Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: June 6, 2025
The Engineer found Mushet's position untenable on the very grounds he was pleading that patents should not be issued to different men at different times for the same thing; and showed that Bessemer in his patents of January 4, 1856, and later, had clearly anticipated Mushet. In a subsequent article, The Engineer disposed of Martien's and Mushet's claims with a certain finality.
Mushet, by this time, had apparently decided to generalize the application of his compound instead of citing its use in conjunction with Martien's process, or, as he put it, he had been obliged to do for his English specification by the Ebbw Vale Iron Works. Scientific American, 1856, vol. 12, p. 6. U.S. patent 17389, dated May 26, 1857.
The sharp practice of Martien's patent lawyer, Mushet claimed, had deprived him of an opportunity of proving priority of invention against Bessemer. Mushet was convinced that Martien's was the first in the field. See Mining Journal, 1857, vol. 27, pp. 839 and 855.
Martien's own process consisted in passing air through metal as it was run in a trough from the furnace and before it passed into the puddling furnace. Mining Journal, 1856, vol. 26, p. 631. It is known that Martien's patent was in the hands of the Ebbw Vale Iron Works by March 1857.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking