# Transcript of Record — Standard Oil Co. (Indiana) v. United States > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386008_0009%3A05 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Transcript of Record - **Published:** January 1, 1931 - **Citation:** 283 U.S. 163 ## 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 4, ay 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 / ey a Jupp & Derwettzr (INnc.), PRntene, WASHINGTON, D.-C., Octoner 6, 1930 3 g . ; . 3 5 > © a’ ’ . . . e ° ° . “ . e . ; % bd . oe . ¢ ‘4 % ° , 5 . M, . Va Ne aes ised rs a 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- © Vo : 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 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 i 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, . . eo 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 | 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 . 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 e 2. = “Oa ard I do not find it even on page 3, where ;: > everybody treat to —_ gum rete in this ae day? Aa 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: ; ~ :Q. And your position is that simple distillation will get Tid of the gumming. constituents? - | > A Inpart. : ‘ ae eo 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 a , 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 ~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 9 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 ee 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. as "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] 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- 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-.. A or (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 | aL 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 *. e) Eo say it corresponds to Ellis’ deeoription of -his mot. fe a — eet Ses ene writen e220. 6 moter ail, ti 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. Z 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 : _ sodium’on diolefines, and to the work of the German Com- hes - L ee 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 - im any considerable amount. © >. ae 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 o~ . 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 x ead, iP oe 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. A 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- -,~ swer it, I don’t know which. © : | 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. . __,Mr: Wiles: Maybe Ihave lost the trend. ~~ © >. -~ -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? 4 - 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 -. 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. _ : - eompared with the present day, even well before Ellis, even. © _ at the times of 1890 or such as the book I have just read. - . _Q. Citation, please? ee | re _ 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? 08 .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 . _ you know of nothing in the literature telling us about there. . © 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 ct eve tat ae Emp © . wa fe al : : 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 - just test it for that, woulditnot? © © ©. gee ta _ A. It/would test it for more than that... sil ae Q. Exactly. It would test for anything but it is not es- : sentially arid necessarily a test for gum forming ingredi- © ents, is it? ares bis iat 2a 1s Phe 0, but itis a test—— - ‘i ; ae : : ’ ¢ ? 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 y “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 - | oc 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. 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. . Q. Would any of the twelve fractions ~~ are © specifically -. described in that patent? ae A. No, but if you would take——_ «© 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 motor. car, and indeed, we have similar mixtures used at the © . 