Patently Improved

A two-wheeled dogcart (via Gail Thornton)

William Glaister, my 2nd great-grandfather, was a coachbuilder in Dunedin, New Zealand in the late 19th and early 20th century. A couple of years ago, I discovered he was also an inventor.

In 1892, William filed a patent for ‘An invention for improvement in two-wheeled vehicles’. An abstract was published in the New Zealand Gazette on 31 March 1892 (available via Ancestry).

New Zealand Gazette (Supplement), 31 Mar 1892, p1

If a member of the public wanted to purchase copies of the patent documents, they would pay 2 shillings and 6 pence for the written description of the invention, and 3 shillings for the accompanying technical illustration. William, himself, would have paid at least a few pounds for actually filing the patent. (Source: New Zealand Legislation – 1889 fee schedule)

Using the Intellectual Property Office New Zealand Patents register, I was able to view the original patent document in which included a description (in his own handwriting) and a drawing of the concept.

An Invention for Improvement in Two-Wheeled Vehicles – William Glaister

I have transcribed the specification, adding punctuation and paragraphs for ease of reading.

Here describe the invention at length

The drawing accompanying this specification is a drawing of a two-wheeled vehicle, and the improvement consists in making the body of the vehicle adjustable so that it can be moved backwards or forwards by means of a series of levers.

In the drawing, the body of the vehicle instead of being rigidly fixed to the frame of the vehicle has four small wheels, two on each side marked A and A1 in drawing: these wheels are made to move in a slot formed as shown at C C1 and C C1 in drawing and fixed to the shaft.

Instead of the wheels and slots, I may use slides formed by the conduct of smooth surfaces attached to the body of the vehicle and the shafts respectively.

The body of the vehicle is moved backwards or forwards on the wheels (or on slides) by means of the brake-lever D which is connected by the rod E with the lever F which works on the end of an iron or steel shaft G which passes across under the body of the vehicle and is attached to both shafts of the vehicle and on the opposite side of the vehicle the necessary levers are attached to the end of this shaft and to the body of the vehicle similar to G J H in drawing and to the body at H.

When the brake-lever D is moved so as to apply the break (I), the body of the vehicle is made to move backwards so that the weight is so adjusted as to be easiest for the horse in going down hill, while the moving of the brake-lever so as to remove the brake, brings the body of the vehicle forwards so that in going up hill the body of the vehicle is so adjusted that the weight is balanced on the axle and thus a great objection to two-wheeled vehicles is obviated.

Having now particularly described and ascertained the nature of my said invention, and in what manner the same is to be performed, I declare that what I claim is:

The combination of the wheel and slot or slides substantially as above described applied for the purpose of adjusting the body of two-wheeled vehicles so that the body of the vehicle and the load carried are balanced on the axle in going up or down hill. I do not claim any novelty in the any of the parts nor in the method of gearing or operating by means of levers.

Dated this fourteenth day of March A.D. 1892 [signed] William Glaister

It’s still a bit difficult to understand (for me), but the Otago Daily Times gave a pretty good summary when William presented a cart using his invention at the Otago Agricultural Show that same year: “The cart is provided with patent gear by means of which the body of the vehicle can be thrown backwards or forwards at will so as to adjust the load on the horse’s back”. Load-balance was apparently a well-known issue for users of this type of vehicle.

Otago Daily Times, 3 Dec 1892, p6 (Supplement), c4

I’m not sure how successful the invention was or whether it was utilised by other coachbuilders. Perhaps someone in the know could shed some light on that for me?

Related posts:

A Grave Mistake

man in deerstalker hat laying on the groundOne of my favourite things about genealogy is feeling like a detective, and today gave me another opportunity to don my deerstalker and grab my pipe.

I noticed that Find A Grave had an ‘extra’ child linked on the page of my great grandparents, George Wright Wreford Palmer and Margaret Palmer (nee Glaister). The ‘memorial’ was for an infant, William Tracey Palmer, born and died in 1911, which included the note: ‘Accidentally killed after his sleeping mother rolled over on him in bed.’ A tragic event, but I was a bit befuddled.

The problem was, George and Margaret were married in 1913, and although I’m no stranger to discovering ‘early’ children, I had never come across this one before. So of course, I needed to either prove or disprove the connection.

a dilapidated grave
Block 3 Plot 105 via Dunedin City Council

The gravesite is pretty dilapidated and only the faint outline of the name ‘Palmer’ can be seen on a marker – so no help there.

Grave marker with faint outline of the name PALMER
Block 3 Plot 105 via Dunedin City Council

I could find no birth or death record for an infant named William Tracey Palmer. There was a death record but this was for a 77-year-old man. The name Wreford Henry Palmer jumped out at me, due to my family connections with the name Wreford, but this was the child of Thomas Henry Palmer (George’s brother) and his wife Kate Palmer (nee Gilchrist).

I turned to the Dunedin City Council site which has a very helpful grave location search but there was no William Tracey Palmer buried at Anderson’s Bay cemetery between the years 1910 and 1919. So where the heck was this grave info coming from?

Screenshot showing 3 search results

Considering possible spelling variants may have been at play, I searched only for the surname ‘Palmer’ in that time period and got three results – none being William Tracey Palmer. The first I knew to be my great great grandfather (George’s father), the other two being children of the above mentioned couple Thomas and Kate. The only 1911 burial was for ‘W Henry Palmer’ but aged 16 years. I thought it was another dead end but lo and behold, the record page gave me the information I needed.

Screenshot of record details

Block 3, Plot 105; died 22 Nov 1911 – the same burial plot and death date given on the Find A Grave site. This was the burial record of the aforementioned Wreford Henry Palmer. Despite giving an age of ’16 years’, the notes section stated the ‘occupation’ of INFANT, so likely meant ’16 days’ – the burial register entry showed this to be the case.

Screenshot of burial entry record
Burial entry of Wreford Henry Palmer in Andersons Bay Cemetery records

So poor little Wreford Henry must have been linked accidentally as a child of his uncle when added to Find A Grave (his parents are also on the site) but I have no idea where the name ‘William Tracey’ came from. Unfortunately, at least 5 other people have since added ‘William Tracey’ as a child of my great grandparents (on Ancestry), so let this tale serve as a reminder to always CHECK YOUR SOURCES.

Related posts: