miller, I _

- should say that includes: those that I gave onthedirect.

_ Q. Armstrong and Miller? , - Bat Gs cal 8

ae ae ae ee Se a

Q. Now, referring to the Cabot first, your statement :, ak

_ “hat at one stage in the process the material would be

in part uncracked, and partly crackéd, and if condensed,

would give a motor spirit,’” ee, TEE a ae

“p74.

= what ae a | 33

Q. Page. 356. Now, just what do ‘you. mean 4 that, :

“please? a

A. This is only | a ‘note, as I called attention, a brief note, |

- .Q, Has it really anything to do with the Ellis patent or

- not? If it has not, we can pass it. I. do not see. that ithas..

A. His process that he describes there would give a prod- eo

uct which would correspond to the specification’ of Ellis, i in-:

asmuch as he has cracked his petroleum, and he is using a

a petroleum benzene, which, at that.time was very cheap; that

is, a gasoline costing around seven cents a gallon,that being

‘the market price. ‘And he calls attention that by cracking 3

that you would get'some benzol, and if we got that we would |

_ be getting an unsaturated product and we would havea part

of our raw material left; and, accordingly, the pa ob- ee

; tained would be similar to that of Ellis. a Ai

-Q. Would it run a car?

A: Lexpect so. We can ise_and we are using at the sea ae

ent day, mixtures of maphinn, © or this type of gasoline with =

_,benzol. a

+. Q. Now, in the first place, this Cabot ‘note was not ee fe

process that anybody ever worked, was it? .

' [f0l. 557] A. No, it was a suggestion.

Q. A mere suggestion?

A. It was never a commercial process; it was simply a

disclosure of a processé : j

-Q. It never made any product, at all; thers never ‘was any

product made that way, ever?./ |

- A. I do not know whether anybody, after reading this, j

_ followed it out; they might have. oe

. Q. The article. itself is a mere suggestion in the form of.

a letter to the editor of the paper that possibly you might

get some benzol if you put petroleum benzene —— a hot 3

tube; that is all there is in it, is there not? Bae i

A. 1 do not find there ‘‘all there is in it’”; there is no such 2

_. qualification. He simply suggests it as one which has, i me

proved from the other chemical evidence, occurred. _

- does not say that he has rried it out. © ae

: | oe vases he says, “Tt ig obtent

.% He states that. a:

A. Is that a statement or a: q ae Hee

a (Q. That is a question. That i is\a fact, is it not?”

| | >. Mr. Rauber: What is that questio ? |

| Mr. Wiles: There is nothing in the a icle to indiveie that a

3 Any product was ever made by. this Ne in the mens se

-of the world. .

' Mr. Rauber: That is.a. etatenn:

The Master: It would have an effect as a

_ Mr. Wiles: It would not, as a disclosure of

the produet, I think.

\ A. I think it would be well if I read he sa Late, the

first part being only ee. Well, I will fren.

cblinetion.

Nee He

whole thing:

= “Sm: May: I have space, as of old, in your hospitable

| publication for a discovery. which I think is of considerable \

‘interest, both $e scientific and industrial chemistry—con-

version of the normal paraffins ogi are benzol series.

Here in the United States there several processes of

making illuminating gas from petroleum by passing it into

heatetl retorts. I was informed by Mr. John Lerltus, of

East Boston, that the tar from these gas works resembled

“= [fol. 558] very much the tar from coal gas. I examined a

~- specimen of this tar and found’ that: it did contain the

/benzol compounds, but not either phénol or creosol. This_

| points very distinctly to the decomposition of the normal

| ‘paraffins of petroleum into benzol compounds on a rather

; q large scale. It seems to me that it might lead to the ob-

tention of benzol by passing petroleum benzine (which sells.

here at about seven cents per gallon) through tubes heated -

_ to the proper temperature in connection with ‘the manufac-.

ture of gas the yield even if quite small, might be made to »

_- pay. At all-events, the new methods of gas making thay

still afford us a source for benzol and its derivatives. Vv,

: I am, sir, 3

8. Cabot, Je. ”,

2 This is 4 dlatonite: in the same Sense as many a dis

3 eaente oe a Process. ae |

+ 2726

-Q. Dove it mention a product t ca

A. Yes. .. eRe aS

The “Master: The product. benzol.

Mr. Wiles: What? .—

The Master: The product benzol. Ae Mat

‘The Witness: The product: containing benzol. -

Q. Well, ‘the produet of Cabot’ 8 process: is not Ellis’ |

product, air ae

. A. “Tn connection with the manufacture of gas, the yield

Ea even if-quite small, might be made to pay. . a

It is not presumed and he does not State that his abduct anes

is benzol, “He says it is a product from which he can get. ~~

benzol, and he suggests starting with a lighter. material,

- gasoline, which at that time was called benzine, and cracking -

A a and ‘getting benzol. Now, his cracking would not be ~

\ eomplete and the acuy then would be a mixture of benzol

and gasoline. 7

-Q. And what elsef |

A. Possibly carbon. ae

- Q: And tar and. pitch and all the other ‘things that yout ae

. get out of a hot tube process, is that not a fact? . ee

A. Yes, in small amounts. 7 -

“Q. Yes. / | nae

er 8 Zeonnnned). But the product, nevertheless, would be

a a prod Ns:

Phe Master: He means it moni want separation?. ;

. / The Witness: Simple ‘distillation would give a omen

- which would be of the same character as’ Hillis.

- [fol. 559]. Q. And in what proportions would the various”

_ ingredients be in if, if-you cap tell Be ne ce

bas aes would depend upon the: degree and ictonk or the Be :

- eracking. .He could crack it so that he could get it or he

.. would have some benzine left. -

% . Q. Does the article tell what to do to i it to get the » Bis

product? ; |

A. Not exactly, but if—— sss ene

: a . ]Q. I mean today, do-you know what to do ta it to ae

’ what he suggests, benzol, plus the Ellis product? Tell us

é a . how to make the Hillis ncaa with a bicrttcduin me a e

_ benzol in it, in a single passing through a hot tube, using _

gasoline as your starting point? : he, Qn

_ A,’ On page 4 of Patent No. 1,318,060, lines 72 to 77:

* “The herein described motor spirit, consisting —"”

get! The Master: That is the Ellis patent? fete eee bya

The Witness: Yes, = Pies

—¢onsisting of gasoline-like material of a complex char-

acter, carrying a substantial amount of unsaturated bodies, ~

_ | and having greater volatility than gasoline of corresponding

(fol. 560] If he thoroughly condensed his product from —~

there—- - .—s_. i RGU ie A

_ Q. Which‘ claim is that, Doctor? Pd aa et best -

|, A. No. 1. (Continued.) You would have such a: product, :

- because the benzol is unsaturated. Nee Pesce oe

The Master: You mean probably a product as Cabot re-

. ferredto? BS cepted Bd REE GE:

. Phe Witness: Yes, tliat is a benzol-cracked gasoline; tia

“« . is a gasoline that has come over and has cracked and would’

—\. be still lighter than it was when it started, if it was thor- ©

oughly condensed. © ee

* Q, And Cabot’s raw. product-would not ron a-motor? -

oe A Howisthett 3 et

- -Q..Cabot’s raw product, just ‘a8- be got it out of here, ee

_. would not run 4 motor, a modern motor? KG

A. I think it would, Modern motors will stand « good

= deal of mistreatment, hat I am referring to the question of:

the raw material, and for that material that is gotten out by

__., taking the product and then simply distilling it with nothing — y

a es Dae ee

Q. Would the product meet modern motor fuel specifica- Hees

_ tions? .\: sleih olin ccelyiae coy Ree ae gr ee

___ A. T do\not find any modern: motor/fuel specification in

pee tibe patent. eee sce eee

> Q. Well, the Ellis patent claims, does it not——- ee

poe Cee Me

Q. (continued). —in- each. im a motor spirit, or sub-

tially that language all the-way through; that-is the

2. =

“Oa

ard I do not find it even on page 3, where

;: > everybody treat to —_ gum rete in this ae day?

i‘, Mabe oe: =

Q. Now, the Ellis plolenl- which is bes by ‘passing

through a hot tube, requires treatment before it meets mes

>. Eillis’s gum test, does it not? I shi it i is freed from ——_.

te .

A. I think that i is true ‘but I canno et it in n the ait é

cation.

ee EEE ESS octor. ‘

A. I have gone through the patent sp sification rapidly ©

Q. Are you looking at Ellis Patent No.

A. Yes. x

_°Q. Ellis does treat: to get rid ha gum, does. he not? ray

A. He does not so state. _He-does treat with acid, but he .

does not state what the purpose. a; so far I have been able

- to find. =A a

' [fol.-661] Q.. Well, what i t is the purpose? \

A: How is that? nas \ ;

Q. What is the purpose aeicds

A. To geta water white product, in several places, is mien-

tidied. \

Q. Now, the ordinary hot ‘tube éracked produce will run

high in gum, will itnot? =. a

_ A. I:would expect a vapor phase pre ia process, each ,

= ‘as-Ellis’ hot tube, to be fairly high in gum.

~Q. And. the Cabot product would be ver up in gum, of

evieebe eee “— ;

hs seat equally ba: SSP ay Oh Ae ae

_ Q. So that’s Cabot’s—the most you could ‘bodied for: <2s5

"-Cabot is that his product, as he gets it out of his hot tube,

would be somewhere near like Ellis’s product before treat-

ment, differing by. containing pi sanyo quantities of

benzol? —

, A. The distillation of the. produet away from the carbon

- and residue would largely remove the gum of Cabot. ee *

The Master: ‘And of Ellis?

Mr. Wiles: And of. Ellis? .

_ The Witness: Ellis does not still afterwards.

"The Master: Oh. is

- Q.. Now, if distillation removes ade gum, ostens why does

2 oy

Gis ae PtP aY en ss

P Se

Ce nen per Ee

. ae Se is

5 Tee te,

. ; ~ ay

Pe Are

~ + A. They treat also for other purposes, not gum-alone-

_- Mr. Rauber: Mr. Wiles; reading this Claim 1 of Ellis,I

find it does not say anything about the gum. \Ate you ask- _

-. ing questions‘in regard to-that claim? pa as wee

. Mr. Wiles: I am asking him about Ellis’s preferred prod- .

uct. I think it perfectly well settled that no matter how. -

broad a man’s clajm is, it canhot cover more than: the J

* . equivalents of the actual things he describes, and it should

~ not ever cover less. The effort of the Court being to nd

out what the particular thing described in the-patent is, and —

' ¢onstrue to cover that thing, the comparison being always |

_. between two physical materials. rs |

: The Witness: Ellis calls attention that on evaporating

- in an open dish here he gets a greasy material, resembling .

very soft vaseline, which would prabably be the gummy.

_ part, but he removes it vith ai instead of by evaporation. |

That is, by distillation, he could get it out unquestionably,

in part. | ane |

- [fol. 562] Q. He gets rid of is gum by acid treatment; I

_ Mean gum forming constituents) of course? ~ hare

A. Yes, but he does more than that by his acid treatment.

Q. Yes, of course; but one of the things that he has to do

- to get rid of his gum forming constituents is to treat with

- acid? - . ae Te eg eee :

- A, Yes. - i: | Beer on

Q. That is one of the things he does do, does he not?

_ A. It is one of the things he does ddPyes. 9 = |”

_ +. Q. And that treatment gets rid of the gum forming con- —

— stituents? . | ‘Seas 3 ae =

_A. To a@ considerable extenj.

|. Q. And Cabot does not do that?, Brice s a.

A. It is obvious that you would distill off—if you had.

- ¢arbon and other materials, you would remove by tHe ordi- .-_

nary scheme of distillation. It is not my thought that Cabot

__ Uses the same process of getting-rid of his gummy ma-

terials, but that: that would be a natural one,. well known -

_ in the art at that time, and am obvious one. > ;

~ :Q. And your position is that simple distillation will get

Tid of the gumming. constituents? - |

> A Inpart. : ‘ ae

a woe : 3 : 7

Q. Gum forming dcaxtituentst i

A. In part. Sufficiently to have met the donation that ee

Ellis gives of his. product.

-Q. In all of his claims where he specifics “free from’

resinifying products’’? 7

A. No, but at least in—— - -

-Q. I want his specific product, Doctor. . Do not let-us =

quibble. about the words of a claim. I want his specific —

product, which he says is ‘‘gum free’’. Now, would distilla-

tion, in your judgment, get a gum ree prodnet or not? ‘It ;

isa perfectly simple question.

Mr. Rauber: You mean could you by. distillation wat rid

mean?

. Mr. Wiles: Would the ‘simple distillation ‘ is talking

about get rid of the gum free product, and if it wouldI =~

would like to-know why-all niy clients use so much acid. —

- of the gummy products, or do you always; which do you 4

‘The Witness: Mr. Wiles, listen to your question as ‘it is. oo

yead.. TI do not think it will read as you intend.

(Question repeated by the reporter.) :

Mr. Wiles: I do not intend to quibble about, words because :

[Omission in copy.—Priwrer.]

[fol. 563] Q. I mean simple distillation, would that free

-. a product from those constituents Which form gum. a

A. Yes, to a considérable exent.

_ Q. Enough to meet gum tests? |

\ A. If the‘amount present’ is not too large it would ho

sufficient to permit its use in the modern motor car; in an

average motor car.

Q. Now, do not dodgp m my question, ploase.. “We hin 3

I know there is gasoline that runs a car up to 500. milli-

it will meet gum tests which gasoline today ought to, meet,

. and which Ellis says. his product does meet. — a

~ A. Was there a gum test i in 1913 when his application wait Le

: filedt : think not. a

€ taken an awful lot of time. I asked you whether you could ©

-~ meet gum tests with it, not whether it would ran in a car.

_ grams, even if you do not know it. I want to know whether *. :

FQ: Yes, but he says it is substantially fee

A. Oh, those are the things that he. mentioned after he i :

~~ had made his invention. | :

Q. I am talking about his patenit.: ‘Twill argue the file

-wrapper with the Court and not with you.

Now, just tell me this: Will a simple distillation (this i is”

. - a fact, -not.a mat-er-of argument ‘about the Ellis patent) ee

asa matter of fact, will.a simple distillation of a hot tube ~

_ eracked product, like Cabot’s render! the* distillate sub- ae

_ stantially free from those bodies which form gum?

eo Mr. Myers: The only difference is you changed’ from.

“gum tests’? to ‘substantially free’’.

_ The Master: Answer that aneation; answer it either yes

or no, if you can, ° areee oaks

A. It would depend, to i some xt: on the raw. material’

' used, whether gasoline——

. Q. I am talking about Cabot’s smateriad:

A. Using gasoline as Cabot did wor his raw material, or

rather benzene, I know that it would remove a corisider-

able amount, but I am uncertain whether it would remove — $

sufficient to meet the 1925 copper vessel scheme of testing.

Q. Would it be ‘“substantially free’’?:

[fol. 564] A. I am not in a position to interpret the claim |

on that, and that does not occur, as I recall, in any place cs

in the specification.

Q. It appears on page 4:

“My product i in its preferred aspects has an iodine num-

ber of not less than 30, but preferably higher and even |

_. maybe in excess of 75 or 100, under some circumstances, -.

-.. and in.its preferred form is substantially free from olefines, —

oe nendily forming resineous bodies on exposure to‘air.’’ ©

AT did not recall that that was in the specifications. Fo

Be noticed it in the claims but not in the specification. .

‘The Master: Ass@ping ‘it to. be, what is ‘‘substantially XK

free’? How free has it got to be, to be ‘substantially e

free’?

=. The Witness: I would say that was free éhough to per- op.

mit it to be used in a motor car engine, and I would say —

= that. Cabot’s product, after distillation, would be that free.

es t would pn however, oy come to the 03 ‘per nt ed

, residue, which is the present—Nav y, is it, or aviation?

. Mr. Wiles: Navy.. ;

The Witness: Gasoline.

“9 Now, as a matter of fact, Ellis. Kenta Pers meet, if

you follow the patent—Ellis’ qaeotine does poe mget =

modern gum tests, does it not?

A. I do not know. ,. | :

Q. And the. fendants” cracked gasoline meets modern

gum tests, even more than half, do they not?

A. How is that? :

Q. The defendants’ cracked gasoline, at least my ‘lient? 8-2

gasoline— -

The Master: Which defendant? ae oa |

Mr, Wiles: My client, the Indiana. Company’ s cratked

gasoline, will have a fifty per cent margin under moderin

gum tests,‘will it not?

The Witness: I have never tested your Company’ S gaso- _ ;

ee line. :

pees) Matton: In order to identify it: I ask you if ‘your &

product i is made by the Ellis, process. -

. -. Mr. Wiles: It is distilled under: the Burton process, as

- we contend, and treated by the Ellis process.

. you?

Mr. Wiles: etcanits: : |

¥ The Master: Of course, as a ‘licensee you are interested

“in sustaining the patent. cee 3

Gee is ‘Wiles: Certainly.

“Q. ‘What, do you find i in the Cabot, any better than any

The. Master: That makes nae cen _ as to 2 |

hot tube cracking process, as a a reference to the Ellis prod- o

uct?

_. [fol.565] A. He happens to menition the scodubls formed, —

which is not true in many of the hot tube cracking pro-

.. cesses, as many of them. describe th r process and speak — |

of making gas, but théy have not analyzed the liquid prod-

': wets, and as such it makes a better reference. There are —

undoubtedly many plants which have made a product which -

. completely filled the requirements of the Ellis product, but < .

‘ which, it happens to be, we do not have, or: at. least we have =

not found written descriptions of their product. == S.

QQ You know ‘that-all of these ee ie hot tube processes, F .

"the gas-making processes, make some benzol, as a by-

Reproduetg. 9s | ae OE Se oie .

> ~A. In general. : cee RSS

. Q. So then, why is it—— . - me

A. But that was not known, as I understand it, at- the.

_ time of the Cabot publication, CE eee

Q: It was known in Ellis’ timé, was it not? —

A. Qh, yes, Ellis-knew it. Regt C Ee oe ais .

Q..At Ellis’ date, Cabot did not add anything to all the .

-. , common, well known hot tube gas making processes, every -

one of which made a little benzol as a by-product. .

- A. But Cabot’s date was 1877. Of course, Cabot did not ~

add anything to Ellis’. . eee ES BPE es

_ Q. And Cabot’s raw material is not any better for this .

purpose than the tar thrown down from-any common oil —

gas cracking process, is it?

| XY es, becauge~he starts here—he proposes to start.

~~ with a benzine, which would at once give us a second ma-

terial besides the benzol: It would make-a product meet-

ing the Ellis specifications..- ae oe

_ Q. Did you ever see any of these real hot tube processes

where any of the raw material got through in its original .

condition? Is it not all cracked up and rée-synthesized and |

: changed around? =§ — | ie a Soon ee

_ A. They are largely when you are taking a heavy‘hydro- —-

carbon, a large hydrocarbon molecule; using light hydro- .

carbon molecules; however, such as he suggests, the ben- ~

_ tine—one would expect a considerable portion to get

'.. through, particularly. if you did not carry your cracking |

_ 40 the extreme limit, but carried it to a normal amount. 3

Q. But if you want the maximum’ of benzel, you have.

. got to carry it to the extreme limit, have you not?

A. If-you want the maximum yield: ,_ SS

. Q. In other words, Cabot’s notion was to make benzol,

was it not? . 7 PRE ORs es oie

' [fol..566] . A. No. ck age gets

__. The Master: That was the object of his article, was to

_. make benzol? Fi beh es ee ea

_ The Witness: Not quite, your Honor. ‘‘In connection

.. With the manufacture of gas, the yield, even if quite

a ee

Q. He enagonte it asa shane for gettin more , benzo,

does he not? | a

er age connection with the manufactur of gas""—yer,

not as—— » :

Q. Gas and benzol i is what. he i is after?

A. ¥es, the twov |

Q. In other words, to get gas and benzol, you are going

to crack to the very limit penile, are you not; jot as. far

as you can go?,

A. No, if you will heat your benzol up you can get & gas

out of it, and you can craek benzol by heating further.

_ Q. But if you want nothing but gas and benzol, you will ©.

go just as far as you can go in ~ first passing, will you}

_ not?

Be Mees 3s pa ee

4 ‘And they do, suite: ig theses en’ :

A. (continued). Because if you went as far 2 as. you could ae

£0, you would have no benzol left. Wake

-Q. Get all gas? - :

. A. You would ‘decompose practically. all your benzol that

you would have formed in the first part of your tube; that’

would have. decomposed to give carbon and hydrogen, or. :

\ .

- Q. You would get all gas and little carbon? |

A. You could carry it through, yes.

_ earbon and ld hydrocarbons, such as ethylene.

Q. Do you not know, Doctor, that if you could do what

; you have just stated, you would be surpassing the best

efforts of the entire gas making industry?

A. It can be ‘done, has’ been done, but it cannot. be pie:

economically ; that is the question. If you will take a hot °

-. tube and heat it very hot you can complete the éracking’

clear down until you have practically ey carbon and abe

tically no benzol.. * a

[fol. 567] Q. That is not an economical ‘process; you say? se

. _ A, Oh, it is not an economical Bronce; I have not pre:

tended it is. :

-Q. Just where: was that. ever done? e

a ae has. bene —, for — | in university labora: ee

‘tories, = =

QQ. Where? pee o.

A. I thing Berthelot did some work of that kind’ in

France, and Davidson, working under Zeneth, did some — -

| work on papa down lower than benzol, ec

ape ~~ ——

_ gotten about this. In Louisiana, they are cracking ahydro-

a Q. And they got nothing but gas and carton?

“tie

. A. How is that?- Seago pees

Q. They got nothing but gas and carbon? |

with a C, H, molecule. They. can carry it by using more .

. . A. I think the largest molecule that they got was butylene

= moderate temperatures and get some benzol. _

Here is a commercial process that does it, I had for-’

carbon and getting carbon and hydrogen and essentially no

by-products. ‘I am.referring to the scheme worked out by © =

Dr. Brownlee for making carbon black: They.do have some _

methane uncracked afterwards. The product they are

. starting with is a hydrocarbon which is not gasoline or oil; —

it is a gaseous hydrocarbon.

—Q: They start with a gas and they subject it to combus-.. .. :

_tion with insufficient. air, and it smokes like a lamp, and. you.

get all gas left and some soat; that is about the process; is |

". it not? i ‘

A. No, I think you are thinking of andther ‘process, Mr.

‘Wiles.’ The scheme that I am thinking of gives you hydro-

~gen'as a by-product, which would not’ be true of such a

_ process as you have described. poste en 2

‘ — [fol. 568]; The Witness: It is a question as to wheltersa, x

_, Man in 1911 would use the same clay retorts as was prob- -..-

| ably used thirty-five years earlier in the retorts mentioned. -

by Cabot. However, presuming that he would use the ordi- |

nary type-of gas rétorts made of clay, with-a D shaped

_ erogs section, the flat side of the D being the bottom of the

’, retort, and heated them externally with coal or other fuel’

‘s

_. toa high temperature. -The method of laying out :the re- :

torts would be essentially that custotnary in gas plants; ae |

- that is, several retorts high, two or possibly three or even’

four. In such a case ds this I would think better results ~ :

- would be obtained by using only two retorts, one above the

cS Sa

_ other. These retorts would be joined to inlet and outlet:

- , pipes, the outlet pipe being one joined ‘to a suction: blower,

ieee

+ so that*there would be.a slight, but only a slight vacuum |

in the retort, say of one-half inch to one and a half inches

of water pressure, or in that general range.

The inlet oil might be flowed in directly or it might be —

. §prayed*into these hot retorts. °

The outlet gases would be passed through ‘some sort of

_ # cooling device, and either completely. cooled and vapors

precipitated out of them, or cooled to approximately ordi-

ary temperature and then sent into an absorption tower, |

-. where they would be treated with a wash oil, such as a Be

rather high boiling mineral oil having a low vapor pres-. | {

sure, this being the customary type \now used and then 4

used (that in 1911 used) in gas plants for the removal of -.

* eounter-current would be drawn off and reworked for the

vapors which it has absorbed from the gas. The gas would

penzol and similar vapors from illuminating gas made from —

.'. ‘his wash oil through which the gasses would pass

‘be passed on to a-storage tank, that is a\gas holder, pro- ©

- | vided they: were pure enough; that is, free-enough from

sulphur and similar products; if not, they would have to go “

_ through a purification house such as the ordinary gas plant —

contains.

{fol. 569] The benzolated oil or wash oil containing the

benzol and other vapors. which it has absorbed, would be

sent to a still and steam distilled. The steam distillation

would remove the benzol and benzine (gasoline), and this —

product would then be condensed, probably sent to another

‘building by means of a pipe-line, and redistilled and cut at _

_. the proper point. It might require, and possibly would

require, a chemical treatment, in order to. be Made into :

products of the highest character.

_ he Master: You jmean into commercial Denzol? |

The Witness: Into commercial benzol or a benzine mix: |

ture; commercial benzol and gasoline mixture. —

"T aid not state, but I should have stated that the retorts ~

would be fed according. to. Cabot with benzine (gasoline)

_ and if the retorts were at the right temperature and the

: feed was proper, we would get through a considerable por- |

tion of. this benzine or gasoline, unchanged, and this would.

be absorbed by: the wash oil and coine out with the benzol. —

- §o that we would have as a final product a motor spirit,

high in unsaturates, due to the benzol constituents,and also

’ to any olefines which would be produced by the cracking. —

." Tt is quite probable that when such a plant started up the

yield of good motor spirit would not be as large as after

- they had been operating for sometime and found. out. the

-optinum temperatures to which to heat and the maxim

- amount that could be fed to produce the desired gas

the desired condensate, we

I have not nilaicten se antiwecing tain dead ied

phases, as to how the furnace would be built and im

s of the unessential items. ;

aS teaching, I notice that the Cabot article, while it refers to _

gas making industry, as using retorts, suggests tubes)

- for his scheme. Do you draw a distinction there or why

- did you shift from what he suggested to the retorts?

__. A. Cabot says, ‘‘Here in the United States there are sev-

-~ eral methods of making illuminating gas — igrgear iss

by passing it into heated retorts——” —_.

In other words, Cabot says, ‘‘retarts.’’

_- Q. Yes, but. go on down the paragraph when he talks

‘about his own suggestion, he says, ‘‘tubes.””

: A. ‘*Tubes.’’ I would say that in my suggestion here

tubes could be used ag the equivalent of retorts. -

- —«Q, It would mak :

[fol. 570] A. oon any essential difference, pean Se that -

Q. Now, still on this same ‘issue of. directness of thie

ie in the case here you would not want to have‘your tubes too

small or carbon formation in the cracking ainisanse would

: \tend to clog them. |

_ \.Q. Now, how hot would you. heat these, bearing ‘i in 2 mind |

in what Cabot wanted was the beg resi seesh: of gas and

Of. |: | :

a ‘The Mader: ‘Te I wiietetend: the pablication, i it was a:

eR suggestion for making benzol. : Se

- Mr. Wiles: What? ee

_. he Master: If I understand any publidation; it was the :

_ suggestion of making benzol. “ Cabot is leaving out of sight

gas, that is: illuminating gas. He has in i produc-

tion of benzol. |

yesterday that he.contemplated both and I was willing td go |

with him on that, althotigh I quite agree with your Honor, =

that benzol ‘is what he really had. in mind.

Mr. Rauber: You mean that-you know of any case where :

‘they get ‘benzol or “cracked ——- without. getting. any a

gas? f Be eee

Mr. Wiles: Oh, no. Of course, he mete somie gas. .

- The Master: That is quite beside the mark.’ Here i is a

man that says, ‘‘I know how to make bensol’’; “there is the

- ewgetiamaeee et :

‘Mr. Wiles: I went:with the witness that far. He ieiated oe

ae Me: Wiles: Put it that way, Doosan: Here i is rete way a

oo to make benzol,’’ what would your temperature be? me

The Witness: I am inclined te think, quoting here again:

“In connection with the manufacture, ef gas, the yield

, (meaning the yield of binsels even: ‘if quite small might be .-.

_.' mnade to pay.’’ eo

'. [he Master: That is,.a picat seidabing hanect alone oe

Y might not be commercially profitable, but if united with an

C illuminating gas plant, you might make the two sucéess-.

. fully, that is all there is to that. |

Mr. Wiles: Yes, sir.

