The paper cup

The paper cup, which has just celebrated its 100th birthday, is such a familiar item that we forget the strangeness of the concept. After all, what usually happens to paper when it gets wet? It falls apart, does it not? Interestingly, the motivation behind the development of paper cups and their accompanying dispensers was hygiene rather than economy. Previously, public water fountains and coolers had typically been equipped with just one shared drinking vessel. The unsatisfactory nature of this arrangement became apparent with the increase in germ awareness that marked the first decade of the twentieth century.

In 1907, a Boston lawyer named Lawrence Luellen learned that a group of investors was planning to develop a paper cup-dispensing vending machine to tackle the hygiene issue. They proposed using flat-folded cups but Luellen decided that it would be much more sensible to present purchasers with cups that were already open.

‘SOON THEIR CUPS AND VENDING MACHINES HAD BECOME STANDARD FIXTURES IN THE NATION’S TRAINS. BUSINESS WAS FURTHER BOOSTED BY THE FLU EPIDEMIC THAT BROKE OUT AFTER WORLD WAR I’

He set to work on the problem and came up with two solutions, one involving a one-piece pleated cup, the other a two-piece version. The paper was treated with paraffin to render it waterproof. He also designed a nifty dispenser.

In 1909, Luellen teamed up with fellow Bostonian Hugh Moore to form the Public Vendor Cup Company. The pair then embarked on a public health campaign to endorse their product, which was initially called the Health Kup. Soon their cups and vending machines had become standard fixtures in the nation’s trains. Business was further boosted by the flu epidemic that broke out after World War I, but by now several competitors had entered the market. In 1919, Moore decided to give the Health Kup a catchy new name. Thereafter it would be known as the Dixie Cup. Next time you congregate around the office cooler, give thanks to Luellen and Moore that you don’t have to share a cup with your colleagues.


This article first appeared in IP Review, issue 25