PATENTS AND THE RIGHTS OF MANUFACTURERS.
Early in last winter, a great rivalry began to develop itself in the business of manufacturing velocipedes; and the demand became so large, as to lead the principal carriage-makers of the country into making it an important branch of their business. At that time it was generally understood that any manufacturer was at liberty to make the two-wheeled velocipede, in any way he deemed most profitable.
When thefurorefirst manifested itself, Mr. Calvin Witty of Broadway, New York, saw it would be a “big thing,†and very quietly went to work to find out in what way the business of making the machine could be controlled. He ascertained, by careful investigation, that a patent had been recorded, covering the principal features of the bicycle, now in such popular use. He sought out the owners of the patent, found them in moderate circumstances, eager to turn to account rights which had heretofore been of but little avail, and purchased of them for a comparatively small sum. He now claims to holdthe right to the exclusive use of the two-wheeled velocipede, with treadle and guiding arms. This patent, however, does not cover the idea of making a two-wheeled machine, or of applying a propelling power.
As soon as Mr. Witty had completed his arrangements, he ascertained the names of parties engaged in manufacturing velocipedes throughout the country, and the majority of them were the astonished recipients of the following notification:—
“No. 638 Broadway, N. Y.,Feb. 3d, 1869.“You are hereby notified, that Letter Patent No. 59,915, granted Nov. 20th, 1866, secures a velocipede with the two wheels, treadle, and guiding arms; and that the velocipede you are manufacturing is an infringement upon said patent. The present is to require you to cease the further manufacture of said velocipede, and to settle with me for all past infringements of the rights under said patent.(Signed)   “CALVIN WITTY.â€
“No. 638 Broadway, N. Y.,Feb. 3d, 1869.
“You are hereby notified, that Letter Patent No. 59,915, granted Nov. 20th, 1866, secures a velocipede with the two wheels, treadle, and guiding arms; and that the velocipede you are manufacturing is an infringement upon said patent. The present is to require you to cease the further manufacture of said velocipede, and to settle with me for all past infringements of the rights under said patent.
(Signed)   “CALVIN WITTY.â€
The following is a copy of the record of the patent, registered at the Patent Office in Washington:—
“Patent No. 59,915. Pierre Lallement, Paris, France, assignor to himself and James Carroll, New Haven, Conn. Velocipede. Nov. 20th, 1866.“The fore wheel is axled in the jaws of a depending bar which is riveted in the frame, and turned by a horizontal lever bar. This wheel is revolved by a treadle crank.Claim: The combination and arrangement of the two wheels, provided with the treadles and the guiding arms, so as to operate substantially, and for the purpose, herein set forth.â€
“Patent No. 59,915. Pierre Lallement, Paris, France, assignor to himself and James Carroll, New Haven, Conn. Velocipede. Nov. 20th, 1866.
“The fore wheel is axled in the jaws of a depending bar which is riveted in the frame, and turned by a horizontal lever bar. This wheel is revolved by a treadle crank.Claim: The combination and arrangement of the two wheels, provided with the treadles and the guiding arms, so as to operate substantially, and for the purpose, herein set forth.â€
Some manufacturers were nonplused by Mr. Witty’s warning, and stopped their work entirely. Others paid no attention to the demand, considering the royalty required worthy of a trial; for if it could be proved that a similarly constructed velocipede had been introduced into the country before the date of application, the inventor being an alien, the patent would be void; or it would be rendered null also, if the patentee had neglected to put into market and continue the sale of the invention, within eighteen months after the date of patent. Others still, including most of the carriage-makers and machinists of note in the country, who had gone into this business, took pains to have legal advice upon the subject. A meeting was finally held by them; and the result was a determination to purchase State and city rights, for the use of his patent, of Mr. Witty.
We give the names of the prominent firms and parties who have received licenses for the manufacture and sale of velocipedes, under Patent No. 59,915:—
Wm. P. Sargent & Co., and John P. Whittier, Boston, Mass., Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire, excepting the cities of New Bedford, Taunton, Fall River, and Fair Haven, Mass.; Kimball Bros.,Boston, for the State of Maine; Wood Bros., Connecticut, excepting one shop right; Pickering & Davis, New York City, one shop right; Mercer & Monod, New York City, one shop right; C. Merrill and Sons, Brooklyn, one shop right. G. L. Brownell, New Bedford, Mass., New Bedford exclusive; G. C. Elliott, Providence, R. I., Rhode Island exclusive. J. M. Quimby, Newark, N. J., New Jersey exclusive.
Mr. Witty now has his hands full of business; employs three clerks to write for him constantly, and has fallen upon a mine of wealth, if he succeeds in maintaining the validity of his claim. He charges the manufacturers ten dollars apiece, royalty, for every machine turned out. If a maker, however, obtains a license to manufacture less than a hundred, he pays fifteen dollars royalty; if under twenty, twenty-five dollars apiece.
