October i, 1907.] 



THE INDIA RUBBER WORLD 



23 



according to his previous investigations, might be converted into 

 rubber. The result is the patented process of converting guayule 

 into what he calls "Mexican Yucatan." 



The patents and processes were transferred by Mr. Heyl-Dia 

 to the Para Recovery Co., of which he has taken charge. The 

 output of Mexican Yucatan five months ago was about 800 

 pounds per day. The output a month ago was six times greater, 

 and one firm alone took 100,000 pounds. From the results ob- 

 tained commercially during this short period, Mr. Heyl-Dia be- 

 lives that this product will continue to be appreciated by the 

 rubber trade. 



This development of the treatment of crude rubbers is a basic 

 one and, as far as known to Mr. Heyl-Dia, the first attempt at 

 producing a process rubber, accompanied by success. The product 

 has a tensile strength of 30 per cent, above guayule, and is, com- 

 paratively speaking, the cheapest crude rubber in the market, 

 comparing it with other medium grades. 



It is understood that the conversion of other crude rubbers 

 into more valuable products is taking shape, and there is a 

 promise of developments in this branch that will open a new 

 area in the preparation of crude rubbers. 



G & J TIRE CO. LOSE A SUIT. 



A TIRE patent decision of more than usual interest was ren- 

 dered during the month, being the first that has been 

 recorded in the suits for infringement brought by The G & J 

 Tire Co., owners of the patents on tires of the Clincher type in 

 America. It will be remembered that when the manufacture of 

 these tires was begun in England by the American company, 

 under patents granted to them abroad, the British courts were 

 appealed to successfully to restrain such manufacture, on the 

 ground that it infringed the patents of William Erskine Bartlett. 

 The fight was a bitter one, and long drawn out, the final de- 

 cision being rendered by the House of Lords. Similarly the 

 efforts of the English manufacturers to introduce the Bartlett 

 clincher tires into the United States were met by the G & J 

 people with infringement suits which they won. " 



For several years past the G & J patents have been respected 

 by most of the American tire manufacturers, and suits have 

 been pending against those makers who declined to pay royalties. 

 The suit just decided was that of "The GormuUy & Jeffery Tire 

 Co. vs. The Pennsylvania Rubber Co.," filed in May, 1905, in the 

 United States circuit court for the western district of Pennsyl- 

 vania. The decision was rendered by Judge Joseph Buffington at 

 Pittsburgh, on September 9. 



The suit charged infringement, in the manufacture of automo- 

 bile tires, of four patents issued to Thomas B. Jeffery, and now 

 owned by the plaintiff company, as follows : 



No. 454,115, issued July 16, 1891. 



No. 466,565, issued January 5, 1892. 



No. 523,314, issued July 17, 1894. 



No. 558,956, issued April 28, 1896. 



The respondent contended that the patents were invalid and 

 denied infringement, and, after a lengthy review of the various 

 claims alleged to be infringed, the court holds "that no infringe- 

 ment of any of the patents is shown." The bill of complaint, 

 therefore, was dismissed. The G & J Tire Co. have filed an 

 appeal, which they hope will be argued this fall, with the prospect 

 of a decision early in the spring. 



Judge Buffington points out that all the patents here involved 

 antedated the automobile art and contemplated use on bicycles. 

 A pneumatic tire for vehicles embodies an inner inflatable tube, 

 protected by a flexible sheath. The four patents all concern 

 the engagement of such external sheath to the rim of the vehicle 

 wheel. Taking up the first patent, the court discussed the word- 

 ing of the claims regarding the hooked edges of the tire sheath 

 and the corresponding hooks in the rim, reaching the conclusion 

 that "if the disclosure of that patent comprised all the instruction 



the tire maker of to-day, it is evident the art would not teach 

 the method followed by both respondent and complainant in 

 the manufacture of a modern automobile tire." The court is 

 unable to construe this Jeffery patent, with its specific form of 

 hook connection, so as to make it cover respondent's device. Not 

 only does the latter differ from the description in the patent, but 

 even the complainant has departed from the original hooked 

 engagement, and follows the same method as the defendant. 



It is stated — not in the decision of course — that during the 

 taking of testimony in behalf of the Pennsylvania Rubber Co., 

 an automobile tire was shown, made exactly in accordance with 

 the specifications of the G & J patent No. 44,115. The re- 

 spondent claimed that such a tire would not be practical; that it 

 could only be mounted on or dismounted from the rim by a 

 skilled mechanic. This contention was demonstrated, it is said, 

 when it was found to be practically impossible to engage the 

 beads of the tire with the hooks of the rim, on account of the 

 shape of the latter. 



In a statement emanating from the plaintiff's side since the 

 decision was filed, it is intimated that to hold that the defendants 

 do not infringe, means that neither the owners of the patent 

 nor its licensees since the grant of the patents have ever manu- 

 factured the structure called for by the patents, because the 

 clincher tire of the defendant is precisely the same as that which 

 has been continuously manufactured by the G & J company and 



all its licensees. 



* * * 



The suit brought by The G & J Tire Co. against the Michelin 

 company was commenced by filing bill of complaint in the United 

 States circuit court in the southern district of New York on 

 . September 21, 1904. The patents involved are the four mentioned 

 in the preceding article and also No. 466,789, issued to Thomas 

 B. Jeffery, on January 12, 1892, and No. 493,160, issued to W. 

 Golding, March 7, 1893. 



"RECORD SHIPMENT OF RUBBER." 



UNDER the above heading Tlie Times of Ceylon, of Colombo, 

 dated June 28 last, reported: 



"The Gutenfels, which left to-day for New York, took over 

 200 cases of rubber. Of this, Messrs. Crosfield, Lampard & Co. 

 have alone shipped 190 cases." 



This corresponds to an item in the reports of rubber arrivals 

 at New York in The India Rubber World of September i (page 

 391), the steamer mentioned belonging to the Hansa Line, of 

 Bremen, trading regularly between New York, Calcutta, and 

 Colombo : 



Aug. 12. — By the Gutenfcls^Co\oYaho'. 



A. T. Mcrse & Co. 



•22,500 



*Denotes Plantation Rubber. 



This is not the first time that the same connection has been 



traced between shipments of rubber from the Far East, for such 

 shipments are now becoming frequent. In the English rubber 

 trade it has been possible for two or three years past to trace the 

 shipment of large quantities of rubber, not merely from some 

 forwarding house in the East, but from the plantations. For 

 example, in the reported results of a recent London auction men- 

 tion was made of 91 distinct lots of plantation rubber, with marks 

 to indicate it as the product of 49 different plantations, the price 

 realized in each case being given. It would be possible for one 

 interested to go still further and trace a particular lot of rubber 

 from the producer to the factory consuming it. 



Acme Belting Co. (Phillipsburg, N. J.) were incorporated in 

 March, 1907, under the laws of New Jersey, to manufacture 

 cotton belting, fire hose, cordage, etc., with $100,000 capital 

 authorized. Two of the incorporators are Charles H. Halton, 

 president, and Philip S. Dyer, secretary and treasurer of the 

 American Horse Shoe Co., of Phillipsburg. 