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 AZ _ _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 to 257 degrees Fahrenheit: © > 6. cf : __ _ 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 | > -would have quite.a large percentage, probably around 40 © ----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 ae 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, _ __ cess of purification, and the product would be identical with ©: Ellis’s product, and would undoubt serve as a motor ee / spirit for use.in cars of ten years later-\that is, 1913, - S _ .Q. What would be the iodine number o that product® = -_ A/ I don’t know. It would be, if it was & cracked gaso- line to start with—it would be identical with the iodine . number of Ellis, starting from the same, or similarly eracked products, eS Ee ING : _ Q. And if you started with a straight run, as you could, within the disclosure, then what would it be? ee aate _ +A. It would be probably 15, ér something like that. \. __Q. Although-there is nothing in this publication that\in- _ __ dicates the Ellis iodine number one way or the other? e A. It is possible to operate the process either the cracked\ gasoline, as would be obtained at that day, primarily, asa \\ __ by-product, probably, in the making of kerosene, of from Ne a straiglit run crude gasoline—either one. = st see cage xe . ~ Q. Now, I wantto examine you further about that pro- cess ih connection with the treating process product, but ' will drop that, now, and you may go on with your illustra-— oe RE Ne Es ee we sg __ _ A. Petitioner’s “Exhibit No. 119,”’ being an article by | __ Armstrong and Miller, in the automobile of 1913, in general use? — : 4 was a pretty fair automobile ##” ae wo) -Q. And this is the distillate that you are setting up—the | % - fntermediate product? ./.: A. It is between the gas and the tar ‘produets. . Q. But the stage of manufacture’where you say it coal a have Been suitable, is the product after the first treatment, 2 before the second treetment—is that right? — Yes—the second treatment is for the purpose of re | . moving: still larger quantities of the unsaturated produ Q. The intermediate product i is the one which you 68 Mag the t | et Yes, bnt I think, also, that the firial product would do _ but —* not cag so well. it panei not” 80 ee: ¢ . that, you think, would have been a suitable fuel : A. I think it would serve, yes, and be a suitable fuel for . 7 the 1913 aytomobile.. The 1913 automobile was one that That completes my list. i Q. Mal be Me ood hot Oo Sp arhomoat that you know of, where there is a product, or __ ‘substance, that would have been: suitable for general use in the automobiles of 1913, as a fuel therefor. | Mr. Rauber: You mean, those that he knows, off hand? _ [fel.615] Mr. Wiles: No, no—in this list that he has = @ _ given. I want them all.. I want to know the case againat - cs / me, before I get to my testimony, if you please. > os Mr. Rauber: I suggest that he re the whole le Hist : ._. through. - es és A. I have notes here regarding bene. other citations, which I will have to look up. I thought I had the seasieaes : ones. 2 a you mean? The Witness: Yes, I said Ta thought I had. — ws Now, with reference to the Ellis; acid treating process 2 i a: ‘patent, you cited, if I remember right, three references, © “ a Vittenet,. French, ‘Armstrong and Miller, and. somewhere in the references? — ls, as ete e ; ‘ ; . a P se . ) is : pare ’ o. ‘ ; x ‘ a Ns Gia ; Vous, . ( a’ : x “Bhis’s ial ription, for pshcaplening lower in anata. : ~~ pated products. : ; ‘ Aneweiting the question, I think I laine, wes all the de. ’. tails of both the making, or refining—or, at least,’ the final - _ produets—is disclosed. I have not taken those cases where: - __ the product is made and disclosed in’ one citations and a” \ method of refining it in another citation, and thé two . - brought together, giving a perfect motor fuel for 1913, cS __In other words, I have not taken those cases where the _ citation can be taken and, in.the light of the. art prior to ___ 1913, a product could-be made, auch », the Dewar and Red- ts ‘wood patent. ee e _Mr. Rauber: ‘To the Dest of of 3 jyour r present ‘ecole, ve - + the record \you mentioned Redwood’s book, but notin ex: e aetly the same place. That is in my n ,andinmy, - otes, but it\is not in the e discussion. Now, are those : A. I mentioned, early, on direct pha ES in n conned: de . — © : Q. Now, ‘as to the Wittanet 3 French patent, you seem to : draw. something from the French that Ta “t get. The ma- | terial treated is defined’ as **petrol,’’ isn’t 1G es: ae BEM ait Q.. And iF ren ‘petrol: meade crude oil, neh it nett A. It also means. gasoline. If youwquld go to a motor ~ filing station, you would ask for ‘““netrol.’? Q. Yes, you do now, but in 1903, what\was the fact? | A. I think there. were no filling stations at that time. | Petrol would be the name for the gasoline product. I don’t ~ think that the namie came in between 1903 1913. _ Q. When you turn to the first claim of this \Vittenet pat- ent, he is very explicit, is he not, with the substance that. he. - [fol. 616] is treating, that it is crude oil—that is, he says, - *Petrol’’—I don t pronounce . French vary “well, but- he * SaVvs——— a A. I have a copy of the French here. ei Q. He says, ‘Petrol bruts’”’—— , Mr. Rauber: That i is’ crude petrol. Q. Well, ‘‘petrol bruts’’ is crude oil, isn’t it? \ . * A. I don’t know. I would think that it would be-just as equally, crude gasoline. . I don’t know.that anybody ever wanted to take the crude oil, itself, and remove its odor. ‘ _ The Master: What is the date of the —. ~ Mr. ‘Wiles: 1908, your Honor. | Q. Now, when you read the title, it says, ‘‘ The. procedure © by chemical purification and’ deodorization of oils and dis-— . tillates of petroleum and siniilar products,” does it not? — _" A. My translation reads, ‘‘Chémical purification and de- | odorization of petroleum oil and benzines and similar prod-’ uets.’’ Now, benzine would be erude gasoline. In the title. to this patent the word, ‘petrol " appears. \ . \ ] eh Mr. Rauber: Essence of petrol. -Q. Oil and essences dé petrol. | Mr. Rauber ’ Essences oO of zetral, as sI understand, malt . de benzine. Mr. Wiles: Well, that is not the — and Tes are not testifying, anyway. . Q. Isn t it a fact that the word ‘*petrol,’’ appears hb the title? : A. It does. Q. And it speaks of oils and.essences of: sotrelk. A. It speaks pf the deodorization of the oils and essences. . Q. Of petrol? - A: Yes, sir. Sas .Q. Now, the ‘‘ petrol, ’’ there, must mean erude oil. on ~ . A. We don’t speak of ga oline and crude oil as one-—as . the translation has it, ‘deodo psation of petroleum oils and benzine. _. * Q. But the claim is very clear that he is dealing with—— [fol.617] The Master: Have you agreed on the transla- : tion of that Freneh patent? \" Mr. Wiles: I don’t think so. _ Mr. Rauber: I maermend that er, have accepted my translation of that. . ; Q. Will you dook at the two deine} in the original French, - and tell me if it is not a fact that one claim:is on the treat- - . ment of crude oil—crude petroleum—and the ‘second one - on the treatment of all other. prenite than ‘Petroleum— | “than the aboye’? . — cS ' . A; I would say that the claim of the French—the first « - qlaim of the French—if read out'of connection with the | specification, might be taken as of crude petroleum. , But, it, also, might be equally taken as a crude petrol—. eu, - that is, of crude gasoline—and that, in the light of the title, where it says that it: is for the chemical treating and _ °,deodorization of the ‘‘essences’’—it cannot mean anything | else than a crude benzine, or crtude gasoline. -Q. It says not ron essences, but the we of petroleum? A. Yes.. ~ . Q. That. might mean the erude—and that is what the _ dlaim says, senate . "A. The claim, I say, might mean that. And there is ons a other place which I think helps in this matter. While I -. cannot translate the French—there are some alee: that Is get stuck on—but in the. translation—— » Q. As it is in your own? | | A. I am speaking of the second place. - Q. Isn’t it a fact that-your own translation, that you. are reading from, says “the —— of purifying crude petra: ‘ leums’’; : A. That i is correct, and I have said that the claim covers. that. Q. That is all on that point. ; eh _ A. But, on the question of it stating here with bine to the perfect clearness; as to the product obtained by the process when working on crude gasoline, I. would say that ‘it could not be—in the illustration—a process of purifying ~ crude petroleum. And, moreover, nobody wants a process — for purifying crude petroleum, compared with what they. — want a process for——- . Q. Isn’t it a fact that crude petroleum is frequently treated—acid treated, for cylinder stocks? © : A. Yes, but ‘not with perfect clearness, as he specifies, as but it is, after you have removed your gasoline and kero- [fol. 618] sene. You do not ordinarily treat, but you re- . move your gasoline and kerosene. — Q. You can treat any time you please. A. You are treating a residue—you ave nat treating crude . petroleum. e: ~ Q. And when you treat for eylindet sleek. you treat to make it clear and bright,—to make what you call bright ' stock, as distinguished from the ordinary residuum! A. You are purifying it for—— Sa Q. Yes—so that it is common to treat “ele petroleum with acid?