Cutcheon v. Herrick

• Decision Date: 09 September 1892
• Docket Number: 2,882.
• Citation: 52 F. 147
• Parties: CUTCHEON et al. v. HERRICK et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts

52 F. 147

CUTCHEON et al. v. HERRICK et al.

No. 2,882.

United States Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts.

September 9, 1892

Alexander P. Browne and George W. Moulton, for complainants.

Charles A. Taber, for defendants.

COLT Circuit Judge.

The present suit is for the infringement of letters patent No 384,893, issued June 19, 1888, to the complainants, as assignees of James C. Cutcheon. The patent is for an improvement in beating out machines. These machines are used to give the sole of a shoe the requisite curve or contour. Originally this was done by the cobbler holding the shoe between his knees, and beating the sole with a flat-faced hammer. In the operation of these beating out machines three motions are necessary,-- the motion of pressure, the motion of clearance, and the motion of removal. The first machine of this character was constructed under the Johnson patent of November 26, 1867. This apparatus consisted of a hand-operated screw press, in which the sole of the shoe was forced against a mold or base plate having the proper curvature to give the sole the desired shape. This was followed by the Johnson patent of March 10, 1868. In this device the shoe was supported upon an iron last, mounted upon a bar moving vertically between the guide to and from a fixed mold. The last was connected with a toggle lever, and a foot lever, and the operator, by placing his foot upon the foot lever, forced up the last against the mold. The next Johnson patent is dated July 22, 1873, in which the machine was operated by a power driving shaft, so that when the operator had pressed the treadle down part way the power of the shaft would force the sole against the mold. In his patent of June 30, 1874, the same inventor substitutes a jack for the iron last or shoe carrier. This jack was adapted to carry several sizes of wooden lasts, whereas, in the case of the iron last a separate last must be provided for each size of shoe. The next improvement of Johnson was patented July 20, 1880. In place of a single pressing mechanism, this machine contains a number of such mechanisms arranged side by side, and for this reason it became known in the art as a 'gang' machine. The next patent referred to in the record was granted to Maurice V. Bresnahan, June 10, 1884. This was also a 'gang' machine. In this device the motions are horizontal, instead of vertical, as in previous machines. It is unnecessary to enter into the specific...