Sargent and Whittier, of Boston, and many others of the manufacturers, who have purchased State and town rights, have sent out within their limits circulars similar to those of Mr. Witty, but with the following N. B. attached:—
“Those using the two-wheeled velocipedes, not manufactured under a license, and not having the proper stamp, are also liable for infringement upon said letter patent.â€
“Those using the two-wheeled velocipedes, not manufactured under a license, and not having the proper stamp, are also liable for infringement upon said letter patent.â€
We present an engraving taken from the Patent Office Reports, showing the Lallement patent of1866. In thisvelocethe cranks, F, are points of great interest, as the claim is for the combination of these treadle cranks with the two wheels A and B, reach C, guiding arms D, and the fork in which the front wheel is hung. We attribute the unpopularity of the old dandy-horse to its lack of these cranks, while the great success of the modernveloceis due to the crank application. In thisveloceit will be noticed that the reach, C, extends over the rear wheel, and a V brace on each side of the wheel connects the axle to the reach. With this style of reach or frame, it was found very difficult to construct avelocesufficiently steady to run with any degree of satisfaction.
There is still another New York patentee, Stephen W. Smith, who claims that the so-called French Velocipede is an American invention, perfected in this country, and introduced into France by patent, and personally by himself; and that the idea was stolen from him by the French manufacturers. He obtained his patent in 1862, for a “cantering propellerâ€for children, or hobby-horse mounted on wheels; and considers his patent to include the combinations used upon all velocipedes, and threatens to prosecute infringements.
This patent has lately been reissued for the purpose of widening the claims and to attempt to cover the whole ground occupied by the patent bicycle of M. Lallement. The reissued claim is as follows:—
“1st claim, in combination with a saddle-seat for the rider, the employment and use of a cranked axle, arms, and foot-rest, so arranged that the power applied by the feet of the rider shall give motion to the vehicle, substantially as described and specified.“2. The combination of the following elements, namely, a saddle-seat for the rider, a cranked axle, for propelling the vehicle by power applied by the feet of the rider, and a steering mechanism so constructed that the direction of travel of the vehicle may be governed by the rider, substantially as described and specified.“3. The universal joint, in combination with the fulcrum of the vehicle, and the steering wheel, constructed and operating substantially as, and for, the purposes specified.“4. The hinged legs in combination with the body of the horse, and with the cranks substantially as and for the purposes specified.“5. The foot-rests upon the arms, substantially as and for the purposes specified.“6. The double-armed levers, and diagonal cords, in combination with the handle and steering wheel, substantially as described and specified.â€
“1st claim, in combination with a saddle-seat for the rider, the employment and use of a cranked axle, arms, and foot-rest, so arranged that the power applied by the feet of the rider shall give motion to the vehicle, substantially as described and specified.
“2. The combination of the following elements, namely, a saddle-seat for the rider, a cranked axle, for propelling the vehicle by power applied by the feet of the rider, and a steering mechanism so constructed that the direction of travel of the vehicle may be governed by the rider, substantially as described and specified.
“3. The universal joint, in combination with the fulcrum of the vehicle, and the steering wheel, constructed and operating substantially as, and for, the purposes specified.
“4. The hinged legs in combination with the body of the horse, and with the cranks substantially as and for the purposes specified.
“5. The foot-rests upon the arms, substantially as and for the purposes specified.
“6. The double-armed levers, and diagonal cords, in combination with the handle and steering wheel, substantially as described and specified.â€
The first and second claims are intended to embrace, and do embrace, as far as words can accomplish it, the essential elements of the velocipede now in use. It remains to be determined by the courts how far the rival claimants clash with each other. The manufacturers have as yet paid but very little attention to the demands of Mr. Smith.
In 1867, the Hanlon Brothers devised an improved style of reach, consisting of a bifurcated bar, or fork, in the jaws of which the hind wheel is allowed to revolve; while the single end of this fork forms part of the swivel, over the front wheel. Not yet satisfied with thisveloce, on account of the difficulty they found in using the same machine for their in-door performances, and out-door exhibitions, they had the saddle arranged so as to be enabled to vary its position nearer to, or farther from, the front wheel, and at the same time had slots made in the cranks, so that the treadle might be adjusted to various lengths. The alterations were found to be of such benefit, that application for a patent covering these improvements was made by them, and granted by the Patent Office. We know of no velocipedes now being made in this country, which do not include in their construction all these late improvements, and the Hanlons are also notifying manufacturers of the existence of their claims.
The Patent powers in Washington are literallyoverwhelmed with applications for patents of different models of these articles. In a large room in the Patent Office, there are some four hundred of these models awaiting investigation. Over eighty models have already been examined and patents for them issued; others are now under examination. Some hundred caveats or notices that patents will be applied for have been lately filed. In one week eighty applications and caveats were received. One single agency in New York city has lately prepared seventy patents for improvements.