"The Master!~They_are doing that every day with t the by. ae

products i in the gas plants; toluol and benzol are being made:

_@ . and turned out as part of their products and being sold'as

| Bee part of their products of their operation.” er a

. Mr. Wiles: Yes. :

fh Al recall the tebbnevutinte used ¢, the innciatenteie Le

_of benzol, that is the distillation of coal i is he d.oetcn moet 3

a thousand degrees. . f

- Qi Centigrade? Masa 7 +

Sg fol, 571] <A. ‘Yes.

_ The Master: What i is s that Febrenbeitt

@. 26000 3

A. 1832° Fahrenheit. ee Rare oe

Q. That is the temperature that fou think one skilled in

: ae art. would run Cabot at? . oo

Mr, Rauber: Temperature of th@furnace e you ‘meant

- Mr! Wiles: The retort temperajire. _ ie

The Witness: That was. the ‘temperature. at which. gaa

_. plants normally operated when they are operating at the , —

high temperature to make present day ‘illuminating gas;.

when they are operating to make a larger yield of hydro-

carbons they apere at a decidedly lower temperature. -

—Q, Benzol, not generally hydrocarbon, but benzol.

— The Master: Just keep your mind fixed on the production ee

_- of benzol from benzine and forget the gas operation en-

tirely. That is Cabot’s disclosure. What temperature ae

_- would -be required in the cracking tube or retort in Sram a

-. to operate and produce benzol by operating on benzine.

: The baderomnsti Rs would eay a on such as Niki-

-”

arenes or 800 degrees Centigrade. . E

The Master: That is how much Fahrenheit?

‘The Witness: That is. 1 1 B88 Fahrenheit... :

Q. How much? © :

| AL 1,382,

@, Now, how eae eis Pe you ‘ae the eae in: that” |

gone;-I mean the material in the zoned of that: temperature

‘ for the manufacture ot benzolt That is, what i is the ime 3

‘element?

“A. Oh, it-wonld only be a part of a minnte. |

Q. Well, I want the part of a minute because T will do es :

. this thing just the way you tell me.

_ A. It is impossible to say without just knowing what the- i

feed it. I have suggested the rate: of: feed which would —

Spl 4 there. .

'Q. The feed determines the time clement, does it nott

“A. Yes, that is what I-say. ake

-Q. Now, how much time element would one ‘skilled:i in the’ =

art do to make benzo] without experiment? ae

[fol.572] A. If we held it there for a half a minnta, I =a

would expect td get.benzol. Whether. that would be the oe

_ optimum yield or optimum production of the plant i is. very ~

- seriously questioned by myself. |

- Q. But your recommendation would be te start this taivar

off at 1,382 degrees Fahrenheit ‘and an average rate which

» would produce a time in that zone of thirty seconds?

_,. A. I think we would. be safe in so dsing and that we

: Q. I did not ask you Ee would be safe; I asked winthen. is

__ . that is the best one skilldd in the art could. do as a start.

The Master: You mean whether it is bést or not, whether

feof icine tor mes same \ncaealia of abaos 750 0 degrees a :

oy using that temperature and time-one could get. benzolt ue

A. I feel that we would get benzol..

Q. And is that the time period for. treatment which y =e ae

- think one skilled in the art would use, if attempting, i in the

- light. of the Cabot disclosure, to practice the process he

E eEgestedt

A; It is the temperature and time which I would sug-

: - gest as probaly being one .satisfactory—that I-would sug-

gest to a plant operator to start off the plant operation *

upon, I do not think, however, that that i is oars! more -

eS ale a guess: as to that ae |

Tee + eee ~~

2740 - ra |

3 ‘The Master: Let ‘me oes Msisnitile the. difficulties of ©

handling extremely high temperatures, would one. skilled .

. in the art use lower temperature and longer time to ac-

” gomplish the result?

' Mhe Witness: Yes, Actually, if I was oureling as manager.

of that plant, I would not attempt to make benzol tht first *

try. The first thing I would do would be to send through -

gas slightly above-atmospheric pressure without any heat

to see if the. apparatus leaks; thé second think I. would’ GO | ia:

would. be to heat there to see if leaks developed on heat- ~~~

ing. . Then, after. we had found tbat the apparatus was .°

[fol. 573] leak proof, essentially so, we would try the ques- © ~

‘ tion of. running in the ‘‘benzine’’ (gasoline) of Cabot, and

Would gradually raise the temperature to see what the re- |

sults obtained were and keep 6n raising until we gat to the

. -point where we got the, benzol.: That was not the question

... that was asked me, though, as, to the method of starting up »

the plant. . ae

Q. In your outline of the way you would build and oper:

~ate this plant given in the beginning this afternoon, you

said you would first cool down—in your preferred method

you would first cool down to a normal temperature and —

- then scrub with wash water; was I right i in that? _Is that a

correct understanding? . ¢

A. Yes, to approximately normal: temperature. 2%

Q. By that you mean what, 100 degrees, something | like,

that? obs

A. 100 Fahvenhéit.

“Q. And in that cooling you would get some: - material pre-

ee would you not?

A. There would be carbon dust. catried over by the proc-

_- ess;:probably there would be a little dust from the casi

- and there might be some tar precipitated.

.. Q. Some tar? Now, thattar—— —_

, A..I mean by. that, heavy tar.

Q. Now, t t tar: would not be the motor uel you are.

ing about?

The

presets + Witness:

-- ‘would be liquid. |

‘- Q. That would: not be the motor: ‘fuel that you are say-.. .

ing would be naturally and: inevitably ne age in the’

_ operation of the Cabot sine : &

a Bisa st |

‘

: Would there be some liquid dvebunuat

1, that tar would be hot and as such it,

Bee mE Son ae

‘Q. Now, ‘that ‘would be a heavy thick thing like coal tar ..

when it was cooled? :

A. Yes. I am not veviain that siartine with a ‘raw ma-

- ‘terial like benzine, we would get an appreciable. amount,

_ but possibly we would.

_ _Q. Whatever it was that came out i in getting down to 160, :

would not be the motor sian anyhow; 100 Fahrenheit?”

A. No. '

‘ Q. You would scrub your gas of 100 with ¢ an oil like min-

'_ eralseal, or something like that?

A. Yes. : : ,

_ [fol.574] Q. And the first thing you would get. eee Seal

be a heavy mixture, principally “composed of. mineral. seal?

The Master: Answer yes or-no..

A. Yes, you would get a mineral ‘an saludo of your’

motor spirits.

_ .Q. And in that the’ mineral sat would be far the greater,

proportion and the other ingredients would be very, minor.

' proportion?

A. Yes, minor; I do.not know that we should say “very

minor.’’

_Q. At least seventy-five per vent mineral seal!

A. Yes..

Q. And 25 per cent of.the other? I will modify my ques-

tion: 90 to 95 per cent mineral seal and 5 per cent up to

. spossibly 10 per cent of the other ingredients?

_ A, It might be as much as 25 per cent of the other in-

gredients. It would depend on your iv apace to cool;

about how clear you wanted your gas from it. va

Q. Now, that mixture would not -be motor fuel? ©

A. ‘No.

- Q. Now, you’ take that over and you run that mixture in .

a still with steam taking off an overhead, do you not?

A. Taking off what? a,

Q. Taking off an overhead distillate from that. mineral

seal mixture?

‘A. Yes, you would probably run it into a column still.

-Q. ‘And you would put a cut point on it somewhere,

‘would you not? That is,. how would you make your cuts’ ,

when you make your distillate? — |

(A. In a column still you would. draw off the particular™

_» Portions. 4 : ea

"ed .

‘ ’

9742

Q. Yes. Sass: when you want benzil, as you are vunnid;

this plant—you are running this p ant for benzol? a

A. For benzol, yes.

Q. Where would your last cut be riadet yes

A. The last part that comes off through the dings:

7 Predk into your condenser. ean

Q. That would be your benzol ial lighter gas!

A. Benzol and ‘gasoline. :

~ Q. Benzol and Hehter gas?

ay pce eh : .

Q. And the endohiit on ‘that ati ina proper bubble Lee

would be where, for benzol manufacture ? pen Fes

A. If-we only. wanted benzol itself———_- - ~*~ #. ss

[fol. 575] Q. That is what'you are after in the Cabst proc, \

ess. What weuild ‘that cut\be; where would your endpoint —

be onthe overhead?

A. If we wanted only*be zol, our, cut would be at about

_ 200 degrees Fahrenheit. 3

~Q. And of: that prodt that Same ovr a 20 what pom

~ portion would be benzol? :

"A. Feeding it as cananerne with gasoline, probably. one-

_ third. . r

“> QQ. When you are running for the maximum of. benzol

you could not get but, one- ‘cana of the iepetions below 200

| benzol? eee Af ee h

. , A. Using benzine as : “Cabot edie ps a raw material,

we might readily not get more than one-third. »

Q. Now, you would have, you say, one cut with an end-"" . ~

point: of 200; what other cuts: would you take, just a heavy —

~ bottom cut. which you would re-run for benzol ; as you sug- <

postiets yesterday? - 3

A. I do mot “er just’ what you’ ‘mean by. “heavy bottom

i cut. PD. ee

Q. T beg your pardon, I was wrong on that queution; Dow

tor, because you are distilling out of mineral seal and you

) would want to have your tnineral seal, of course: Now, you -

would take another cut between mineral séal and benzol,.

. which would be all the rest between: 200 and the end; that) ae.

is right, is it not? Miki ie

{fol. 576] .A.. That is. right; yes, ‘aad that would be re-run ee

Tcccewed in ine copsee ea ee

Q. That you would re-run in the_process. N ow, it is this

first-cut with an endpoint of 200 that you say is motor —

spirit, am right i in that? . ae

. A. 'Yes. ; eet eos pi

‘The Master: Now, Dootor,. assuming that one wiih to »

..perfarm this operation. Wovld he look at the prior art

containing such things as Dewar and Redwood for a sug- °

gestion as to the building of his furiface and-his jiping and

his ‘necessary concomitants of his: structure to -ayiens his poe

operation? |

_A. Yes, ‘but not particularly Dewar and ‘Redwood. Pe

think we would find much better. ° 3 | .

- .The Master: As for instance? : :

The Witness: Well, in Intschick, ‘the fcsiina | andi in a’ ~

‘number of the ones which are concerned with higher tem- .

perature crackings, such as. ‘Dewar and Redwood.

Theré occurs to me one phrase Fused that possibly should

be explained a little. I said Oe ae ses

T-saidatso that we v would be spea ing of a steam distilla-

tion. I really. meant cut where we would if we were dry!

distilling at 200, but we were ony ae it out with a steam eee

: distillation. NO

Q.: What the aiteiition eas. and I think you answered it. -

correctly, was that for benzol you would run til the end-

‘ © point of your overhead or distillate was iy Pinta Fae pe

A. If that was the question I answered it correctly; if

it was in the other-point, sinply sto where the cut woulc

be, then it needs the explanation that IThaveadded. -

Q. That overhead distillate has an ‘endpoint of 200%

“A. Yes. cg |

~Q. We are together on that?

jy” a ae .

Q. Now, I want to take up the Thorp & Toisas reference.

‘The Master: Before you leave that, I want to know what

“unsaturated bodies of the aliphatic series, corresponding

. to an, iodine number of about 75’’ means. I do not know ©

what that means at all; it is Greek to me.

The Witness :. That would mean, in weaved, the products”

that we have been speaking of as olefines, or it would also

-. include our diolefines; that is, ones that have two unsatur-: _

ated groups in them. If we used the term ‘unsaturated

. _ . bodies’’ without aieter ‘tof the naauaut beries’” we

(2744

would then bastuile as well such products. as benzol and

~ several others.

[fol.577] The Master: But if you use ‘‘unsaturated bodies

of the aliphatie*series’’ you would not include benzol f |

_ The Witness :, That is right.

. Q. And as shown by you the other day, the benza] Meas a

very low iodine number?

‘A. Yes; however, a relatively high sulphuric acid un- |

saturation.

The Master: Of course, if you had a spirit osntainiie a

‘substantial amount of unstable, unsaturated bodies, - thep

you might include benvol? F

'—.. The Witness: It would never be unstable; it might ‘6

‘asable, it might be sfable and still include it; for example

here the first claim.

The Master: But-if those Fequiremenits were there, that

it should, be ‘‘stable, saturated bodies——”’

The Witness: Benzol would still fit.

- Q. Benzol is extremely stable, is it not?

A. Exceptionally. 7

Q. And these unsaturated aliphatic compounds are, some —

of them, of the unstable character? 3

.+ A. Particularly dislefines.. ‘|

_Q. Exaetly. And are the olefines’ more or. less stable

than the benzol?-’ |

A. The olefines are tiie stable than the benzol towards :

most, though not all, chemical re-agents. - eh

Q. ’ How about the things that happen in normal handling

of fuels, such for example, exposure to light, and exposure ~ ..,

for long times to elevated temperaturés, as in the tropics)

and so forth?

+ A. I would expect that the olefine hydrocarbons would:

be less stable than: benzol. |

~)°.Q: Much more or very little different?

~ “A. I would expect those with larger molecules to be de"

-cidedly less stable. .

‘Q.. t is the heavy ones that are Jilkel t6 go off ? ?

A. What does ‘‘off’’ mean? met ee:

QQ I mean which would break down d give you the un ais

tesults that instability gives y

(fol. 578] A. ewe: ones are gan at nore

’ . /

} 2745

Q. Yes. And bhew. 6 are partiailiaitee susceptible to these

other re-actions, like light .and long continued temperature |

- and the normal oxidation and the other things thiat happén -. -

to fuel when it has;to be stored and handled? - .

A. I am not very certain in answer to the last question. :

I have seen statements to that effect; I have also seen state-

ments that it was not that; people thought they had olefines. .

of large molecular weight ‘when they had some olefines: i in

it, which were perticularly sensitive. — te

Q. These troubles, .I suppose we both understand, that~~—

j occur. to fuel, happen ‘by reason of something in the higher

part—higher boiling part. of the fuel or the lower boiling

= of the fuel?

A. Both, but, possibly more in the upper half of ay fuel...

Q. Considerably more? ;

‘A. I do not know. We do know this; that: larger ‘mole-

cules ordinarily have more color to them and if we increase

~ the size of the molecules, having even the same chemical re-

action ; we are likely to increase the amount of color dispro- —

portionately as compared with what we increase the size of °'

the molecule, so I cannot sayas to that phase with certainty.

Q. Naw, I want-to take up this ee and ——— trad ‘oe

lication. |

_ A, Which’oné? . There are , several.

Q. Well, the group which you uged as a reference atid

this Fllis patent, and if I am not mistaken, the part that you

used as a reference was the description of ‘the product .

which they got by. distilling in their 4 iron mereury bottles ;

that is correct is it not?

A. In the first disclosure in ‘the earliest article, they de-

scribe it as a product made on the larger. scales. In their .

second article they say the same thing. can be carried’ out in

pieces of. strong composition tubing, that is, in glass.

‘In the third article, they describe both methods, I think,

so that we have two descriptions of the use of glass appa-

- ratus and two of the use of larger quantities. :

Q. Those are. several: ‘papers by the same’ people, before

“3 "different bodies or different times before the same Days

ere about the same work, aren’t they? :

‘A. Yes. - ‘ \

_.Q. And they wae ‘really two: experiments—one was in.

i ‘tol: 579] glass, aud the other wag a larger. scale experi-

oY ment in mercury bottles—is that true? — 7

2746

poo oo “KI think that is correct. ve

Q. And the one. you rely-on here, is the datailed descrip:

tion of the‘mercury bottle result,-isn’t it? —

A. Yes, but he states that’ the two are essentially the Be:

same.’, . -

Q: Now, in this operation with the mercury bottles, they .

_ had about.a gallon,:in all, of their, total ‘Product—that is

| eat ‘isn’t it?

A. A little over a gallon. .

«* The Master: What is a mercury bottle? Pai

The ‘Witness: A mercury bottle is—w generally speak

- efit in this country ab a flask. It is a bottle in which mer- |.

gury is shipped. ‘It is really an iron. vessel, made; essén-

tially, bottle shaped. Glass wouldn’t stand it—and carry-

ing, I think,.75 pounds of mercury—I am not quite - -certain®

as to the exact commercial amount, but it is about 75°

pounds. So that that would make it about a gallon and. a

half container, made of iron, atid made so that it gan be.

closed up—that is, threaded at the top.

The. Master: What Thorpe and Young were. fescribing

was a laboratory experiment, and the kind-of-an ‘instrument ©

that they used in this laboratory experiment, when they :

said that ‘‘we used a mercury. bottle??? ; :

' The Witness: That is a]l—it is‘simply-an ordinary piece ©

of apparatus that would be around a laboratory as they buy

mercury in the laboratory—it would come to them in this”

form, and they used two of those containers. a

Mr. Wiles: And they made a little still, using two of

‘ those cast iron bottles that the mercury comes in. One they >

used for a still, and the other, just like it, they used fora —

_ condenser and. dipped itin water. |

‘Q: Is it your contention that this gallon of product: that:

they first made—their first product—ik a motor spirit, like |

‘the Ellis motor spirit?

A, No, I would-say that the product that they described

as a distillate, when they spoke of distilling into two or”.

_ three fractions, 4

—, Q. Well, all right, I will ome to that,. We would save ~

lots of time if you would just answer the question and let.

. me put the next one. vas -

- ‘Now, having this original mistoriel, they cut that into is

4 wee tian first eut was thatawhich boiled below a hun-..

(iene Stt 2747

° 7

dred Centigrade, or 212 Fahrenheit, atnounting to three-

tenths of a litré—that is correct, isn’t it?

og) 580] “4. So I understand. © : 3 "S404

-- Q. How much is ‘that thrée- tenths of a litre, i in gallons? —

The Master: Ask him a fair question and we will have

done with it; This was a’ laboratory experiment, made with .

‘such apparatus as-one would pick up around a laboratory —

. and perform a laboratory experiment?

The Witness: Yes, that is correct,—but’ ‘a large sized

isboratory experiment.

The Master: Well , the usual size for an ordinary labora-

_ tory experiment?

The Witness: Yes, sir. as.

The Master: Why waste fur ther, time on it? :

A. Answering your question—about a twelfth of a aah f

Some 8

Q. Now, is that twelfth of a gallon the motor apirlt that

you set up here?

A, What do you mean by set up here?’’ 3

«Q. Is that first twelfth of.a gallon boiling below o12 Fah- !

renheit, the motor spirit which you say is the: Ellis motor

é “ain

_ A. It could be used as a motor spirit, and it would: be janhy

as‘is described by Ellis, but, as I’ recall it, I. said ‘that we

_ would mix the first two fractions—— »

Q. Thorpe and Young didn’t do. that, aid they? They

‘separated them?

_. A. They were after getting out the individual constitu-

ents. This was only a Aven in getting the individual con-

stituents. . tg

Baiiatly: Maybe I am ‘wrong in my. theory, bat’

~The Master: Now, let ué get this. Was the result ‘of the.

. Thorpe and Young laboratory experiment a motor. spirit

- consisting of gasoline-like material, of a complex character,

i a.

containing a substantia] amount of unsaturated bodies!

The Witness.. Absolutely. :

. The Master: And having greater volatility. than gasolin 5

of corresponding specific gravity! ts

‘The Witness: It was... “3

Mr. Wiles: Just a moment. You- Honor’s- question as-

sumes that there was.a single product in the Thorpe and

ag callsipeed _— i am a not to wante = aes |

Vedio

2748

but nia I can save a lot of this diseussion, _ and

forth, if I state my: position. -

Phe Master: Go to it, wihout, any further discussion |

"with me, Go to it with the witness. ;

Q. Now, the-point I am trying to get at is this: Thorpe

_. and Young ended up with a very large number of: separate. 5

products, and I want to know which—that is’what I am in- |

quiring about—where,, in this process, did they have a .

motor spirit? And I am not going to-dispute with you .

about the possibility ef blending up, out of anticedent, ‘or

other materials, an’ Ellis-motor spirit. If you went to /the

chemist’s shelves and picked out the stuff—you ‘could an

ze them, if somebody told you how

The. Master: You mean, could\they, at the final end of-

their process, fractionate off a suistance whicli would cor-

/Xespond to.that claim?

Mr. Wiles: Did they, at any time, do it? Did. they have _ -

anything, here, that was motor spirit? ~~ e

A. I could answer that very quickly by saying ‘that at

that-time there were no motors; but in 1911, a man, reading |

this, could, without difficulty, by making his endpoint 200

degrees ©, have.a product which would be a motor pri in

every sense similar to that of Ellis. §

The Master: By following the process followed by —

Thorpe and Young for its ‘reduction, and using apparatus -

known in the prior art, he. could have arrived at that motor

_ Spirit? .

-.. The Witness: Yes, sir.

' Mr. Wiles: If somebody told him. Bly

The Master: No, ‘no—he says that is in the distlosure. *.

He says he would draw it off at the ptoper fractionating.

point. . a

| Mr. Wiles: If somebody told-him how to do it. I want

| to get these questions of mine a da if I can: *

Q. Now, this twelfth of a gallon’ of stuff that boiled be-

low. 212 Fahrenheit, which was Thorpe and Young’s first

pe ge is it your position that that cut—which was tlie

se a they. had--corresponds to the Ellis motor

Eo say it corresponds to Ellis’ deeoription of -his mot. fe a

— eet Ses ene writen e220. 6 moter ail,

P . ; ee fe

; ee

x , . 9

. 4 .

‘ . ae |

; (2749

yp: iy . ms : : IM g ! my

It would be too good a product to be used as a motor spirit

. commercially, becande we’ could use just as: well a poorer

, product, and. thereby \make ‘it cheaper. sively!

Q. Now, that particNar product, boiling up to 212, is.one

_ of ‘the Thorpe and Young fractions, which you say is the

jEllis motor spirit, is that right? er ees.

; (fol. 582] A. I say it corresponds to his description of his

motor spirit. 3 as a? ah

;

The Master: When you say ‘‘his,’? you mean Ellis? ~~

. + The, Witness : Yes, sir. elas |

_ The Master: Do you think that if you have made, your’

claim too broad, yot' can save your claim, now, by a dis: ©

claimer ?. ee | oe ark Niet Sah PMA Te jae

‘Mr. Wiles: You can alway disclaim, provided there are

_ other claims. But there are some-very specific claims here,

_ » your Honor, and I don’t think any of these are met, but I °:

want the witness’s position on these specific products.’

That is what I am after, and I am entitled to get‘a compari-

“son on it...Some of these claims are extremely narrow—

that is, they are specific, ‘as to Ellis’ product.

“* Q, Now, will you tell me how this first cut, boiling up to °

212, about a twelfth of a gallon, Thotpe.and Young’s ‘cor- _

responds to the specific thing described in the Ellis patent,

- as his motor spirit? Maes As Matinee Packs ; ae

_ A. It must be borne in mind that Thorpe and Young gave.

it a refining process, as well. Do you mean to cut out the.

_Tefining process? © = © hg -

_ ' Q. Just a moment. I am just going that far—this first |

_ cut—at. that stage, did that correspond to the. rom Tyee

spirit? - aN Ne gy Aeatee Eee

__ A. It corresponded to ‘the: Ellis description of his motor

Spirit, - oe RES - Pell Sot:

Q. I mean, the physical thing that Ellis described?

, The Master: Have you ever seen any of Ellis’ physical ©

The Witness: No, your Honor, . |

_ Phe Master: Well, then, you cannot answer, ”

. Q. Well, it is fully described, el ae

____ The.Master: He has told you that it corresponds to hig

_ Mescription of it. . Reagile a | ) ge:

, ‘

- 2750 ye a

. Mr. Wiles: The road claims, he is: talking aboaks

'. The Master: Which of your lata do you want him to

| compare with?

Mr. Wiles: What I really wanted compareid with i is the

af specification.

oe grees.

‘Q. How does it compare, Doetor: with the physical ma-~

_ terial described in the Ellis specifications? -

’ The Master: That is on which page? -

Mr. Wiles: There is a long description of it.

The Master: There is a’whole lot of process in this, and

-_[fol.583] it gets down, soeroe a think it is at the bottom

of ‘page 8, about line 120, cee :

The Witness: I would say that it-would correspond. to

- that of lines 117 to 125.

I would say, further, that it would not ‘correspond to what’ °

he gives as a specific instance, having a Baume of (52 det .

It isa better gasoline than: a 52 degree gasoline would, a

. be—that i is, a higher grade product. |.

Q. And would it meet modern motor fuel specifications! :

The Master: When you come to your theory of .confin- 3

ing your claim, and. saving your claim, by reference to your -.

specification, you have got to deal with this very gerieral

‘description which might corréspond to the\first claim. “

The Witness: It probably could be used) but I doubt if.

it would meet modern motor fuel specifications, which deal .

essentially, with the presence of olefines, until it has been»

~-earried through the operations given four line below the...

table on the next page—page 188,—‘‘after repeated dis-

tillations over See fen aan is ‘refining ny the — x

be sodium. :

'Q. I will come to that i in a minute. q will get to. it ‘all,

before we/get through, and we will save lots of time if you

oe will answer the question. Do you think the first cut, boil-.~

- ing to a hundred, would not: meet modern. specifications for A

‘motor fuel oilf *

A, These low: boiling products, as was anid earlier this :

ae afternoon, are generally relatively free: from fhe color pro- a

- dueing products, and, as such, it is quite possible—in fact,

ae ‘we would have to repeat exe experiment to find out whether.

aeeemememenaian july pamemmemmenetmion ~—

; ‘it was true, or notothint this low boiling onda: oiling | a

27 SL

below # hundred degrees, might be free enough from gum ‘

and. color material; to meet the specifications for motér

fuel—and there is an even chance that there would be, I

seannot say definitely, because I have not carried it dut.

. The Master: What if you re-distill it? ; ne

The. Witness: Oh, if you take it and re-distill + it wala:

Mr. Wiles: I just want to find out what Thorpe and

” Young did—not: what they might have done. ;

The Witness: Well, they did it.

Q. What. about the endpoint on PS i you think a

product boiling with an endpoint of 212, would meet Lica!

as specifications ?

A. You. are choosing the’ épecifications ek are the _

~ hardest to meet. The State specifications, for example—— =

-The Master: ‘This don’t have to meet the: Navy specifica-

[fol. 584] tions When it is put through the process of

Thorpe and Young, would it meet bicccs Po and not the Navy .

_ specifications—that is the question.

~ +. Mr. Wiles: I have assumed, all the way through; that

Ellis describes, and his claim is ‘limited to a practical, usable '

‘ motor spirit. It says so * every — I will. baler, ital

the question.

Q: Do you think that this first dae of which asi was

only one-twelfth of a gallon, would be a proper.and suitable |

and safe fuel to put in a motor car-and run it? i

A. \As I said once before, it was too volatile, too good s a

. gasoline to be used commercially. It would be a better -

product, .in the. way of gasoline,’ than the ordinary user E

- would want,-because it would cost him.more, in the first 4

place, and, in the second place, it would be quite volatile.

On.a day like this it could be used without the slighest

ee Miicnulty.

Q. And when- you say ‘400 eend: ig ao you mean it-would

eg satisfactory to the user than - ordinary. gasoline

be—forgetting the price, altogether? —_

oT It would be, as I said, rather volatile, and unneces-

--Sarily volatile, but it- could be used. Whether it would be

mee satisfactory, or not, would depend = the kind -

carburetor he had in his engine...‘ .

Q. Now, take that: first product, that was ; distilled over.

eo podine, and cut into three neperate ¢ cuts, wean tit?

2752

A. ‘After repeated. distillations ‘ over sii. ate

Q. It was repeatedly distilled over ‘sodium into ‘those -

cuts, wasn’t.it? Isn’t that your ynderstanding? That i Te:

that that was all the distillation and re-distillation neces-

‘sary to- get it into these very narrow ‘cuts?’

A. I am inclined to think that the text, reading as it,

does, would imply thatthe cuts were only made towards

\ the latter part of it, though it. might have possibly hap-_ -

pened then, because he says ‘‘after repeated distillation

over sodium, this portion was almost completely resolved

- into three fractions.’’

Q. But if you will look at the narrowness of those frac-

tions—one of them. 32 to 38, and- 65 to 70, and the other 94.

to g— -

A. There is no difficulty, with laboratory apparatus in.

Biers euts as close as that—— :

Q. Wait.a minute—with the large gap between: them—

_ doesn’t that indicate that the repeated distillations were

" required to get them into those narrow cuts?

- A. If we. would use a Young column—a glass ‘column - S

about two and a half feet high—on top of our flask, such as

is known as a Young column—it is probable. that we could

accomplish what they have’ accomplished . in a = dis-

~~ -tillation. «

~ Tf, on the other hand, they. used, no Young column, but

’ used a simple flask, without any type of: column, then it a

* would take repeated distillations to do it. a

- Q. Doesn’t the fact that they used the repeated distilla-

tions and got these very narrow cuts, paige itty that. that is

the way they did it? — :

A. I don’t know:

| Q. It might‘be. - I will withdraw the question: You ‘i 4 ee

' know. Now, this first major fraction was put into these.

three little cuts, and of the first one, as I recall it, there

‘was less than five cubic centimeters—is that: right? That 2h

-. is what hangs in my head. | >

A. Ithinknot. ee

- Q: Yes—didn’t amount .to five cubic Centimeters—that. a

is correct, isn’t it? 5 ie

A. No. That is the part’ boiling below the first cut. The ay

- [fol. 585] first cut was 32 to 38, and the part boiling 30. did a

% not amount to five cubic centimeters. ees ee

Q. You are right. This first cut, then, 32 to 38—does he

_ state how much that was?

eM aol believe nots: os) Pe seciel YE

Q. He said it was far too small to attempt the. prepara-~ |

‘ tion of any derivatives from it, didn’t he? | YY

A. But he did prepare a derivative from it.

Q.. No—the cut from 32 to 38—didn’t he say’ that?. i

A. He prepared a bromide—treated it with bromine— .

and he also obtained quintane, which we, at the present day,

’ call pentane, . in eet | Rees Fay

Q. Then, does he state how much there was in this first fe

little cut—can you tell? Be te RS

- A. No, he says that the pentane obtained was far 00

_. small to attempt the preparation of any derivatives ‘from

_it., The brominated .portion he analyzed, and identified, is a

_ and— = * .. Mee, ae Z Venere

Q. I understand. But the total of the first cut of | the |

first main fraction, you can’t tell how much there was,-of ?:

A. There is no statement here as to how much it was.

. The. derivative he obtained, you notice he gives as-amyline..

‘bromide, — ATR NIG he eae,

_. Q. Is it your impression that that.first smaller cut, or sec- :

. ondary cut, of 32 to 38, Centrigrade, is a suitable motor fuel,.

ee OR MAOtOr apirit?: ©! ee ee ee eet |

». ’ A. It is a material commonly present in gasoline, as, for

example, in the Bulletin, No. 15, of the Kansas City Test-

ing Laboratory, it says: ~ oe eagtunin 7 PO ake

__ “Ordinary gasoline made by natural distillation of Mid- .

_ Continental crude, will contain several or all of the follow- -

~.* ing substances.’’ : NEMS PA tage ee

The first substance it.gives is pentane—the material that

he got out here. oes peta ‘

~ Q. Now, do you understand that that is what I asked 3

yout ~~ OE One OR a a pierces

~~, A. I thought I was answering your question,. ge

__Q. T asked you,—and I wish you would answer the ques- .

tion, and not something else—whether this material, boil-

_ ing from 32 to 38 Centigrade, is, in itself @ suitable motor: —

» faelf . Wigs GEO Pas er ee i ag :

__, A. No, it is too low boiling, ‘excepting for the first end ©

_. of the material. EE SG et

2754

ie Now, the seneadl eut of the first major fraction was 65...

to 70 Centigrade—was that. cut a suitable motor fuel?

A. That could be used in winter time without any trouble,

as a motor fuel for ordinary cars.

Q. It is as light as casinghead, isn’t it?. :

[fol, 586]. A. Yes, but it boils at about 150 Phecabeli:

Q. And you say that isa suitable motor fuel?

A. I said it could be used in the winter time as a motor

fuel.

Q. Satisfactorily?

Mr. Rauber: For what motors?

ee Satisfactorily i in many cars, for at door oak: It e .

too volatile to be used in the summier time, and ‘possibly. in

some motors. hee

Mr, ‘Rauber: Your Honor: ¥-do ink these questions

~. should be limited to motor cars. There is nothing said in

the Ellis patent about motor cars. . ‘There are aeroplanes _

and other mite Pe

" . Q. Now, the third. prodaetion. that | Thorpe and ‘Young .

- had from this first major cut, boiling at 94 hrm 97 Centi- ..

eer yl —is that a suitable motor fuel-—a satisfactory motor _

fuel ~e

‘A. It is ‘a constituent of sehen fuel, which meets your po

- fifty per cent. requirement of aviation gasoline. —

. Q. Now, do you think that answers the question? __,

A. Well, I den’t think. your question is at alla fair one. ©.

You are not at all fair in attempting to quibble, here, asto -

what a motor fuel is. You know and I know what it i is, and «+

why try to mislead in the metter? Be

~Q. ust answer my questicn, ‘whether you think iti is is fair, ae

or not?. 7 :

A. I don’t think it is fair. : :

Q. ‘The Master will stop me, if my eciias are not fair.

If you will just answer them we will get ‘along a whole lot .

-.. better, Would this ent, 94 to.97, in your judgment, be a

satisfactory motor fuel?. — oo

A. Yes, when mixed with a smal amount of lower boiling, 3

~Q How abont it by itself? he *

A. I don’t know. It is a. eat a wed do

I ne a Ie sapere ot mitons, arta

9755

larly those which ordinarily operate on kerosene, This one

“would operate without difficultly, in certain motors. - It js

lacks the low boiling point that would be required in some.

' motors which depend upon having a low boiling. constituent.

Q. The third cut, boiling above 200, you would not con- *

sider a suitable and proper motor fuel, I presume? .

(fol. 587] \A. It would be a suitable motor fuel for. the

type of tractors which use, in some cases, kerosene, or prod- ‘

ucts intermediate between kerosene and gasoline. It would

‘not be a satisfactory motor fuel for those motors which

‘normally use,low boiling products, such as gasoline. Weisgess

_-.Q. And that is true of any of the-higher fractions that _

- are above 200?. SSE aie

f -

forming ingredients, in the first place, because of their low

product “woul S

bat I was inclined to think that it probably would be low .

_ A. It is always trué“in general, ae t, i

___—Q.-Alt right.” Now, you stated, I believe, that these first -

tree little cuts, from the first fraction below a hundred,

you couldn’t tell as to the presence. or ‘absence of ‘gum-

boiling point—that is correct, is it not? . —

*A. No, that is not correct. .- + ©

_-Q. Didn’t you say that you couldn’t tell whether that

fraction below a hundred, would have any gum-forming’ -

constituents init? 2 | say

_ A. Tean, if you will give it to me and le

Q. I mean, from the publication.

“stating his position.

Q. What is your position? Phe aad sa

‘The Witness: No, you have misquoted me, in part.

A. Y sald i" I didn’t know whether that low boiling

carry color and gum-forming constituents,

enough to be permitted to be used without any further treat-

-, Ment, because it was a low boiling constituent, but that I

_. had not tested it. - a fs

-__ Q. When -we come ‘to a fraction between a-hundred and __

’ two hyndred—the original, second main cut—that con- .

___. Sisted of one litre—a quart, didn’t it? - | ee ee,

A. A litre is about a quart, yes.

Q. And that was the amount of that cut? “aye

ee - ec se

Mr. Rauber: Do’ you mean if it was treated with sodium? _-

_ Mr, Wiles; No, before it came o er. I thought I was

«-

;

2756). “ es ivist : <

Q. Would that carry these gum-forming. ingredients?

A. It might, until it was distilled over. sodium, as given

on page 192.

9. Do you think it would,. as-it-came over?

A. Came over sodium treatment, or before?

. no—the first distillation, which was withoni - ~

~ sodium—would that cut into three major ingredients, from

a hundred to two hundred, I am talking about—the first

major cut, or about a quart.

[fol. 588]. Now, in your opinion, did that cut contain these

gum-forming constituents, or not? :

A. Probably some, but whether enough to be recor npc.

1 don’t knew.

Q. Now, take that out as a whole, a hundred to two hun.

' dred—is that a suitable motor fuel?

A. For some types of motors, yes. |

’ Q. For the ordinary gas engine of 1912 and 1913.

A. They never use a liquid in a gas engine—or fuel—_

you use it in a gasoline engine, but not in a gas engine. a

Q. Now, would the second primary cut,-from the Thorpe |

‘and Young operation, consisting of about a quart,. boiling

from a hundred to two hundred—that is, 212 to 392 Fahren-

heit—be, in your judgment, a suitable fuel for the rdnning ~

of an ordinary automobile" engine, of the ordinary type,

existing | in Ellis’ day. oe

A. I:don’t: think it would. It would. need about fifteen

per cent more of lower boiling products—pethaps ten per

" eent would be ample—thongh if would work in other types

of explosion motors, other than the one—— . .

The Master: Internal combustion motors?

- The Witness: Yes, other thay the one that you peri :

* Tarly mention. — ‘

Q.. Now, that' second cut, ‘consisting of about a mie was

- subdivided by Thorpe and Young, into how many smaller :

fractions? Just tell me the number. 4

'- A, Into four fractions, which were then subdivided after-

a wards,

Q. Four of those were further subdivided.

A, Yes, sir.

{fol 589). How many did he get, finally, out of “|

four?

AT think he obtained — materials out of the met

_ themselves, have been a suitable fuel for use in a motor car

. motor spirit, and the narrower the group of ;

=, . BmST

Q. He finally got eight lots?

treatment and partly by distillation.

Q. There were four primary cuts?

_ AL Yes, sir. sb aR 8 aia ge

Q. Now, would any of those products, or cuts, alone, by

in Ellis’ day?.- If so, which ones? id :

A. As we here, we, in general, narrow the type of

internal com-

‘bustion motors, fhat it. can. be used in; - Limitin

narrow jimits that you did, of motor cars—a:

A. The second sub-division was partially by chemical

ing it to-the—

and I presumed -

you referred to internal combustion engines, rather than ~

to motor cars of the steam type, such as the White——__—--

| Q. Tdidn’t mean the Stanley steamer, or anything of that _

kind. I referred to internal combustion engines. -- ¢.

A. It would be an undesirable motor spirit.

The Master: That is, before it was refined by re-distill- ie

int «

The Witness: And cracking; and ‘adding to it the light

ends, such as casinghead. | :

_Q. The point was’ not that before refining, it was not the

_” able‘motor. fuel? . | | eae He

_ A. That is, of course, true, with ordinary gasoline—that -

- no one of the narrow cuts is suitable motor fuel, |

- The Master: That is not Ellis’ patent.. Ellis’ patent |

__ takes ordinary gasoline and refines it, she

right product—that is, this was the final product after re-

fining, when.he got done—no one of these cuts was a. snit-

——

_ Q. Now, you have stated that this distillation’ over so-

' dium ‘would remove the gum which would originally be ~~

present after this major cut, No. 2, boiling from 212 to |

392—what is the evidétice for that statement, please?

_.. Gum-forming constituents, is what I mean. :

’

‘ ¢

__._A. It is a common laboratory method of removing such

, Products. It.is also a commercial—or, rather, described ©

as 4 possible commercial method of causing chemical ac-

tions on diolefines, which are tH products, which we under-

stand, generally, as producing gum. | a .

_ [refer particularly to the Perkin patent, on the use of

_ sodium’on diolefines, and to the work of the German Com-

hes

pany, of which doaiaiveae was the sianaging director—I

think it is. the llberfeld Company—in which they used it

. in a commercial way, though only in a small production..

[fol. 590]. Q. When was it learned that the gum- forming

. constituents are the diolefines?

A. ‘That has, been the general impression for a considet- :

able ti Certainly we know that the diolefines are much

more / e-active, chemically,.than the monolefines.

my earlier testimony I said that this was a common =

ef. I don’t know the history of it, and there may be

"some error in it, but it is the common belief. . -:

-/ -Q. What is the first mention in the literature, anywhere;

/ of the presence of any gasoline, or a gasoline-like material,

of these gum-forming-ingredients? . - 3

. A. I don’t know what the first mention is.

Q. As far’as you know, Ellis may have discovered ‘then ee:

and removed them both, for the first time, as a conscious ¢

‘ action, may he not? ae a =

- Mr. Rauber: Does Ellis ination diclefines? eee

. Mr. Wiles:. No, but I asked him where he found the first

eet _ mention of gum-forming matter in gasoline, at all.

. A, I know that it has been commonly considered that the :

‘diolefines are responsible for. color and responsible | for — oF

_ gummy materials. :

I know, farther, 2 sulphuric acid is a material which,

~ when diolefines are treated with it, gives a tarry product, :

and as sulphuric acid treatment of the. hydrocarbons, to give

_ tarry products, have:been known for many, many yéars— —

. well, back in the Kerosene art, of half a century ago—then

one would think that this scheme of removal, and the in-

ference that it was due to the products which gave tarry

pee a with a acid, was eo periine® at that.

Q It ja a fact, isn't bi, ecko dheliokes oie ea os 2

oi—many oils that do not have these gum-forming ingre- a)

: * [oe them—with sulphuric acid, you will get a ‘tarry

A acts te prvoe that thy tn wot have thet ae

_Q. I did not ask that. You that as an argument on

known. atoms 6 hurie acid treatments, with

: sa as : : ae

. all kinds of oils, whether they had gum forming constitu-

ents or not, does not give a tarry product? ; !

. A. No. DASE Tah POE SRR De an agen

: Q. Now, suppose we take an oil, say a cracked product,

which has been treated so as,to meet the gum test——

A. How is that? lita , Be Coe

_ _‘Q, Suppose-we take an oil, gasoline, a cracked gasoline,

_ .[fol. 591] which has been sufficiently treated to meet: the

gum test so that it is substantially free from gum-forming

_. ingredients; you know there are such oils'as that, do you

- not? Oe ee PR :

- A. Yes. eae Se hes ca be perie Seep ae

Q.. Now, you take an oil like that and treat it with sul- soe

. _ phurie acid, 66 gravity, you will throw down a tarry pro-

- . duet, will you not? A SEE pee oe

_. A. I would expect you to. > | ; ee a kt

-_. Q. Yes. In other words, the throwing down of a tarry

- product does not in any way indicate that the oil had in it

‘any of these gum forming ingredients? Can you answer

. ~ that question? — se eS Es Bae Ry pert

-_ A. It certainly does. It is only with oi] which has had

special treatment, and whith is an abnormal oil, so far as‘a.

_ straight distillation is concerned, that would have in-it ole-

_ fines or have in it such products which would give sulphuric

acid-tar, and at the same time not have gummy materials:

' init. .It probably would lave a small amount of gummy

_/ Materials and it would not be free, - 0° Cure

On the other hand, if you take an old type gasoline that —

has been.treated with sulphuric acid, you can have:a gaso-

_ line or you can have a gasoline which, on treatment with.

_ -sulphuric’ acid does not throw down a tarry material and

* does not have in it the diolefines or olefines. :

-. _ Q. Yes, But you can have a very light fraction of gaso-

Tine which will not have any appreciable gum forming con- _

__ stituents in it: anyway, can you not? I mean, even a

ee ead ein Pe ea

__. A. Yes, particularly if you do not. have diolefines in it -

Q. If you take a cut from the gasoline up to 225, it will

not have any gum forming constituents in it left; not any

n it but I do not know ast

you could notice? a

_A, Well, it would be low :

rely free, that it would not have

uld say it would be entire

. It would meet meet gum tests all right, would it not?

. Yet, that saine oil. could be treated with sulphuric acid

‘throw down a very tarry residue. | |

_A. I do,not know possibly it may. - ee

{fol. 592] Q: It would if it was fairly Unsaturated, as a

matter of course, would it net?

_:Mr. Rauber: You mean having gum — consti

- fuents? = .

. Mr. Wiles: No, — eo

Mr. Rauber: Or if it did not | have ice forming con-.

stituents? . is Ee

Mr. Wiles: J ust olefines. |

oN. A ae would depend on ‘the ‘temperature at witch it was Be

treated and it would depexd on what olefines it had in it.’ —

- Q. I. mean the ordinary treatment with. work coneen-

trated sulphuric acid, Doctor: : :

‘Mr. Rauber: What are you treatingt : ne

Mr. Wiles: Light gasoline ; ‘light cracked gasoline.

A. That is a produet boiling below 225 Fahrenheit!

Q. Yes.

love 9

‘it

. A, Well,. that ¢ gasoline—and I am taking your wend that -

that is a gasoline——

fa Sad Riek Reema.e.queeiinn,

. A; No, you said, ‘‘that gasoline.’’

Q. E said a cut from a gasoline. i

The Witness: Will you read the record, Mr. Reporter!

_ (Record read by the reporter.) ise pach ;

Mr.. Wiles: Tf. I did I on meet. We. will. not

ais

ead,

pe i y ;

-¢

Wiles: In the-art that he has got. fk

“Mr. Rauber: So far as he’knows, you mean? __ od

‘Mr. Wiles: Surely. — - sid ahaa

‘Mr, Rauber: If he finds one tomorrow he can bring it in?

; . : ; Pp). »

\ Mr. Rauber: Are you- speaking of the prior art? Of

__eourse, he has not made a search on that particular thing, .

: a4 he said, ‘‘no’’—— : Soe

\Mr. Wiles: Surely; who, in the whole world, before Ellis; :

I do not know who has. Certainly I can not find it*in the

art he has got here. | typecast es

A, I do. not know whether they were interested in the 7

~ question of gum forming constituents, but it is interesting . :

ffol, 593] that they treated petroleum distillates by the

* ‘game method that Ellis is using, many years before Ellis

.., did it; and probably for the sam purpose. .

| Q.. That we will have to discuss later, but that does not .

-_ answer my question. bat, deed per Ear seas

___ Do you know of any mention in the-Jiterature of this art. ~~

- before Ellis df these gum forming ingredients in gasoline

_ at all, as distinguished from ordinary olefines? —_—- :

A. If we mean-by the*‘gum forming materials”’ products

which gave gum and color to the gasoline, we have in the

- early tests which I mentioned yesterday or day before, the). ’

. equivalent of it; that is, putting. the product on a piece of

_, Paper and allowing it to evaporate and seeing if a colored

+ ving was left.

2762

Q. Where?»

. A. The old methods of treating illuininating oil with. sul-

| ; phuric acid in order to get.a lighter product and a product

which would not gum up the wick.

Q. Those are the same ones you have referred to in your % &

testimony, are they?

A. No, I do not {hink I have vitecbad to sini possibly

_ I did.. It was a: enoceas that was in use ‘back in 1860; %

possibly ’65 at least:

_Q. And the process was oeant: ipigeg ee

A. The stirring up of the yeaa with sulphuric acid.

‘T have here citations for-—_—

‘The Master: They have. giniady ae stated in ‘thee

record, the process of the sulphuric acid treatment, have.

they not? :

[fol. 594] _ Mr. Wiles: Some of them, yes.

The Master: There were a lot of. them ; talked about 4

them. -

The Witness: ‘Yes.

‘The Master: Were there not citations of sulphuric acid”

treatments?

The Witness: Yes.

Q You cited several special, ones, if . there are any |

others—

_ +. - “MreWiles: If ay is aoe on. somothing? different brett -

eee: what he has cited, why, I want it; if he is not, I will go to .

' “ what he has cited. :

The Master: I do not- know, but there were some some-

where that were read, an savaratee on ‘alphuric acid treat-

- .ment.

ie. Wiles: Sure. ‘If that is ‘the one, wie we are together. :

The Master: I know it recommended 4 a light solution and

not a heavy solution of sulphuric acid. 7

‘Mr. Wiles: Yes. - - | a

The-Witness: Here, for example, I find i in Mills’ took on .

- Destructive Distillation, published in London’ i in 1892, page 2

i speaking from shale oil distillates : . :

‘“‘They were formerly stirred with 2 perc cent “ volun

of caustic soda solution in order to.take up phenol andits

analogues (kreasote) acetic bodies and perhaps some ter-.

; meee at sodic. extract wis drawn off below — the

; 2763 -

supe natant fluid, sometimes after washing with water, ~

__ agitated with 5 per cent of oil of vitriol of specific gravity

1.7 (a metal stirrer or an air-current produces the required

agitation). This latter liquid has but little action on the —

fatty hydrides proper; but on hydrides containing ‘less

hydrogen it-acts/ powerfully, resinifying and polymerizing —

them as it does turpentine. a5 erie Mises o2

“Weak acid; sometimes used at this stage, is compara-. —

tively inefficient for the purpose.’’: | Se

. -. I want to call attention that here he speaks of it as résin-

ifying the product and’ as polymerizing these materials

_ which are lower in hydrogen; that is, as we would speak of

. them as the unsaturates and also, further, that he uses an

_ oil of vitriol. Oil of vitriol is defined, and it is interesting

in this connection, because elsewhere we do not have itdet :

_ ~ fined, as 1.7 specific gravity and not one of 1.84. ~~ is

' In other words, it is about a’77 per cent sulphuric acid - -

and not a 93 per cent sulphuric acid. It.would be 77,17 per

eent.. So that we have here in this early work a description |

of use of sulphuric acid for resinifying and polymerizing

these products, using the. same strength of sulphuric acid

' as Ellisasks. 3 pO a eee ee

' Q..Now, Doctor, you missed my question or did not an- -,~

2 [fol. 595] . A. I think I Answeretit. sige ug

|. The Master: He did; he answered it. You asked him to _

- point out where the prior art showed anything of that kind. .

-~ -Q, Does that “article that you have*just’ read or quoted.

from show anything more than the removal of the olefines?

- A, When wé treat-olefines with sulphuric acid, we ordi- .

_. narily think -of our sulphuric- acid combining with it di-

rectly and giving olefines-sulphuric acid compounds. When

we.treat diolefines with sodium or with sulphuric acid, in

many cases, we get polymerization, and ‘here he mentions

a _ specifically polymerization. |

Q. Your point is— . :

_. The Master: Resinous-like material?

_- The Witness: Yes, resinous-like material.

Q. ‘Your point is that the olefines do:not polymerize -with

_ Sulphuric acid? See ae :

ee stirred as he says- here, “with a metal stirrer or an air-

oe ‘edly cause the petroleum refiner more annoyance than any

-. gontaining them. Diolefines are produced in relatively _

OE & '

% ‘A. ‘They do, but they do not polymerize n near as nepal as +

_diolefines do. - Ags

: - "Phe Master: The object of thait treatment. was for the

.. purpose, not of destroying the olefines, but Lani fas the

ying elements, was itnot? i

- The Witness: ‘That i is correct.. >

‘ Q. In that article that you read from just now, “does it .

| laa show that the — were removed?

A. It says, ‘The action of hydrides containing | less

hydrogen” which would include olefines and diolefines.

: — -Q. Certainly, and they are all-—— ‘5

A. (continued). But it does not. state, that ‘it: has ré-

moved them all. 2) 3

Q Is it not the assumption that they are removed?

h oo

GO Ye. 22> wep RL

A. No. : -

Q. Is there any indication that they : are not?

- The Master: Does it not tell you how to avoid doing 80, :

_by the strength of your acid?

_ Mr. Wiles: Not as he read it.

A. The amount of acid used would be so ; small that if i

would remove all of it. 5 per cent would be too little, Aloe

current’ in the few’minutes.

Q. Now, Doctor, it is rather a recent: dincoveey: 3 is it ae

that. is the diolefines: that give these gums on standing? -

woe

_ [fol. 596] Tam reading from page 24, American Petroleum

and Refining, and it is not a discovery of this author, but |

2 eee feet tare cere: 2 :

oe (continued). “The diolefines idroaubons undoulls:

of the other groups of hydrocarbons of which petroleum and —

ce products are composed. Members of this series out =

_ merize readily with a consequent-darkening of the product :

large quantities by some of the present mathods of cracking —

gas oil to produce gasoline. 4g a oe

bo ‘Who wrote that and when! Ste

-. A, This is,.as I say, not an attempt to describe late things.

. Q. Will you please answer. my question? Who wrote it.

Pe Weel. ee, COR ee Ge nie

. A. Bell wrote it in 1923. _ i

A. (continued). But you wiil find it in almost any book. —

It happens to be that I had it here. In older books you can

find it.. a yee: oe ;

_ Q. Will you find it for me before Ellis, that is what I am

‘ after?. I want to know who, before Ellis, knew that it was

|S. perageayeig Mae ces Sie

‘. A. Ido not recall that Ellis states that it is diolefines.

- > Q. No, he does not, but who knew it? You: assume it.. -

Did anybody know that before Ellis? Ay see

Mr. Rauber: Know just about.as much before Ellis or

afterward, is that it? eee og .

Mr. Wiles: Are you testifying? — he sitar oe

_, Mr. Rauber: No, I am asking you if that is what you; .

‘mean. « . arabes Sid wict asthe wie ea

_-- Mr. Wiles: He has relied on this recent knowledge.

+ Now, who before Ellis’ day knew that it was the didle-

fines that made. you any trouble, or in fact there was -any

, - gum trouble at all? ans eae Sa ei

__ A. The properties of diolefines ror an wall that is,

«they are not well known now but were fairly well known as. _ :

_ at the times of 1890 or such as the book I have just read.

- . _Q. Citation, please? ee |

_ Q. Does Mills say anything about them? Please read it.

A. No, he does not; he is not interseted and does not give |

- you the formulae of the products. |. / - Sy re

+ The Master: Name an author thit ao

[fol.597] The Witness: Beilstein. ‘ |

_. Q. And Beilstein tells you, does he, that those arefound

__A. I do not recall. I do not know that he d

he gives the properties. - Pte 1

Q. Now, whoever knew before Ellis, is what .I am

to get at,

that these things were in gasoline at all. ee

. . do you not; may hayé dark oil i in the worm?

.A. I do not recall any mention before or after E i

| cepting the one citation I have read he his not a new: ie

citation. So pokes utiynral citation, naming the man,

as to who did, nnot, but it is common knowledge and I r

think it was well known even before Ellis, though I do not |

happen to recall the citations.: .

Q. Now, you have said that this statement about the diole- -

- fines was not in the literature, as far as you know, also that .

being any gum forming ingredients in —_- distin-"

| guished from the other olefines? = —

‘A. I think that is not correct. I quoted you the blotting

paper experiment, which were tests. They did not call them

that but it was a test for that kind of a thing. Ss

’ Q. You stated that would show ‘other things besides, too, .

did you not? —

- A. I do not believe I did, excepting where you ea as

that. somebody might put in asphalt and'I suggested put-

. ting in a yellow dye if they wanted to. — .

Q. I did not say they might put in a yellow dye or asphalt,

You know, do you not, that otills puke sometimes f

A. Yes. sie

The Master: Stills wledt:

Mr. Wiles: Puke. eee

Q. And you. keow; too, that a still that i is running along. ‘

at the end of its run has some pretty dirty oil i in its worm, ?

sae Ne: may have. ss

Q. Iti is bound to have, i is it not, if it runs down toa heavy

- cut? . | 7

+ [fol.. 598) A. The last distillate i is likely to be a run of that

Se character.

Q. Then, when you get your first gasoline off at your next -

. Tun, it comes through a dirty worm and it may come through

- a worm that has just puked, where there has just ne a.

puke through it, may it not?- : Et

A. It might, if it was 80 eosin

Q. What? 3 :

AL If the plant was ao operated. i e:

aa" Wall the plant often ge diy that way inspite ofthe

: ‘best attention, does it not? : 4

wa fe

: : oe » ey.

_/ _ A, I would not think so often. - If the plant was operating —

.. gnder good management, I would not think so. |

Q: Do.you know of — _ poke eee Ties

A. I would expect that not-more than a smiill percentage

eit: | : ee

- ’.°Q. Exactly, but: sometimes there is a puke so that your’

gasoline comes over off-color at the beginning. =

A. The gasoline is washing out the material that is in the

‘condenser. | | ey ae i

Q. Yes, exactly. And then your blotting paper test would -

_ A. It/would test it for more than that... sil ae

Q. Exactly. It would test for anything but it is not es- :

ents, is it? ares bis iat 2a 1s Phe

0, but itis a test—— - ‘i ; ae <a

ota « And the fact that people made it does not indicate that —

_ they knew. there were any gum forming-ingre i

because they might make it to test. simply for this off-color *~ _

which we have been discussing. ge ee aes

_ A. I do not-think they were likely to make 4 test which -

would simply take an abnormal material. All they were

after was to test to see if the product was carelessly manu- , ~

factured, not from distillation, but from other things as’

_well, such as the presence of gum forming materials. ./ |

--- tun gasoline? : pe anol “a

___ A. Primarily. on straight run gasoline which was to be

_used asa cleaning material: =. ee Oa eR ck

. Q. Exactly, And at straight run gasoline would not

have any gum forming material. in it at all, would it; it |

naturally would not have? = ae hes Be

__ A. Probably.not, but they wanted to:test-for it to see if ~

there was such material. 2H Sst AR a el gee

___Q. The only sense in that test is to see whether the gaso-

_. [fol. 599] line is off-color, as it could be from the puke; that .

is true, is it not? EM oa A eas Uae

A. No, it might be, and oftentimes was, off-color due to

meomaplete refiting, = Line

___Q. Yes. And they were testing it for being off-color, and

_ they would test it in thé kind of gasoline that never dreamed —

_ of having any gum in it:. MIP eects

A. This would not be a test for off-color. They can see

- the color easier by looking through a glass vessel, but this —

would be a test to see if there was any non-volatile material

of gummy character. :

Q. Such as you would get in. washing out a:worm of light .

gasoline? |

. . A, Such as you would get orem light gasoline, and you

might say gum. : os

Q. And you would get from a lot of other places? Heavy.

- oils would give just that same réaction—you would get a -

ring on your blotting paper, would you not?

A. Yes, I would expect:so. ‘ |

Fn And the other things are very riuch more likely to.

ir in straight run gasoline than gum? a

. Possibly, but it was a test of gum, just the same.

Q. Yes, but did the existence of that test indicate that

anybody knew anything about gum?

| A. By ‘‘gum’’ do you mean resinifying products?

Q. Certainly. - :

A. That test does not particularly specify it, but this test ae @

- of mills particularly specifies resinifying products. =

_Q. That.is, resinifying with sulphuric acid, is it not? a

A. But on hydrides coritaining less gue me” hy

' Q. Is it not a resinifying material? Bee : :

A. Yes. | ;

_ - Q. And it will polymerize, ‘a it will Menntn with straight oy

BG Noe as well as diolefines?

A. He says, ‘‘Resinifying and polymerizing.” ve: :

-Q. Yes. You can polymerize straight olefines ; you dé not —

ge have to have gum forming diolefines in order to polymerize,

..do you? —

A. No, but if you had them they will polymerize the diole-

fines. They will polymerize easier than the mono-olefines. .

— -Q. Yes, but Mills does not indicate that he knew there

. were diolefines or gum forming constituents on’ exposure to

air, does he? | Fat

ae A. He knew he could purify his shale oil distillation by

| treating with sulphuric acid from ordinary products.

- (fol. 600] The Master: From resinous forming product

on Mr. Wiles: Well, resinous forming your — ng ae

nn 5 rr anes

> : : ’ ¢

? 2769 ;

_— 7 ‘

_ Q. Let me ask this: Those are products that form resins

with sulphuric acid and not necessarily form resins On ¢x- _

-’ posure to'the air; that it correct, is it not, Doctor? SS Vania eee

A. He is after the question: of finishing his illuminan

and lubricants in such a way,that the oil will keep its color.\

He is after color, and the resinous products are, in general, —

NON Pili tog: ja : sp

Q. And there are plenty of others tal are colored, too,

are there not? ; hs SORA tae hate ata

A. You mean yellow dies and such things as that?

Q. No, I man heavy oils, all sorts of things are colored,

are they not? i igs Bidets do .

A. Yes. Yes, I think most-of these are also products

which, on sulphurie acid treatment will give us a tar prod-

NO Be eg es : aE, Rais

' . .Q. Why, of course; we do not dispute on that. In other

words, the formation of the-—— : ues

_ A..I may add that they, in general, carry unsaturated

- compounds, too. | ; ¢ RATA wo pe

_Q. Certainly; of course they do. Therefore, the forma-

tion of such a gummy mass from sulphuric acid does not

indicate, necessarily, the presence of any material which —

/ forms gum on exposure-to the air, ee Me ae. we

_.. A. We normally think that the eolor forming and the -

Tesinifying products are of the same general character, and .

he says that this is done in order that the products.may be

__ of good color and that they will keep, the color will keep.

a: 6 Where do you see that? ar ,

A, I am reading on page 32...

- about 13 degrees.” A. temperature of -22 degrees, however, _

_ does not injure the blue oil, and the tar then separates more _

easily; but the acid is then of less value for treating the.

_ /erude oil. In finishing both illuminants"and lubricants the”

temperature should always be low with acid. With soda it —

_ is the product—after stirring, particularly with 3 to4de-.

grees Twd. soda—to steam the mixture to 54 degrees, the .

~~ 0il keeps color better in this way than when finished cold,’

_He‘also states, in the paragraph just preceding:

“aa

0 Sa 174378." ais aa ts peed my ie a

4 ; ; axe 3

* \

asaN

“That the witriol used ranges. on specific pene sh 1.3 to

"1,83; the soda ftom 1.05 to 1.3,” which is the acid being

-. used and the soda being used. | 4

[fol. 601] “ Q. Will you please te}i me ; where you find a dis-

closure in this ‘art of. the fact that you can ‘take out the —

diolefines without.taking the olefines with them, or that you |

pick out those ingredients which form gum on exposure

the air without taking the olefines as well—any. substan-

part of the olefines as well and do that ‘to the ordinary, |

gasoline?

e Master: It does not saya word about diolefines, as ag

cs am reading to you from Thorpe and. Young——

far as I can find, and I have searched through it now three

Mr. Wiles: No, but the witness has stated many times »

here. that the. diolefines are these same gum forming j ingre-

dients, and I put it i in the alternative.

A. 1 find. that such a process is described, ‘though the pur-

‘.” pose is not given, in Thorpe and Young, proceedings of thie

- Royal Society of London, Vol. 21, page 188. of 1872:

_ MAfter repeated distillations over sodium, which portion

was almost completely resolved into three fractions—’’

And then he goes on and’ shows the olnfines that he. gets. BS

and they were a haste by the process; on the other hand,

he has,.as we k from our general a, ef diole-

: fines, remov-d the diolefines. ONS ;

- ' That is one citation that does it. = Ni

Q.. Please tell us which of: the various references that ag

have not been so far discussed, that is, all except Cabot and

Thorpe and Young, disclose a product. or. material which,

-. just as it is without: change, fractionation, or a, \ -

- would have been suitable in 1913 for — use a

mobile engines as a fuel therefor? ;

‘Mr. Wiles: I am not sure whether my nt ts a to: tin :

‘Master. My position is Ellis’ product is a finished, com-

piste profiant, veady to 0 right inte @ motor and be need. |

- That is what he has claimed.

Q. Which of the references in the art have a astey at :

o oA likewise fit and ready to go sti into a car and be used! -

Na"

| The Master: That. is true enough, but if you are talking |

_. of a product of the proeess of cracking as it comes from the - |

viously ©

rom the.

still? ° Tae :

_ Mr. Wiles: No, the product in any stage in which it is set.

', forth in the reference. That is what I want him to answer

_ on; any product that is set forth in the reference.

The Witness: I think I understand you. _ BA pays t

__. Mr. Wiles: But. just as.it is, not changing or. additional

_ Tefining, not. set forth in the reference. Se

_ A. Bassett, ‘‘Petitioner’s’ Exhibit No. 110,’ describes a

_ product made of five parts light petroleum spirit, 79 deg..

__ Baumé and one part coal products which.should be rectified,

~ Of .28 to 30 degrees Baumé. Such a ‘product, without.

- change, would. be a motor s irit, which would be such ag

.|_-has been described by Millis,

+’ The. Master: Might I ask what the‘commercial name of

__. the Ellis motor spirit is‘on the market, any of it? - — -

_. Mr. Wiles: Motor gasoline, — : uaa ada

\. The Master: What?” Fate gene eee

. :Mr. Wiles: Motor gasoline, - he | ie

The Master: Is it sold by anybody under some special

rand? Can I'buy any of it on themarket? = leks ct a

_Mr. Wiles: Why, yés, buy some Standard motor gasoline -

rights eross the river in New Jersey and you will get it,

y {

“

The aidan What is its brand? ‘What i is it called?

Mr. Wiles: Standard Motor Gasoline.

Mr. Ranber: You mean that i is made exactly by. the Ellis

process?

. Mr. Wiles: it is the Ellis product; that i is what the Mas-

fol. 603) - The Master: What do they call it? What does oe

the filling station call -it? |

Mr. Wiles: Standard Motor Gasoline.

~ Mr. Siahers Any kind of gasoline, as far as that. is con-

cerned, straight run, any cracked gasoline. < uP

Mr. Wiles: It is not a straight run product, what ° “the

- Standard Oil Company. of New Jersey sells on the Jersey

glide, and some of it on this side, sometimes: As I under-

stand it, I am not thoroughly up on the exact’ methods;

rich Nar pr orichi headin syed aes ara dtemaaly

Company of New Jersey is the product

The Master: What.do you ask for out in God's country?

.Mr. Wiles: Red Crown, and you will get as near as you —

- an to it. Now, there may be, as I said in my answers to

- interrogatories, a most careful and minute chemical an-lysis |

_ that would take us years to find out, might demonstrate some

differences between the Ellis and the Red Crown;-but so far |

as we now know, Red Crown as sold by us is the Ellis prod-

uct. If I were sued on it I would put in two or three years

of careful research to see whether there were minute differ-

i ‘a have not yet been discovered that would differen-

The Master: And your Solite differs from. your Red”

Crown? |

Mr. Wiles: In the cut.

- The Master: Do you consider Solite as + corresponding to ¥ | g

the Ble product

Mr. Wiles: I do not know. T do not know Soite as wll”

eet hve. : | | oe

‘The Master: It is the higher test.

Mr. Wiles: Yes. Well, the Ellis is ettieshity directed :

see mick bein took and tat fo chy T hetged va it: 4

why I say I am in more doubt as to the Solite. I would. -

to make a very careful examination, more careful a

ee eee eee OF Belle: befare I could auewer, tats a

}

: ow ®

arn ;

v ¥

Mr. Rauber: Your Houor, it seems to me that that ill

‘

prior art, = ° ha

trates one thing that. Mr: Wiles ‘asked. Doctor MeKee, to 7

compare something he does not know himself with the -

c ; eR 8

The, Master: It does not make any difference whether :

Mr. Wiles knows what he is talking about‘or not, if he

Mr. Wiles: I am only counsel. I can be just as

follows my error. 7 PP gets) os

A, (continued)... “Petitioner's Exhibit No. 98, Engler and

after discussing the cracking states that, ‘from

the different main. fractions (whose. boiling points were —

voncentrated by the aid of dephlegamators** * baad ad

mg as

it it if he,

‘[fol. 604] Schneider of 1897, on 2 of the ‘translation,

This phrase ‘‘boiling points concentrated by means of |

kind of a column still, or its equivalent. ;

We would have some of the fractions here ‘which wo

be the same as that motor spirit described by Ellis,

-_. Q. Ido not understand that, Doctor. Do you mean some

of those fractions when combined or that there would be

- eertain fractions that were finally made which would be.

suitable?

. at No, not finally made but intermediately made, be-

gause they have been fractioned into the individual consti-

‘', tufents. But I am referring to the main fractions as he .

speaks of here, which would have, say, boiling points within

“A. He says that he has fractioned here—

'_ dephlegamators"’ shows that is was: fractioned in some

_ the gasoline range and not within a kerosene or gas oil

-. Paige; that is, a product whith would méet the Ellis de-

_ . Q. Jast which main fraction did do that?

_ A. - (continued) : —Into main fractions and then, later, :

he makes his separations into individual—— _

Q: Where does it state that? |

£ tt ke Near the bottom of page 2, in the lines that I quote: :

. From the different main fractions (whose boiling points —

_ Ste concentrated by the aid of dephlegamators grates Fah:

i, F

cca yee

I do sok know whether you have -got the same translation E.

as I have or not. I will give it to you in the German.

Mr. Clark: That i is the same translation, — e

Mr. Wiles: I do not see it. | : * :

- Mr ‘Clark: Just below (indicating):

-Q. Which : ‘are those main fractions? Are they not the Bet

ones just above given? oat a

- A, Ido not aaderithind 80. ac

_ Q. Well, what were they? — es

A.: They were the fractions. If we take his crude oil and.

distill it, and then from these he separated here his pentane,

as shown on ‘the following peragraph, , sabeealia? hexane,

ay nas a nonane.

Q. Arenot the main fractions where he talks about those

_ fractions below 100 to 120, 120 to 140; 140 to 160; 160 to 180, .

and so forth, as given in the table, 12 so-called main frac-

[fol. 605] tions; are not those the ones that he is referring

-» to, and if not, what are ney? . What are the main frac: 4

> enet 25, ae 7

A. I do not understand that they are the main elias ae

to:-which he refers, but even if we want to také it as the

fractions to whicli he refers, the: ‘product, for example, 100 *—

to 120, would. be a motor he ict within this description of

Ellis. = —-

My own understanding i is that he has broken it up here

into main fractions; that is, one fraction we will say. o :

to 200, and another from 200 to 300; and the third over 300. __

Q. Does he describe that? 3

A. He has not described in detail these.main fractions, |

but I said here that that was my understanding of the'text;

_ that he had made them into certain main fractions, as he.

Speaks of main fractions, and that the one which’ would

have the boiling points, such as I have indicated, would be

a good motor spirit within the description of Ellis. . - .

-And, further, that if we even wanted to take it in a narrow

| “form, that that narrow fraction, which I would not call the -

- main fraction, 100 to 120, would be a fraction which were

meet the description of Ellis.

Q. And that.would be suitable for general ad as. fuel ts . :

ee automobiles ‘of 1913, in your —

‘ .

| | 2775

” It is a vasa desea iy Ellis, bed it would not

sees, be suitable—this narrow fraction of 100 to 120, would not

- . you co

be suitable at certain times of the year.

-. described in that patent? ae

Q. All right, that is all. If you add something to: them oS

pial them.

__A. Wait a moment. None but the first fraction would be,

probably,’ universally useful.

.Q. You: think the first one would be universally unaile

as a fuel in the motor cars of 1913? - :

‘Mr. Rauber: How do you get “motor cars’’?- You ‘said

“‘motors.”’ . ;

‘ . Mr. Wiles: “That j is the ‘question.

