# Washing-Machine Company v. Tool Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
87 U.S. 342
Washing-Machine Company v. Tool Company
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island.
The Washing-Machine Company, assignee of Sylvanus Walker, this last being assignee of one Sergeant, filed a bill in the court below against the Providence Tool Company, for an infringement of Division No. 2829, of a patent for an improvement in clothes-wringers. The original patent was granted to Sergeant, July 27th, 1858, and was reissued in two divisions, the one in suit being dated December 31st, 1867. Although the matter which was in issue in the present suit was confined, so far as the complainant's title was concerned, to the reissue No. 2829, it may be well to describe the wringing-machine which was the subject of Sergeant's original patent, and out of which the invention patented in the reissue No. 2829 was carved.
The original machine belonged to the class of clothes-wringers long known as 'twist wringers.' In these, clothes are wrung by twisting them into a rope in the same manner as without a machine the washerwoman twists them by hand. This sort of machine differs from another and well-known class of wringers, in which 'squeezing rollers' squeeze out by pressure water from clothes passed between them. Both sorts of machines had been in use for many years prior to the patent to Sergeant.
In the original machine of Sergeant, Figure 1 represents a yoke-frame of U form, the curved portion being an arc of a circle. This yoke had a pair of jaws and a clamp-wedge for securing the frame to the side of a tub. To the yoke frame a hinged frame E was attached, which, when in position, stood at right angles with the yoke, as shown in the engraving. At the middle point of the cross-bar which united the two sides of the hinged frame there was set a 'hitching-pin,' F, around which the clothes to be wrung were partially wound and held fast by the left hand of the washerwoman, while with her right hand she turned the rotary clamp in Figure 2, which formed a part of the machine, and which gave to the clothes the twist which expelled the water.
The rotary clamp shown at Figure 2 must be supposed to be set in the yoke B of Figure 1. It had a ring, H, with
flanged edges to hold the clamp in the yoke. I and J were lever jaws which jammed against the portion of the clothes inside the ring, and K was a gag for locking the levers. The outer edge of the ring, H, was furnished at intervals with notches, with which the pawl, P (Figure 1), could be made to engage, so that the rotary clamp, when the clothes were twisted, could be prevented from turning backwards, and the washerwoman would be able, if she wished to do so, to gripe with both hands around the hitching-pin, F, the portion of the clothes 'rendered.' With the exception of the model in the Patent Office, there was no evidence that a machine of the kind had ever been constructed. It was too complicated to be practicable.
Such being the machine, the Washing Machine Company, complainant in this case (or Sylvanus Walker, rather, from whom the complainants got it), bought the patent of Sergeant, and obtained the reissue on which this bill was founded.
The apparent idea in getting the reissue was that the apparatus shown at Figure 2 was a wringing mechanism, and was the equivalent of a pair of squeezing rollers; that the yoke-frame (Figure 1) was an apparatus separable from the clamp (Figure 2), and performed the office of supporting such wringing mechanism; and furthermore, that such supporting mechanism was peculiar in the fact that it had a clamping jaw attached to it which made it capable of being temporarily fastened to a tub. The complainant proposed, therefore, to divide the machine and to claim the yoke-frame and its device for being clamped to a tub, as a separate structure, without regard to whether the wringing mechanism used with such 'supporting and connecting apparatus' were rollers or a twister.
The cut, Figure 3, on the page opposite, represents the structure claimed in the reissue under consideration. The specification and claims in this reissue were thus:
'SPECIFICATION.
'The first part of this invention consists of a portable machine, which may be temporarily attached to one side of a common wash-tub, or readily disconnected therefrom, whenever desired, and is especially adapted to wringing clothes.
'The second part of this invention consists in a portable frame, and employed for supporting the wringing mechanism of the machine upon one side of a common wash-tub, by means of a clamping device, which is made to gripe one side of a wash-tub, for the purpose of attaching and sustaining temporarily the entire wringing mechanism of the machine upon one side of a common wash-tub, in a firm and expeditious manner, regardless of the diameter of the tub, which greatly accelerates the operations of washing, rinsing, and wringing of clothes, as will be hereinafter more fully set forth and described.
'In the drawings annexed, A represents a common wash-tub. B is a yoke whose inner margin is of U form, the sides of which extend upwards, forming uprights S S1. From the lower end of yoke B extend two jaws, C C1, the latter of which contains,
within a dovetail groove, a wedge or key, D, whose exposed side is made slightly concave, as shown in Figure 2. The office of the above-described jaws and wedge is to hold the frame, composed of the yoke B with uprights S S1 for supporting the wringing mechanism of the machine, in position for use, on one side of a common wash-tub, in a permanent manner, temporarily, regardless of the diameter of the tub or the thickness of its rim, in reference to which service they are termed collectively the 'vise.'
'This arrangement affords great facility for successively washing, rinsing, and wringing out the clothes from several waters in as many tubs, the wringer being readily changed from tub to tub.
'Omitting to describe the general features of the wringing mechanism of the machine, which will form the subject of another application for letters-patent, of even date with this, and then more particularly the frame for supporting the wringing mechanism in position, and the clamping device by which the frame for holding the wringing mechanism is attached to one side of a common wash-tub, which forms the subject of the present invention.
'When it is desired to have free access to the tub, the wringer may be instantly removed therefrom, so as to allow the operations of washing, rinsing, and wringing to succeed each other, without trouble or delay; or the wringer may be detached instantly, for the purpose of cleaning its parts where dirt is apt to lodge-a common necessity to avoid soiling the next batch after dealing with much soiled or colored garments.
'It will be particularly observed that this wringing-machine differs very materially with those heretofore constructed, in its attachment, by a clamping device, to one side only of a common wash-tub, so it can be constructed separate from and independent of the wash-tub, to which it may be clamped, whenever desired, regardless of its size or diameter; and a further distinctive feature consists in the manner of operation. The wringer being placed in position on one side of the tub, and the jaws made to gripe the same firmly, the clothes are admitted to the wringing mechanism of the machine, and pass through it as fast as the water is expelled therefrom, and they are received at the opposite side of the machine into a basket, piece by piece, as they are wrung out. By this means articles that are of lighter fabric, as lace curtains, can be operated upon lightly, as those that are heavy require more force. By this means lace curtains may be wrung without injury, as the force required to expel the water, when all are wrung together in a bag, will tear the lighter fabrics before the water is sufficiently expelled from those that are stout and heavy.
'I am thus enabled to construct a wringing-machine as a separate and independent device from the wash-tub, box, or other receptacle for receiving the water when expelled from the clothes.
'Wringers heretofore constructed have been attached to the opposite sides of the box or vessel, consequently could not be readily attached to common wash-tubs of various diameters, therefore the box must be of a diameter to correspond to that for which the wringer is adapted, and would thus constitute a part of the device or wringing-machine. Thus, by means of the portable frame for holding the wringing mechanism adapted to clamp the edge of one side only of a common wash-tub, I am enabled to overcome the serious objections referred to above.
'In the clamping device of the invention, a wedge or setscrew, cam, or spring, when having a bearing, so that when power is applied to them they, in conjunction with the jaws, gripe the edge of the tub, as a 'vise,' may be used, in the manner and for the purposes set forth.
'CLAIM.
'Having thus described the invention, what is claimed as new, and desired to be secured by letters-patent, is—
'1. The employment or use of a portable frame or yoke, B, with uprights, S S1, or their equivalents, for supporting a clothes-wringing mechanism in position on one side of a common wash-tub, for the purposes set forth.
'2. The application of an adjustable clamping device, when employed to attach a clothes-wringer to one side only of a wash-tub, substantially in the manner described and for the purposes set forth.'
The defendant's machine (of which a drawing appears just below, Fig. 4) had two uprights. It had also a cross-piece
connecting the lower parts of these uprights. It also had jaws which extended below the yoke, in positions to embrace the side of a wash-tub, to which the machine was to be applied; these jaws being fitted with a screw for the purpose of securing the machine to the object to which the jaws were to be applied. But, as on reviewing it the court considered, it had not the U-formed yoke.
The defendant set up want of novelty in the complainant's invention, so that it became necessary to consider the prior state of the art and fix the extent of the claims in the reissue.
It was not denied that wringing-machines of different forms and of more or less practical value had long been in use, and that devices for clamping or attaching machines of various descriptions to benches, tables, or other articles with which they were used were old and well known. Reels for thread, vises, eyeletting machines, fluting machines, egg-beaters, and small mills had been attached to benches and tables by clamping devices similar in principle to the one described in Sergeant's patent.
It appeared also that a patent for a washing-machine had been
issued to H. W. Sabin, August 16th, 1845. The cut, Fig. 5, represents this wringer; the parts marked h and g being a pair of rollers (one of them fluted), which served as a substitute for the ordinary hitching-pin; one end of the clothes being held fast between these rollers while the other end was secured to a contrivance which held them, so that, by means of the crank supported in the screw-clamp, X, they were twisted and made free from water.
In this machine, as the reader will perceive, a wringer-the common twist-wringer-was supported by a standard furnished with jaws and a clamp-screw, the two forming a clamping device such as is in common use in all wringers at the present time. The standard, however, was not a U-formed yoke-frame, but was simply a support for the journal of a shaft, although the standard had jaws and a clamping screw adapted to secure the standard to the sides of a wash-tub. Unless, therefore, the U form of the yoke-frame in Sergeant's mechanism was to be considered as an essential part of Sergeant's invention, as distinguished from the standard in Sabin's machine, which was simply a support for a journal, there was apparently no novelty.
The question, therefore, was whether the U-formed yoke was an essential part of the invention sought to be secured by the reissue. If it was, the defendants did not infringe, since they did not use the U-formed yoke, while the other parts of their machine were old.
The court below held that the reissue was only for a combination, and that 'the U-formed yoke-frame in the Sergeant machine was necessary as a device for supporting a clothes-wringing mechanism in the manner and for the purposes set forth.'
That court accordingly dismissed the bill, and the complainants appealed.
Messrs. J. H. Parsons and T. A. Jenckes, for the appellants; Messrs. B. H. Thurston and C. L. Woodbury, contra.
Mr. Justice STRONG delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse