The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-06-26


rugatsd goods! and when no means 10 say-and Isubl
NIT that he does moan tn saytbat, so far rs in him
lies against all inventions, against all i'm
portsrs, against every body, every wnere far Us
he tGooay ear) is concerned, Day shall have too
entire market for shirred corrugated g0od5-thet
is TO say, whatsoever COOS by the name OF shirred
goods, whatsoever is known by the jobber gene
raj dealer as SHRED goods, whatsoever ills the
same place, whatsoever meets the same demands,
whatsoever gives employment to she Same ma
chinery-that is to say, cloth made elastic by o
union with India rubber cords-whosoever comes
into competition with that form Of trade infringcs
on my patent, and l will not aid it. That, sub
nit, is the spirit of Goodyears covenant with us.
think bave not overstated its effect and meaning;
aut wish now to call tho attention of the Court
one instant to the terms Of is-pages 40 and Al Of
the brief Goodyear's covenant therefore, il not
merely that he would not permit any else to in
fringe upon his patent, because he might import
manufactured goods, but l (Mr. Day. may say to
you, believe You covenanted to protect me. How
ever that may be, into whatever hands of piracy
ingenuity you may fall elsewhere, SO tar as ]
am concerned, You shall have, uuembarrassed
by competition, any form and every form
OF every fabric which may properly be called
in the market shirred or corrugated goods,
and will not even lend my aid assistance in the
importation Of any DESCRIPTION Of shlrred goods
which comes into competition with those you manu-
facture. Well, now j should be very glad to know
whether these goods exhibited here are not shirred
goods: Does anybody deny it on the part Of the
plaintiff!
Mr.. JUDsoN-Ycs, sir.
Mr.. CHoATE-We proved by numberlcss witnesses,
persons OF entire respectabity, perfectly acquainted
IN the markets of the greut cities with goods of this
description that these goods manufactured by Soils,
nre called everywhere SHRED or corrugated goods;
they answer to that denomination exactly as Mr.
Days; they fill the same demand, they afford the
same supply, that is to say, these witnesses proved
that they cloth made elastic by an Ingenious
preparation and union Of it with rubber ] think
will read two three names of the witnesses Here
is VIM Ward, lie says II call Sos's fabrics shrred
goods" Stephen Bogardus. says, 81 call solis's
Calhoun, Bliss and Rolla and Humphrey, all
call them "shirred goods = They are identically
the same in every mans judgment. They are
shlTea goods, that is to say, they are cloth
brought, in an unnaturally compressed state in
unison with India rubber. II tho Court should
see that here is probable evidence that Mr.. Good
year, by Mr. Judson. did directly aid and abct
in the manufacture of this article, and if they find
there il nj least balance of evidence that these
goods were called and known in trade rs SHRED or
corrugated goods, apprehend they would not give
any effect, in the form of cstope, to the prayer
OF this bill. until they had given opportunity
to inquire before u jury whsther they are SHRED
goods. Goodyear alone could sue Soils, and lie
would not sue him. We chose tho specific atcrna-
tive; We e5tinseished his competition, by buying
to say about Soliss Infringement, and respectfully
submit to the Court. that more paIpabe infringe
ment on patent was never presented to the just
anlmaiyersion OF II court administering the patent
laws in the United States The very instant it was
brought to Mr.. Goodyears notice, Instead Of igur-
ing up the profits, selling threads, and abetting in
the manufacturing Of it, he should have prosecuted
it, or else the duty to afford protection is nullity
and the language OF the covenant mere mOckery:
without meaning. | will trouble .v,,,v MI Iii
nr &c commentary on that suit in the womb Of
another lor- .s,ut. say that Solis's patont, org
mating at the distance Of thousand miles. is PLAIN
fraud on Goodycars patent, and IT have to cs-
which renders Goodyear's claim Of doubtful yalidi-
ty, Goodyea bus his own conduct 10 answer for it.
Goodyear has made claim which bears certain
construction, and by that construction nc is bound
lie has made n covenant with us, corresponding
with that patent, and corresponding with that
cialn and have only to ask the attenton OF the
Court to Goodyear patent. 70 show that 1t IS cn-
tircy clear on any construction OF the claim, as he
Las made it, that Soliss patent is an Infringement
uTon his Now, viii you refer to what Goodyears
and Solis's patents are, brought close together
Soils got q patent in 1913, and am now about 10
submit that it is 50 positively or apparently an in
vasion OF Goodbye or at best ~ mere patent for
improvement On Goodyoar's, which he could not
possibly use without Gocdycar's consent, that Good
year could not legally, or at least delicately or
properly, aid HIM Now. thuk, IN order to make
this little intelligible. ! opght to shy that
understand that iof the purpose OF showing that
uii-s patent e s4et Infringement on Guclrcars
they loy On this-that tho process by whirh he
makes his fabric is slghtr df.r,lit process in
very minute particular from Goodyear's process The
fabric out exactly shrrcd goodsso aho,gR upoa
the testimony susccptihic Ct app icaton exactly
the curs H. both cnsest Is cloth cofrlga
ted by aunon with rubber. y, both cases. the con
in unnatural state Of compassion corrugaton.
In both e., when the rIbber Is united With IT, the
cloth mny he drawn e rs Original snoath state, ~
brewing the India rubber % IN uanatural ssato Vt
tensile with H. They ago exactly tho same; Lnt in
n very minute detail Of the process by which Solis
maa,s has, tie ,ncrs itoIn tho process in which
Goodyear makes his; that II. the cetrrgaton or
pA AtC1 in tpS
irg the rubber nTnn the cloth, and then nc con
traction Of tho rubber shirs, corugltcs or draws
M tho cloth; and ia Sclis case ;ha' Tsst,it i
elected ~ pullin. tho cloth by iIna Htrength,,hy
hand, dasonn4y. aud then placing the uobcrrosds
across tho cloth ii tic opposite drcction ana aso
Giagonaly. Both seeh to bring the cloth into
compressed state. which ccirugutes il: They arc
the same exact goods. but minuttiy differing mo
ccsses Io patent process is one thing: but when
you iind hc Claims to patent tho fabric u sArred
corrugated goods by any process. then soils has
stolen i hoiy Or as 'Sc say on the lace q nc on,
tent. liwticnii! -mtaning q course. in q lcstl
seusc, larccny Now then. what is Goodyear
claim. ~, Charles Goodyear have invented now
ard usefiG what. 4 process! No-'anew aud usc-
stEic utefcn0cht i. - process: ana tiut new and
lseu gcods i ueIo;ui' atcd corrugated. or shicred
goods. Well then, re- tolls us. a. IL must tel ",
how he ldaECs t--'c I, dcssndaats printing pagc1,
TAT the eud) '-Althopgh 10 nor intend in this
specification to claim any particular apparatus"
&c. | Nishtd IL .hOw HI. Good scar does not claim
process, but Claims goods-lc article itself That
i the argument. Now. sr. The construction which
irtspcc;inlfr submit, Sc ire to import into that
part u TIC claim stards, as a whole. exactly thus.
J therefore sabnf u your honor that il i plain
case q claim iot n article and not ior process:
ald thca proceed 90 how. that il the latentce
takes The article, he violates the patent OF the gri
&c Bu there is sin one view 10 be takon Of the
Construction u t'ii patent ] understand Them to
say. ttat soils puts his rubber not in state Of
t. on BIT understand 'r. GoodJ ear 10 Soy, that
\ n, Ia n