- . a oes A. No. You said a moment ago that you. are treating eS. residuum, after you have distilled out the kerosene and — ‘% Isn’t it a common praction, to your knowledge, to treat a ernde petroleum with acid, for the purpose of subsequently _ " using it in the manufacture of cylinder stocks? 2 A. I don’t recall any case in which crude petroleum, be- a fore the removal of gasoline and kerosene constituents, was _- treated with acid to aid in the quality of the cylinder oil. - _ ¢ *. common! A. I cannot say that it has never been done. ‘It is impos- sible to answer such a question in the negative. _ - Q. Can you say that that was not a common practice in © _ . the art,.and well known to those skilled in the art—that — is, the treating of crude oil or crude petroleum with acid? A: in 108 poke ge Seige Q. Yes. Rs A. I feel quite certain’ that it was sit: but. I cannot say, a positively, that it was not, at that date—22 years _ Q. And how about it today? fey ee ' A. It-certainly is not common. - Q. Not common enough | to be generally known by those skilled i in the art? a ‘Can you say that that was not done, and was not! - - A. We normally remove the kerosene and. gasoline be- Bu fore it. Q. That is not the question. Is it common enough to be ~ generally known to those skilled in the art? : A. I don’t récall'a single case which has come to my knowledge, where the original crude oil is treated. with acid "ad a first step. There may be such cases, however. | Q. Now, going to, this Vittenet patent—I believe you said cand I want to be sure that it is in the record—that so far as this patent shows, the raw material may éither be highly _ {fol. 619] unsaturated, or not—that the patent § is Bain. silent on that subject—is that true? A. That is correct. Q. Now, furthermore, you have said ‘that Vittinet treats g: with sixty Baumé acid—that is correct, isn "t it—that is -.° your statement? : A. Yes. ee) Q. Now, what he really does is to treat, first, with sixty “ah . degree Baumé acid, and then, immediately thereafter, by - sodium bisulphite, is it not? A. Yes, and then with caustic soda. Q. Yes, neutralization is always presen: in any treat- . -ment—or should be. Now, he also’ says that, this dowbl¢é - treat—first with sixty gravity acid, and then with sodium . bisulphite,—is the equivalent of single treat with ten a kilos of concentracted acid to a hundred litres of ‘oil—that 4a wf Sern ~» a+ is s about 34 pounds of concentrated: acid to the Barrel— one -isn’t that true? Check ‘my calculations. ce never sure of my translation from the decimal system to the —s I figured on.a 42-pound. barrel,. The Master: Why do you compare it with Anreded Why . don’t you ask about gallons? *. «ss “Mr. Wiles: Because, treats are always spoken of in es pounds per barrel. A barrél is 42 or 50 gallons. . ‘They. : always speak of \the number of pounds ‘to the barrel, in the extent of the treat. They use five, seven or ten pounds ‘to the barrel, of sulphuric acid. : A... Figuring on 42, I get a somewhat different figure.. I. get 36 and a fraction, instead of 32. I want, though, \to - Taise—one supposition that you raised in your question; I don’t think is quite correct. It is not given as an equiva-: lent. It is given as a variation, and I don’t know whether ~ - the two products resulting, would be the same, or not. _- Q. Doesn’t the patent’ substantially say you get the same reigit: either way? - A My translation says, ‘‘Finally, by way of a varia- tion.”’ I don’t happen to haye a: copy of the original ' French. QQ if you read a. little fenkhiet along, it says, - ‘Finally, ; z by way of a variation; these two successive treatments can be replaced by a single one,’’? A. That is what I have, but that doesn’t necessarily mean. e that the two are identical products. That is my point. Ay -Q. Isn’t it the plain implication that they give the same x result—one replaces the other? : A, I-would say that one is, as it states, a variation of the [fol. 620] other—using the same ‘material, getting some- where nearer the same product.- Q. Now, now, 36 pounds to the barrel is is a pretty heavy -_ treat, isn’t it? | _ A.-Oh, yes, but we had that, for example, i in the altation I quoted from Mills—thty were larger than the present day. All of this older work used larger amounts. They didn’t * doas thorough mixing and did not appreciate that a thor- — ough mixing would enable them to get along with less acid. . Q.