The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-07-29
II o r A o y M /. D A :

II Q r A q u M. D a z,
AFFIRMING HIS TITLE AND EXCLUSIVE RIGHT 10
TIE USE OF
VUlCANlzED RUBBER IN ALL ELASTIC FABRICS,
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES,
DISTRICT OF MARYLAND.
Horace H. Day ct al. us. John Stellm,an Ell. al
Decree Of Judge Giles on final hearing on pleadings
and proofs, reported by W. H. Burr, and revised by
the Court.
GILES 1.-THE case of Charles Goodyear Horace
II. Day and Alexander Hay VS.. John Stellman and
Others, occupied the attention Of this Court some
nine days, and argued with ability and inteli
gence on both sides scarcely ever surpassed, and
only repeat what said the other day, that through
out the entire argument the Court never wearied
or lost its interest in it, feeling that the case was
full of most important and interesting questions
that there must be, from all the surrounding cir
cumstances, large amounts involved in the true de-
csion of the controversy and that it was only ano
ther evidence of the value of the patent of June
Is, 1874, which has rendered the gum of South
American tree of the marvels Of the day in its
tageousy IN almost every department Of industry
and to minister to mans comfort In thousand
ways.
Since the adjournment of the Court have very
tanned in the dispositions and documents, and having
made up my mind in reference to the disposition
of the cause, have thought it best not to wait to
prepare written opinion, but to announce it as
soon as possible. / prefer to do this in all cases,
because It enables me to do more jnstice to the
arguments of counsel while they are fresh in the
mind of the Court, and take that course now, in
this case, rather than let it pass over the summer
vacation, and decide it in the fall.
The bill was filed on the 18th Of December last.
II set forth that letters patent were granted to
Charles Goodyear on the 18th day of June, 1874,
for new process of preparing India rubber for
surrendered on account Of defects in its specified
ton; and on the 25th of December, 1874, two new
patents were granted to Goodyear-ene for an inn
provement in telling India rubber with cotton fibre
with which we have nothing to do in this case),
and the other for an Improvement in processes for
the manufacture of India rubber; that these two
patents were for the term of fourteen years from
the 18th Of June, 1874; that the Commissioner of
Patents on the l4th day Of june 1858, after full ar
gument granted an extension of said patents for
the term of seven years from the 18th of June,
1885, that subsequently Goodyear by several instru
ments made in Is46, sold and assigned to Day, one
of the compainants, the said patents so far as re-
lated to the preparation and manufacture of shrred
or elastic India rubber goods, except in 80 far
the right to manufacture said goods had been part
ed with by Goodyear by three several licenses viz:
To Hutchinson & Runyon Ford & Co. and Onder-
donk & Letson, which said licenses were duly as
signed to the said Goodyear subsequently, and by
him assigned to Day.
It then sets forth that in October, 1882 Day as
signed all his interest under this contract to Wins
low, Syms Gilbert; that these parties assigned it
to the Congress Rubber Company, corporation of
the city of New York and that said company in
1857 reassigned the interest to Day. 80 that all the
interest conveyed by the contracts of 1886 are now
vested in Day, except small portion which Day
parted with to his co-complainant, Hay, on the lst
of October 1858.
The bill further sets forth that Goodyear, on the
18th of May 1858, conveyed to said Day the full,
absolute and exclusive license right and privilege
to make, use and vend his, the said Goodyears in
vention Of vucanized rubber, as described and pa
tented in the ressued patent granted to him on the
25th day OF December, A. D. ls49. for the present
and all extended or renewed terms of said patent,
as the same may or can be used in the manufacture
of all braided, woven, cemented or sewed fabrics,
or such can be covered or protected on one
both sides with substances other than rubber and
in all smooth, elastic shirred goods; and also to
make and sell India rubber threads of vuleani.od
rubber, and all threads or sheets Of rubber which
are or can be made finished by union with or to
be covered by tibrous substances"
It then sets forth that in 1850 Goodyear instituted
suits in New Jersey in equity and At law against
New Jersey, in which the validity of these patents
was maintained, as reported in Wallace, Jr.s Re-
ports page 1888.
It further AYERS that the defendants in this case
have violated the patent of June Is, 1874, as
issued December 25 lS49, and extended on the 18th
day of June 1858, by selling large quantities of sus
penders which are made of vucanized India rubber,
and are shrred or corrugated goods; and it prays
an Injunction and account.
The defendants in their answer, set up as their
defence, that the complantants, Day and Hay, have
no title to the said patent for the purposes set forth
in said BILL that by the contracts oflS46 set up in
the bill and relied upon by the complainants, Good
year, on certain conditions, granted to Day the pri-
vilege of using vulcanized India rubber in the manu-
facture and sale of corrugated or shrred India rub
Der goods which are described in the patent of
A.. at fho n0t
the I'd day of October 1885, sold any corrugated or
shirred India rubber goods so made under the pa
tent of March 8, and that they have done nothing to
infringe any rights held by the compainants. They
admit that they have sold goods composed in
part Of vulcanized rubber. which the COM
plainants have right to manufacture and sell; but
they claim that the right to manufacture such
goods is vested in other parties under certain as
signments from Goodyear; and they set up the
contract of the 18th of July, 1874, between Good
year and the Naugatuck India Rubber Company,
and several assignments which vested its rights in
the Union India Rubber Company.
Two agreements have been filed in this cause, one
setting the cause down for final hearing and arrang
ing the terms of decree, If the Court should de-
eide in favor Of the compliments so as to dispense
with the trouble and delay of taking an account;
and the other in reference to the testimony on
which the case has been heard So that the cause
has been heard under these agreements on final
hearing, and is now before the Court for final de-
cree.
tracts and assignments of 1885, and the deed of as
signment of May "a, 1858, and the decision of this
cause rests on the construction which the Court
may give to those instruments.
The first question under the contracts of 1916 is,
What did Goodyear assign to Day by the paper of
the 10Th of October 1915, the first in the series?
Tee complanants allege that by that paper Good
year assigned to Day the right to manufacture all
India rubber goods that were shrred, and to use in
the manufacture thereof Goodyear's invention of
vulcanized rubber, as patented to him on the 18th
of June, 1874, and re-issued on the 25th of Deem
Der, I849. On the other hand the defendants al
lege that the term "shirred or corrugated goods,'
as used in the contracts of 1916, is limited and was
intended to be limited to the goods made under the
patent of March ., 1874, and does not include any
other "shirred goods" which might be made Of vul-
canized rubber.
The first thing which we ascertain in the exami-
nation of this contract is that by it, terms it in
shirred; "shirred' being technical term meaning
"wrinkled," or CONTRACTED" Upon the face of