Walder v. Ulrich

83 F. 477, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 2859
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey
DecidedOctober 27, 1897
StatusPublished

This text of 83 F. 477 (Walder v. Ulrich) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Walder v. Ulrich, 83 F. 477, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 2859 (circtdnj 1897).

Opinion

KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.

This is a bill in equity, filed to obtain an injunction restraining the infringement of hitters patent Ko. 289,872, granted December 11, 1883, to A. Urbalm, and by him assigned to Jacob Walder, the complainant, for an improved loom for making French harness. French harness has been long known and most extensively used in the art of weaving. It consists of a large number of huddles, each of which is composed of two interlooping threads, looped alternately equidistant above and below the plane of the center of the harness. A reference to Fig. 11. of the drawings of the patent shows a double thread suspended from the upper .part; of the heddle frame, through which a similar doubled thread that connects with the lower part of Hie heddle frame; passes, the two doubled threads so interlocking and bolding one another taut and secure. Every warp thread of the loom-in which said harness is to be em[478]*478ployed is first passed through the loop of one of these double-headed • threads, where the point of interlocking is above the center line, and then through the loop of another, where the interlocking is below the center line; being thereby prevented, beyond certain limited play, from moving up or down, except as the two heddles which are raised or lowered simultaneously are moved. The necessity of bringing the supporting loops of the warp threads into exact alignment rendered the making of French harness by hand exceedingly difficult, and, from, the requirement that each doubled thread be tied over and around the heddle frame or to a rig band of tape, there arose a liability to an irregularity in the plane of the loops and a variable tension on the heddle frames. The complainant’s claim of invention relates to looms for making the kind of harness above described, and it consists more particularly in the combination of two shuttles traveling in circular interlocking tracks, with certain reciprocating pins; the shuttles being arranged to lay their respective threads around said pins, and thereby interlock the threads. “For example, one shuttle carries the thread, a, and the other the thread, b. The thread, b, will be carried through the track described by the shuttle laying the thread, a, and thus the two threads will be caused to interlock.”

To accomplish satisfactory results, a machine for making French harness must be able to interloop the threads alternately above and below the center line of the heddle, to give them equal tension, and provide the means for uniting the threads firmly and uniformly at the ends. It was desirable that the heddles, instead of being fastened independently of each other to the heddle frame, should be woven into a selvage, which should take the place of the heddle frames. For this purpose, the complainant’s machine provided warp threads extended along both sides, shuttles to carry the heddle threads and lay them around the reciprocating pins in the center, and which on their way back and forth should pass between the side warp threads in such manner as, when beaten up by two reeds on opposite sides moving together, they would be fastened so as to incorporate them into the fabric which has been called the “selvage.” In laying their threads around the pins, the shuttles travel in eccentric tracks, and the amount of thread paid out by each is regulated by a light spring pressing against the bobbin, which is that part of the shuttle on which the thread is wound. The patentee states that “the main feature of my invention in my estimation, so far as I am acquainted with looms, is the use of the two shuttles traveling in interlocking paths, in combination with the inner abutting or loop-forming pins or needles, a2 and b2. How the motion of these parts is obtained seems immaterial.”

[479]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Knapp v. Morss
150 U.S. 221 (Supreme Court, 1893)
Lane v. Park
49 F. 454 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania, 1892)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
83 F. 477, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 2859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walder-v-ulrich-circtdnj-1897.