-It, then, is a heavy, ge Eis pounds: to the barrel i is : i * heavy. treat? © s A. It would be considered now, a heavy treat. Itsig, particularly if you used as thorough a mixing as is used ae 4 now. “With a pooter mixing it might have-. the same result 3 as the-small amount used at present. _ Q. Then, if these two methods of treating—the one with sulphuric acid, followed by a sodium bisulphite, and the other with - concentrated aeid—are ' they interchangeable ~ equivalents? ‘That is, the first one would be a heavy treat, or the equivalent of what we would, today, consider a heavy — treat? A, On the supposition that you make, that they are abso- Jute equivalents, yes. But we know, of course, that the sodium bisulphite does not act in the same’ sens¢-as the : strong acid, when given very thorough stirring. _ Q. Now, in addition to merely using this large amount of. acid, Vittenet makes it even more energetic, by adding to -.: some potassium bichromate, doesn’t he? A. And he suggests the use of a thousandths part—that is, a third of an‘ ounce to a hundred litres—it would be — almost an insignificant amount, of course: - *Q. Do you think that would ‘not witke any difference, at all? 3 : ond A. It might make some difference. It was probably pat ; infor the purpose of making a difference, though I think the : - amount of a'third of an ounce, or, perhaps half an ounce to - the barrel, is an insignificant amount. — Q. Now, if it hada tiger: it would make the treat more energetic? : sae ' A. Probably. When we use ‘bichromate as an diidislig S _, agent, ordinarily we use it ‘not in parts $95 thousand, but ~parfs per ten; . Be ell, it ig an extremely energetic 6 chemical for that purpose, fs. it not? | . ae * Yes. aS Mr. Rauber: ‘For what purpose! git iok | (fol. 621] Mr. ‘Wiles: fae an ene agent, is what he >» said. Ee Q. New: saitetand to kesdheeas and Miller, the effort was . to treat out all of the olefines, was it ‘not? That is, the object of the final process was to get rid of all, ted the ole- fines? s "A. Tf we carry it out in 9 process, as T suggested, with ite. omission, yes; it was to remove the olefines 4 : , 4 ‘ook amount. agi) é The aim of the icdin of las proce sas @ whole = = Was to get rid of all of tlre olefines; that is right, is it not? _ A. He certainly would not. accomplish it by treating ite aah with acid of the strength that he suggests here. ~'. Q. He says he does, does he not? A. He says ‘‘to complete the conversion of \the unsatur-. : ated hydrocarbons into polymerides.’’ Q. Exactly. That precipitates them and removes them, * do@s it not? A. Yes, but we well know that such a process as he de- scribes here, using diluted acid will not readily remove all . ‘of the unsaturates. Q. Do you know that? Aeastnle | _A. Yes, I think I know. that ‘from personal experierice, : “hat j is, I have taken and treated products. containing ole-* fines in considerable amount, with, sulphuric acid of ap- proximately the strength that is added here, and you finally *. reach a stage where it scarcely darkens the sulphuric acid; and: yet the product contains perhaps as much ae wel, it. > - would have an iodine number well over seventy. | a Q. When you performed this operation that you have! just testified about, did you treat in separate dumps, or did __ you put all your acid in in ample quantity and pettate, to- 2 . gether with the oil? = aye A. I put my acid in in separatendumps. Q. Yes, and if you had treated with all the acid at: once. you might have got rid of all of the olefines ? A. I thought I used sufficient acid, in the first ee to. de have gotten rid of all of the olefines, ‘but I actually treated it a succession of times; several times. I do not remember ‘how many. and the ‘partially diluted acid would then be sent through- _ the present-day acid recovery plant. sf If, on the other hand, we use the diluted acid, and diluted it as much as suggested by Ellis, it might be even more di- _ Inte than, according to my understanding, is, diluted: when using concentrated acid: | | é The Master: What is concentrated and what is diluted; _ is it 50 per cent strength, 60 per cent, 70 or 80 per cent . _ The Witness: Those are-all diluted acids. - *. |The Master: They are all diluted, are they? | . The Witness: They are, but a ninety-three per cent acid | _ Would be counted as a concentrated acid, in this connection. , » * ‘ 3 - Q. I do not think you indurated my ttt At leas [fol. 629] I have not /had anything that sounded to me oN an answer to it.. / ae Which is the mor¢ expensive to recover, the acid as con- centrated acid, or.to recover it as dilute acid? : _ A. In present-day they are’ about ‘he same, -Q. Well, you said in an answer a little bit ago that there : would be some difference in fuel, you comparing ‘those two; which did you mean would take the most fuel to recoveras ‘ i concentrated, or to recover as a dilute? -~ ee A. It, would depend on the degree of dilution used, whether we used thirty. or sind per. cent or used eighty per cent. Mr. fauiber: I ‘wonder if you understand the question! : (Addressing Mr. Wiles) Do you mean to recover a concen... .- trated or to just: leave it dilute? Mr. Wiles: Yes, | es Mr. Rauber: You mean to concentrate it? Mr. Wiles: To bring it up to sixty-six gravity-or only to. seventy-five per cents referred to. ; - . Mr.Rauber: I do not think he quite’ understood. I think he means starting with a dilute——_.. “Mr. Wiles: You do not start that way, anyway. a Mr. Rauber: I thought he misunderstood your question. ok The Witness: I think I understand the situation there, - and I would say-that, it was approximately the.same; be- _ cause you have to heat it up high enougk' to oxidize part of your organic materials and then you would dilute it. down. again, so that it would be approximately the same. | Q. Was I correct if I understood you to say in the last ‘few answers, that acid recovery was sgt new; was that your statement? | A. That acid recovery at the side day can be carried \ out much more cheaply than it could be a few years ago, ° ae, and I will give you. the redsons if you care for them. = : Q. Now, having in mind the conditions i in 1913, what. were om me Ricca a apa if any, in recovering your acid as dilute, | g-it.as omer i acid? m TH thi ‘the first sludge acid recovery plants of tower type, built with ‘acid-proof brick and so forth.in the re fos - fineries have been put in within the last four or five years. *Q. And before that what — ae | = 901 a’ Before that there were attempts to do this bet ay . were not anywhere near as cheap operating schemes s the ~present-day schemes, nak Se Sh sige {fol 680] Q: Yh mean that they did or did: not recover : the acid before this?. et aeaae : ph: aed ca ieee ‘ . A. I say there were operating schemes which did. .'There- . ‘were other places where they threw it away, discar ed it as waste material, and bought new acid.. ©: | Q. And in 1913,°1912,. 11 and "13, what was the normal and gen¢ral practice of the industry in. America in that: -Tegard? ~ ; a. Sie Se Lesage A. I think that the rather normal practice was ajcom- .:. promise between, where they took their product. (and of .. this I can only give it in:a'-general impression; I a _ absolutely certain as to what was the average or maj practice) that they took the waste sludge acid, adde $8 _, water, allowed the sludge to settle, separated the partially “diluted ‘acid out, and concentrated that by the common:con-. eentration processes of the sulphuric acid industry; and that the sludgé acid, which was the other_part-of the sul- ‘\. phuric acid, together with a considerable amount of what. - is.now recovered, was then simply discarded or used simply as a fuel. As I say, this is only a general impression of | my own. I was not interested in the ‘oil industry particu- larly in 1913, my interest, as I stated in my direct, began about 1917. . 7 NEM Rene ce, aoe ‘Q: And the American standard practice of 1911 and 1912," ° you do not know: much about? | 7 ne - A, Only in a general way. I was not-working in such a ae | plant nor concerned primarily. with it.. RO age Ma Raver _. Q. Now, in considering the Dewar and Redwood patent, — , -you stated in substance, I believe, that in that process gas - . would be pumped in only in. starting up the process and not _ during normal operation. Please tell us your authority . _ . . for that. statement. te ies (at eee ae: A. Before answering that ‘question, I’ wish to say that [ . have now the copy of Mills which the photostat man Had. © __. Do you want me to quote that? +» °° + Q: I did not ask you anything about Mills: — ray ae __ A. (continued). As we were. discussing the other Red- ; BY wood in connection?: ~ . | Say ein Pa tiet ek Nae ~--Q. 1 did not: ask you anything about Mills, 3 176—378.- | Bes eat \ , The Master: Mills has already beén.on the record. A. In the patent itself the statement is made:'‘‘That we | ‘aes and keep,charged in the space in the boiler or retort and condenser that is not occupied by liquid with gas under considerable 'pressure.’’ I read also the same author describing his same appa- [fol. 631] ratus, but in 1896, page 322 of Redwood’s ‘Pe. troleum, beginni [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386008_0009%3A05. Public record. Not legal advice.