The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-02-19

GOODYEAR had to the use OF his vucanzed rubber in
the manufacture Of the goods made according to
the SHRED goods patent valuable right still re-
manned in him. 1t il necessary, therefore, to look
at the exception to If that right was to
him; Tor if It were not reserved, 1t passed to the
company by the terms Of the grant.
That exception We here again extract:-"And,
Whereas the said Goodyear has heretofore sold TO
d. L. Suydam, of New York city, the right to manu-.
facture SHRED goods the said right is hereby ex-
cepted from the operation OF the instrument III al
ditiOn to the exceptions above mentioned No
thing is here reserved in Goodyear. Something Is
excepted in favor Of Suydam. The "said right" Is
hereby excepted" What is the "said right which
is so excepted from the operation of tue general
terms in the granting clause! The "sald right
! which Goodyear has heretofore sold to d. l.. Suy
DAM and nothing more. 1t is therefore in this con-
necton necessary to see what was sold to Suydam;
and when we have ascertained that we shall know
what was the limitation and exception to the gene
| raj terms of the granting clause
We have already shown what was sold to Suy-
| dam. His rights under the grant from Goodyear
| would expire on the 9th day OF March, 1858. They
! could continue no longer.
The grant to Day was for the unexpired term Of
any OF the patents enumerated and for all renewals
and extensions OF the same. 1t was, therefore, ut
all events, to continue until the 10th day of June,
| 1858; and as the vulcanized patent has been eX
tended, the term OF the expiration Of the grant is
not until the 10Th Of June, 1861 The grant to the
! Naugatuck Company was also for and during the
uneXpred term Of all patents issued to Goodyear,
! bearing any date whatsoever, or owned by him, or
|
to be issued and for any extensions OF the same
| It is claimed by the conplainants that the grant
| in the Naugatuck Company was not for any ex-
| tended term. When we come to the consideration
Of another point made in the case it will be shown
! that this grant carried the extended term.
The defendant claims that when Suydam on the
| 10th OF May, 1S45, reconveyed to Goodyear the
| right which he had, Goodyear received the recon-
| veyance in trust for the Naugatuck Company and
that from that time the right Of the company to use
| the vucanzed rubber in the manufacture Of "shr-
! red goods made according to the shirred goods
| patent, commenced and was vested. But the neces-
sites OF the case do not require determination OF
| the hitter question
! From what has been made to appear, it is mani
fest that at the time Of the release executed by the
| Naugatuck Company, they had right to the
| OF the vulcanized rubber "in the manufacture of
such SHRED corrugated goods as should be made
according to shrred goods patent after the 9th OF
! March 1865" which right it was important to Day
to have cancelled in order that he might have the
! full benefit of his extension grant, and that the
| release was obtained from and executed by the
| Naugatuck Company, with the view, among other
things, that they might be Invested OF this partlcu
/ lar right and that the same might be cancelled, so
that Day should have the full benefit OF his grant
In the investigation OF the question submitted for
decision we have had occasion to examine with
much particularly eight several deeds executed by
| Goodyear, namely: the deed to the Naugatnck
| Company, to Hutchinson d Runyon, to Ford y Co.,
| TO Onderdonk LetsOn, and the four deeds to Day
| the one to the Naugatuck Company having been
executed after Goodyear was Invested OF the right
which he granted TO Suydam to make "shirred or
corrugated goods" and the remaining seven having
! been executed after he was renvested in the
] right which he had granted to Suydam. When
| the deed to the Naugatuck Company was executed
lie had right to convey to them the exclusive
| right and privilege he thereby granted. The
terms used in the deed did carry that exclu-
! siye privilege; and they were sufficient to
! carry the whole and exclusive privilege to use
| such preparations in the manufacture of COR
Iugated goods cloths made after his shrred goods
J patent, and would have carried such whole privi-
| lege if prior right had not been outstanding in
| favor OF Suydam. Therefore the exception in the
| deed. And the question forcibly suggests itself to
the mind, why, if Goodyear intended, in the deeds
to Hutchinson Runy0n to Ford Co., to Onder.
donk Lets0n, and to Day, to convey license to
use vulcanzed rubber in the manufacture of elastic
woven rubber goods, he did not the terms
| which he used in the deed to the Naugatuck Com
papy instead Of using the terms " shirred or CORFU
gated goods.' The reason is obvious 1t is because
| he had right to convey license to use his vul
caniZed rubber in tue manufacture of elastic woven
goods, the entire aud exclusive right to them being
| IN the Naugauck Company. But as at the dates Of
these seven deeds he had the right to the shrred
and corrugated goods granted to Suydam, with the
| right TO in the manufacture of such goods his
preparations the rights granted to Suydan, having
| been conveyed back TO him, he intended in these
| seven deeds to grant them new extension. This
all the right granted so far as 1t respects shr-
red or corrugated goods" The licenses to Hutch
inson d Runyon, Ford l. Co., and Onderdonk &
| Lesson were free licenses to be enjoyed connect
! eddy separately. The grant to Day OF the 18th
| of October, 1886, was Of an exclusive right, but
subject to the right previously granted to the last
| named fiins which last mentioned rights, by the
articles of cement entered into on the 9Th day Of
| November, 1856, were by Goodyear to be cancelled,
condition precedent TO the right to hold Day to
| the covenants which he had entered into.
ii there were any doubt as to the meaning of the
terms in question, as understood by the parties at
the time the agreement of the 18th of October,
1916, entered into, and as used by them in that
| agreement, such doubt would be removed by con-
| dor finp rf fba 1onh nffb IF thar of
| the SHINE year. This last mentioned agreement was
executed by both Goodyear and Day, under their
hands and seals. 1t made after the several free
| licenses which had in the year 1915 been executed
! to Hutchinson Il Runyon, to Ford i Co., and to
Onderdonk & Letson, were delivered up to be can
celed; and the very day they were cancelled, at
! time when, after the cancellation, there were no
outstanding licences in favor of any one of them to
manufacture "shrred or corrugated goods" accord
| ing to the patent of March $, 1854, the grant to
Suydam before then having been re-assigned to
| Goodyear.
1t appears expressly by the first deed executed
| on the 9TH Of November 1916, and entitled "Arti-
Giles of Agreement that such articles were to be
additional or supplemental to the articles entered
into on the 10th Of October of the same year. which
articles in the deed of the earlier date, were to be
construed and governed ny the provisions in
the subsequent " articles OF agreement,
| wherein they might differ or be inconsis-
tent. but in all other respects were to remain in
full force And ii appears expressly by the second
deed Of the said 5th of November and entitled
! Memorandum of Agreement, that 1t was to be
auxiliary to the two preceding deeds. And it is to
be inferred that this deed Of the 5th Of December
! was executed Tor the same purposes for which the
two deeds OF the 9TH of November were executed.
II was made for some purpose, and If it were not
made to place the subject of the grant beyond all
doubt and dispute, it rs difficult to conceive OF
son Why il was made; for in it there are no addi-
tional grants made and no additional covenants on
the part OF Goodyear; and by 1T Goodyear was not
absolved from any Of the covenants which he had
previously made. Day entered into new
| naut and was not absolved from any of the oblga-
tons of the covenants previously entered into.
The agreement Of the 9TH of December rected
| that Goodyear was the owner Of the four several
patents already mentioned and possessed the sole
and exclusive right to the same so far relates TO
the Of all any OF the patented articles in the
preparing and manufacturing shrred or corrugated
! goods except the three said several licenses for
the same, which were simultaneously herewith to