Akron daily Democrat. [volume] (Akron, Ohio) 1892-1902, 1902-06-07

sti uClioii ny CidiHiiuS tndI ny ulo hiouc
of construction he has produced "a rub
Der tired wheel rim which is capable
of more use and which will remain in
position better than any other tire
which has ever been put upon the
market
The first claim of the Grant patent
is for a combination of three ele-
ments:
First-A metallic channel rim, hav-
ing angularly projecting tianges,
shown as in Fig. 2, forming a
channel with inclinng sidcs,into which
the rubber fits.
Second--A solid rubber tire having an
inner portion adapted to fit in the
channel rim and an outer portion form
ing an angle or corner with the inner
portion, the corner being somewhat
below the top of the channel seat or
metallic rim.
Third-Independent retaining wires
lpassing entirely through the rubber
! tires horizontally, and located below
the outer periphery of the flaring sides
of the channel seat. The drawings
heretofore set out will better explain
these parts, especially if sSulincd in
the light of the description of the
patent also fully set out.
The decision points orr 'arSt. that It
, was not new to set solid rubber tires
, into iron channels with flHt,ng fnngrs,
the widest part of the rubber being
, below the periphery of the channel
J sides, second, that it was not new to
use solid rubber bands of
, tie peculiar shape o' that employed
: by Grant so far as that shape has any
substantial bearing upon the question
/ of novelty here to be considered; and
: third, that it was not new to use one
| or two or more wires for the InrpOs e
: OF retaining the rubber tightly IN the
: cnannel seat.
l The mere bringing together Of cd
e parts and allowing each to work out its
: own old effort Without producing some
!, new machine or pro1uc; Is not inven
n ton.
"a combination of old elements to be
; patentable, must produce different
force or effect, or result in the COM
bned forces or processes, from that
given by their separate parts. There
u must be new result produced by
: their union; if not, it is only an aggre-
: CATION of separate elements
After analyzing various claims made
;. regarding the functions of rubber
-, wheel tire, the decision continues
q "Grant has shown great industry in
; acquiring knowledge of what others
4 had done or taught in the attempt to
;. make marketable rubber tire wheel
!. and has shown good judgment in
. selecting from earlier structures OF
earlier teachings the best of the de-
vices thus made known, and good
judgment in combining them with
mechanical skill. But we can discover
no trace of invention or original
thought, for his parts as combined dc
substantially the same operations
which they did in the combinations
from which he took them. He has
united the most beneficial features OF
other patents, and in that sense has
made new combination. But he has
not produced new manufacture or a
! new result in patentabk sense"
The decision says in one place
"Much of the superiority, or rather
superior dura bility, of Grants tire is
undoubtedly due to the quality of the
rubber used, in respect to which there
has been in late years great i'm
provement."
| The Rubber Tire Wheel Co. (Spring
| field, Ohio was incorporated under
| the Ohio laws, June 2 1894, to manu-
| facture solid rubber tires under q
| patent issued In 1893 to Arthur w
| Grant.
| The original capital was $4,000
| which was gradually increased to $45,
| 600. The Grant patent which ha
| been the subject of later litigation wa
| issued in 1896 In April, 1899, the Rub
| ber Tire Wheel Co, was merged for
| consideration reported at $1,250,00O
| into the Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.
| together with several tire selling con
| Germs, the authorized capital of the ney
J corporation being $l0,000,000. At tha