The New York herald., 1862-11-03
IMPORTANT INDIA RuBsER CASE.
United States Circuit Court, Southern
District 81 New York.

IMPORTANT INDIA RuBsER CASE.
Unissa states Cire.ls Court, Southern
District o. New York.
Hsnrv a. Goeausay. az Idr;nistycsor and Conrad Pop
pe~Asss~ w. ksssr Dsxs~Ae6w, Jos Stsinsrt Salo ss
yehason; RssAmors, Cone q Co. Chapman fvor q
Noyes; George s. kagfsy Co.; Sssa'nar ko,.nheim
Dsoesesr Robert Hasring, Leo gsrS Sa.sn9.ra "a.
Marks, Palmer d CushpsaH. ~" - "0'e"S
ooTonss ~, lse2-rerse ior complainants in the
~ ',, a 30 for In said bills, in the Of
VmcanW Cclnpauy, ct al. j. NELSON.
~ Goodyear, administrator, 4, al. Us. Nee York
9va Peca0 and India RAIDER tucdsite C6npdau Oscar
faks q aI-NKIsoS, G 1.-THE bill in this case fled
npcn two ressned patents TO the complainant admins
yefcr 0f new and useful improvements in The maufsc
Of India rubber. The original patent him bears
date 6th May 1851 the rcissued patents 18th May 1883
This invention relates to Improvement in the process
Of preparing India rubber and other vulcanzed gums
described in the previous Wei known patent 0. Charles
Goodyear, and by which improved process a lew
subsaIce produced, distinct in character from that
produced ~ the inv ention Of Charles Goodyear and used
different i generally snGwn ss
claim, the the process Of manufacturing the hard
ru1hsr compound, the other the product There was
sss Ssss ssss sa 20
specification.
The utility Of this improvement is not questioned II
has been before the courts incidentally heretofore and
the subject Of observation In the case Poppenhu
Fake and others, decided October torn 1851
what known tho "Tin Foil Patent Judge Ship
man, delivering the opinion Of the Court
That in the year 1851 Nelson Goodyear patented the
peculiar substance known as the hard Of India
rubber He produced this remarkablo mataria bv com,
binat0n, when operated by the proper degree heat
proved TO be Of great value, aud well adapted to
great variety Of II Is FREQ from any disagree ~,
Odor impenetrabe to ordinary fluids, hard, like . 10
ivory, susceptible Of polish, and with clae S y
lar in kind TO that OF tempered steel. F. >sy e. @
poses of utility and ornament its value many pu.
extensive use IN the community" f - -
The only serious question out Of The facts in this
Goodyear This has been ,rar,nnsx contas,oS hv tba
learned counsel for tho DEFENDANTS and requires
notice.
The proofs sho tia, Goooyear began his experments
with view tho Improvement early the year IS47,
auu .@ had nearly completed them as early as the
cveat IN the Patent once containing description Of the
iuvenson, ana which embraces, substantially all the in
required at this day 70 the article
This, as We have seen was followed up by patent
dated 9th May, lStl-the application bearing date De-
cember, 1850.
The defence Of want Of novelty in Goodyear is placed
lst The patent Of Austin Day, dated 9th November,
1855, and
I'd Patent to Charles Hancock, England enrolled llth
July, 1916.
There other criticisms in the proofs referred
in the argument Of counsel bearing upon this question
but we regard them as too unmportant to require any
particular notice
relied on to show want Of originality Goodyear. Per-
haps this Is not quito exact statement Of the ground
defence uuder
The defendants claim that they carry their manufac-
tnre OF the compound under this patent and set that
the process is different from that Of Goodyear.
The OF Goodyear Is found in the Of De-
cember ls49 the patent Of May 1851 and in the issues
In the caveat he sates-aMy intention or discovery
consists in the production, by Of composition Of
India rubber and sulphur subjected 10 intense heat of
new and useful substance hitherto unknown resembling
in hardness bono horn, extensively applica-
Bile, and less costly in use than either of those SUBJ
Stances" .TDe main and Indispensable ingredients Of
vn6tQ
phur Of these take certain proportions equal parts
by weight of each and mix thsm thoroughly in any
venient manner These proportions he observes, may
however, be considerably without changing mate.
rally the product" .
is combined with rubber, sthat much hess Quantity Of
sulphur than four ounces TO pound Of Rubber would be
In his patent Of May, 1861 hs obseryes-"Further OK
perimens made BY me since The fling Of the have
confirmed the entire success Of my invention
And then after describing the process-rst compound
ing India rubber and sulphur, and second combining
with them other ingredents-he states 1.-THE propor-
specified in both these compounds may be
ably varied without materially changing the result but
in no case will much less quantity Of sulphur than
ounces TO every pound of caoutchouc be sufficient In
which respect particularly my compounds differ very
essentially from every other composition Of India rubber
in use; In all other rubber compositions, the least
aimed at.n
and in greater detail, but substantially the same tho
difference consists in separating the claim and the issuing
Now Austin G. Days patent is dated 9th November,
1885, nine years after the filing Goodyears cayea and
after his patent. and nhs specification he says ~
took up the bard rubber manufacture at the time Of
issue of the Nelson Goodyear patent OF 1851 having
single object in viewnamey, the OF hard
elastic compound in which used with success both rub
ber and glftta percha'
Again he says:-"My invention consists in a special
mode Of making hard but highly elastic gum compound
by process differing length time in the degree OF
heat and in the proportion Of the ingredients and in the
mode OF equazng the temperature from that described
He then claims, 1st "Thc running the heat for vul
canzing flexible and elastic hard gum compounds through
the high range OF temperature, and the compare lively
great length OF time substantially FORTH that is 10
commencing tho heat at about 275 degrees and car
ryng the same to 300 degrees and upward, substantially
I'd. "The making as described, the flexible and elastic
harlequin composition Of two parts by weight Of rubber
or other vulcanzab!e gum and one part sulphur when
such composition preparatory running Of the heat
as described in there specifications
Now, as to the degree OF heat 70 be applied in the
manufacturing Of this hard compound Nelson Goodyear
IN his patent OF May 1851 refers to the patent Of Charles
from 2l2 degrees to $50 degrees depending On The hic
mess OF the composition, and adds-In most cases the
heat will be required to be raised high a. 2eo degrees
or 80 degrees and the time OF exposure OF heat will
range from three 10 six hours longcr' The cayeat
stated the range between $50 degrees 900 degrees de-
pending upon size OF compound. aEs
II quite apparent from this reference 10 the several
that there nothing the subject OF the degree
10 the Austin patent but what Is found in tha Of Nelson
Goodyear. IS
Inen as 70 tLc proportors OF no rubber and sulphur
Austin adopts two parts rubber and one SULPHUR.
Goodyeariu his patent OF 1851, siates tst the Sest
proportion win be about equal parts 1Atsthe proper.
items may be considerably varied withn6e ssaierialy
changing the result but that in cls be- less
than four ouBccs Of sulphur to pound Of rubber The
caveat contained the same substantially.
We perceive ne ground for the claim 10 any improve.
ment BY Austin In this'branch of the case
Much was said on this argument end also by witnesses
on the part OF The ds'endans in resrct 70 the qualities
impaired 70 the hard compound BY 6s patsuees in the
descriptions.
Goodyear in his patent OF 1851 claims the "combnias
Of India rubber and sulphur, 20 for making isrd and
inkexiDc substance, Hitherto unknown substantially as
dsscribed.H -
III hI. eaveas e Describes hsra and g, q Substance