' A, Yes, it would be. You could run our automobiles of

the general character of 1913 with a fuel of this fraction.

It would not bea desirable fuel, first, because it would be

. too expensive; and it would be undesirable, again, because

of the losses from evaporation, which would occur in there ~

. > and have risks if somebody was pias in the car using a

. cigarette, for example.

[fol.606] The Master: Do7 you ‘tine that that fraction

that you just designated has an iodine number not less than

30 and as high as 75 or 100, is substantially free from ole-_

_ fines, readily forming resinous bedies on.exposure to the

airt

‘+ The Witness : It would have an iodine number as high as.

you have indicated. . Yes, but the very fact that it has been

dephlegamated and kept hot and distilled here at this time,

- one familiar with the light boiling products, weuld expect

', it to be free from resinifying bodies, after it had been so

_’ distilled and treated as it has been here.

. A, (continued). Boynton, United States patent of 1886,

**Petitioner’s Exhibit No. 109,’’ on the second column of the’

:.. Second page, describes a product i in. which naphtha, benzol

‘ and gasoline, the naphtha and benzol being from gas tar, .

-- that is coal tar, but have first been taken out from the tar —

_ -itself; that these products are mixed with gasoline, and.

oe that this — ga be used for carburetting gas.

He heals whiten “these may b2 used after being sdisnty

but thoroughly mixed, but it would be better to re-distil] |

.them together before using, stopping distillation at about

‘350 degrees Fahrenheit.” |

_ Such a product, after re-distillation with an end point of

350 degrees Falirenheit, would be suitable for use in a

. present i in motor ears. |

Q. What would its iodine number bet |” De cub ct

- A. Ido not recall that in your ‘question | there was any.

specification—— 7

Q. I did not. I just interrupted to ask ‘that question.

_ A, Its iodine number would be low; its unsaturated num-

_ ber would be high. .

The Master: Would its iodine number be cis 307

The Witness: I think so, but it would be—

Q. How much below, Please?

A. How is that? :

Q. How much below 30?

A. Distinctly, decidedly below. Oh, I would expect it to. es

be around 15; 12, 15, 18. |

' Q. You testified in your direct-before you “made the tests.

_ at Mr. Neave’s request, that would have a much higher

. jodine number, did you-not? — .

A. I do not think so. I spoke of it as an a. masa tare ted

a S

Q. All right, that is all: :

[fol. 607} A. (continued). For I have my own notes bene

and in my own notes I said, “T cannot say just. what its

iodine number would be, so cannot state. regarding. certain a

- descriptions, particularly referring to certain claims.”’

Q. Now, will you continue? _~ a

A. (continued): But it is, of course, highly unsaturated |

and would be essentially free from patayins hodies due Re:

to the way itismade-

’ The Master: If you were ‘ine to select a satan itil =

having a substantial amount of unsaturated bodies, how a

much would you conisder a substantial a amount. of uneata- 3 i

rated bodies? .

~The Witness: I should say 20. cent c or more, uel dil: 4

e product would have probably 70 to cent, at leaist.60.-

_ _A. (continued). “Petitioner’s Exhibit No. 114,’’ Walker,

_ United States patent of 1910, describes a product made by

-, eracking and which is-said to be known in the refineries as . .’

_gas-naphtha. It is a product which is stated to contain 40.

per cent. olefines and about 60 per cent of the saturated

paraffins.’ Its-boiling point ranges from 35 degrees to 125 _

" degrees Centigrade.’ That would bé 95 degrees Fahrenheit

__ _ It is stated that it is believed the olefines range from 5 te

- 8 carbon atoms; that they are primary in structure.

3 If we take the: average one of these, say, the 7-carbon .

_ atoms product, we would have an iodine number of.100 or

possibly a little more. as a Pi od

This petroleum cracked product, taking as we are only

the low ends, that is, 35 to 125 degrees Centigrade (95 to

257 Fahrenheit) would be without change, capable of being _

‘ used in the motor cars of 1918. > : bees ie

Q: For general use?. ess. hie

A. For general use. It might and probably would carry

sonte color, but as I understood that was not objectionable |

_ as indicated. in the question. te ? é

-.-Q. In passing, will you tell us how it would run’in gum.

. forming constituents? - Soe

A. Being such low distillate, that is, being the low boiling

ine ont would probably run sufficiently low in gum form-

*, Ing constituents ‘so as to be ready to be used.. Just: the

/famount of gum forming constituents that-it would have

/ would depend upon the character of the fractionation of the

/ distillation. It could, of course, be cleared of these by'the

___[fol. 608] ordinary process, which had been known for forty — -

_ years previously, if desired, of this color and ee tee

_, products by use of sulphuric acid. | BS

_ “Petitioners Exhibit No. 113,’’ being an article Wy Allen —

of 1881, describes certain ‘‘representative commercial prod- .

_ tets’’ available in England (as this is an English publica-

__ tion) and one of. them is gasoline from shale. Thisisa .

_ gasoline of high test, being one having a gravity of .665;__

_ that is approximately 80 degrees Baumé. The commercial :

- product of. that time, as I have quoted from the various -

~ authors describing the shale pétroleum, were made by treat- —

ing with sulphuric acid, and such a product would com-- -

etely meet any-of the specifications of Ellis. .

a ae

It has 4 high iodine number; it is high in unsaturates, it

would have an iodine number of about 100; it hasa bromine _

number of 67 ; it is highly unsaturated, it is a high test gaso-

_ Tine, and from the fact that it was a representative com. -

mercial product of that date, we would expect it to be light

in color, or practically colorless; and the fact that it was of —

high test, and 80-degree Baumé, would mean that we would -

have very little in the way of impurities :to be removed by

the ordinary refining process. So that the ordinary refin-

ing process would do. it completely. Ae oe

~ -Q. And that, in your. judgment, would have been suitable °

for general use as a fuel for the automobiles of 1913? ee

: _ A, It would. It is too éxpensive a’ product, being too high

oy RR eae x . ae eee

. _Q. Cost aside? | Siig

A, Cost aside-it. would give high evaporation loss and

there would. be, possibly, danger to the man if he struck his |

match ifthe container-was leaking, but automobile tanks

- are ordinarily not supposed. to leak gas into the driver’s

seat or near the driver’s seat. Se ys

Q. Did you intend to answer my question in the affirma-

. The Master: : ould it. have any substantial amount of 4

\bodies? i wt us -: eee |

----per cent. I have not figured it exactly; it may be 35 or it’ —

_. [fol:609]. The Witness: Yes, as Allen’s analysis shows ~~

here, that motor spirit contained be of the aliphatic series?

_ -Mhe'Witness: They would. se

A. (continued). Williams, in ‘‘Petitioner’s Exhibit No...

. 114,” publication of 1885, describes a product obtained asa

_ by-product in the Pintsch gas system, which he has collected

from some seven different stations. Such a product, carry: ~~

> jing as“it does from 24 to 65 per cent of benzine and toluene, -

- . and also presumably additional amounts of aliphatic, unsat-

_° arated hydrocarbons, would meet the Ellis description ; and,

‘judging from the gravities given, would. be available and

- a een ene ae

_ useful in maniy, but perhaps not all, the automobiles of the

‘1913 date. It would depend upon the efficiency of the car-

_~ buretor. There-would be some of the descriptions of Ellis —

_ that would not be met, but it:would meet other descriptions,

_- Q. Which ones would it not meet? ee aren ee

A. Wel, I would say that it would not meet, for example,.

- petroleum hydrocarbons, which is the minor’ portion’ of un-. .,

“saturates. ° |. SS Se Fe pre ete

-. Q. How about gum? ii ee Mires oo ae

_ A. After he has distilled it as he has here and made these -

‘separations, it would probably be essentially free from gum

Materials. =~ PR ee Lorie. 3 :

Q. Wait a minute. I do not get you on that:; As I under- .

_ Pintsch casinghead liquid; that is, liquid thrown down in

- the compressors of a Pintsch plant. Now, it is your posi-

- tion that any of those seven in thai condition as he got them

* for test, met the conditions of my questien? : pe

A; I think on re-reading this that I answered slightly in-

correctly. When I spoke of the low gravities I was think-

> ing’ that this was the product after distillation: ‘This was -

~ not, this was the original product, and as such probably

_ carried some gum in it. But going back to the middle of the.

articde-—— 0 eee te ae

> \ _.Q. Just let me——, ie AMG O aN hae Es Fee a

' | . A, (continued). _ He discusses distilling then. 2g

_-- Claim 15, where it requires a major portion of saturated’ ~~

. stand it, he has seven different ‘specimens of practically.

_Q. I will go ahead with the distillation, but speaking of _

_ the seven original specimens, is it your position that any

or all of those seven would-have responded to the terms of

_ My question” = | oe

_ A. I think that the

use products, be

[fol. 610]

__ by distillation, and above that he speaks of distilling the-

products, «= Re ea te we ee

y would not be satisfactory general

ecause they would probably contain some

A. I understand that he only made two outa chee

: Q. How many? igen Ge Bes PG oe Penis

§ and so on, which would have to be removed a

A. Two, the oi point hobie: at 66 sae Onatigvade the: ~

portion boiling bélow 66 he uses for preparation of olefines,

which he ‘says he requires for his conversion into hydro-

- jodates in order to continue certain work that. he had com- —

menced previously. . As I said,” this I do not think of as a :

: general disclosure.

Q: Neither. one of his cuts was suitable for motor fuel, —

after he got done in there; his raw material or either of his

cuts?

A. His earlier cut, his lower cut wonld be'a orodindt faitly

. satisfactory. It would be a fairly volatile product, and as |

- such, be troublesome possibly in the summer time.

Q. That is the cut below 667 |

_ A. Yes, but otherwise than for that, that cut would he a

a satisfactory motor fuel.

Q. Suitable for general use in the motor cars of 19131

. A. Yes, it would be counted as a very high test gasoline. ,

Q. And the second cut would not be useful? | :

A. No, I am not certain, Mr. Wiles, as to whether the car- .

| buretors of that time would handle benzol.

The carburetors. at the present time, most of them, will.

~ handle benzol, and if they would, then this second cut would -

: ‘tions, what became of the gum? -

be. But whether, in 1913, they would.do that, I do not know.

I am not familiar enough with the history of the develop-

ment of the carburetor. — -

Q. Was this seond cut pretty nearly straight benzolt

_A. Benzof and toluene, very largely.

-Q: Now, of course, that freezes in. cold;weather?.

A. Not a mixture of. benzol and toluene. :

Q. As ‘found in commercial ee ftom the Pintsch a

gant

_A.No, it would not Srersis| ini old weather. ~

Q. What would its freezing point be? - : nS

A. Oh, well down, because I know that we were getting

shipments of benzol which carried relatively a small amount .

[fol. 611] of toluene, perhaps fifteen per cent, and we had-no

a trouble; left the- drums ‘out in winter. weather and they :

never froze on us. 2

‘Q. Now, when Williams made this cut in the two frac

_ A. The-gum would be left, and—— | pk eer

ies . — of the hada teeming constituents? a.

me rersnatiacnaencorsusnesnesmenras

+. A. That.would be left at the bottom of ‘his powerful rec- |

fifying column, ashe callsif. = tt ie

— Q. Wouldn’t those inigr listill over?

A. Not as you would carry 4t out in the laboratory, with

the slow distillation. The redistillation would have the.

effect of polymerizing the gum materials. - Cy

-Q. One of the functions of redistillation’is to polymerize -

"those gum forming bodies, and remove them—isn’t that _

2 tags gl Ra) So ee ae Ros.

A: Yes, I would say so, particularly when ‘iit is carried

out in such a case, with a rectifying column, where you

would have the column distilling in various fractions—per-

~ haps a total of 200 times. -

Q. ‘That has a most-useful effect in removing the gum

constituents, has it? .°-

, A. It has a useful effect. sik

Q. Gum forming constituents, I mean. oe

A. Because when they are heated these gum forming —

materials may polymerize—that is, they are much more

active and polymerize much more readily than the olefines,

. the low boiling olefines—that is, straight olefines. 7 By

Q. Then, it is a fact that the Lewis and Cook bubble tower

Must have a remarkable effect in. this way—that is, it must.

_ take the cracked product and polymerize the gum forming aa

_ ingredients, and give you a much better product?

_ A. It ought to give you a better product, and the Barbet,

_< with its:larger number of plates, would probably give you

_ still better. effect, on that. i: AE Ma Se

_ I would like to have the file wrapper of Lewis and Cook. - -

__. And, confirming this view I want:to quote from the affi- ~

- davit of Shaefer, in the file wrapper of the Lewis and Cook

- patent, in which he states, on page 3 of the affidavit, that

= “the bubble tower distillate treats and. filters to the neces-

_ fary color, without Ciflinalty. 2 6 ee ss ae

__. Whereas, that using the tadiator ‘still—that is, a still‘of —

the ordinary typed, does not dogo. We have, here this ques-

tion of reaching the desired color—the. color being ordin- ~

a said to be due to the same product as the resinifying. .

scheme as that of Williams, where it is run through a —-

ctifying column. «=~. Pe oe uals

‘Q. Now, I was led off on to this line because of your re- ___

arks on Williams. Will you continue with the original

POM oe

ol. 612] This removal can be-accomplished, better in such

in Vol. 3, page 108; of his s ‘Commercial Organic Analysis,” :

- for its object a process of chemical purification and deodor- mo

eas ization of petroluem oils and benzine.’? - 3

_- gasoline, and which is the under which gasoline is sold

a A Baumé, which would be about 77.6 per cent sulphuric acid.

a “eae oe wc he Aoosgi tet tba elearr

“9782 etangel ite

A. ‘Petitioner’ 8 Exhibit No. 115,”’ ie of 1910, sntateat

| cas Chia bitumin us shale’’—in other words, shale i.

oil petroluem—‘‘contains ‘to 60 per cent of unsaturates: tf: :

_And that the remainder are saturates, with no trace of Es

aromatic hydrocarbons. ae

On page 110 he gives the gravity aod the amount of bree is

“mine reacting with a 100 grams sample. —-:

Such a product would be useful, as this i is stated tobea

commercial product of England, and; as such, it would be

expected to be white, and frée from gum forming products,” —

because it was sold at a time when it was being used for

automobiles, and I don’t think we had any evidence that - ;

there was any change e between 1910 and 1913.0

Such a product would be useful, and was

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.