Chapter IV: Part 4

(Signed) "G. A. MAYHEW,
T. R. SEBRING,
A. CASTNER,
JACOB WHITE,
H. B. COFFIN,
C. F. COFFIN,
S. W. FOLGER,
T. B. COFFIN,
WM. PADDOCK."

There are several other certificates equally conclusive and satisfactory; but we will only copy in addition to the foregoing, a short piece from the _Farmer and Mechanic_, issued July 3d, 1833, in Cincinnati, as follows:

"Several members of the Agricultural Society on last Wednesday attended in Carthage to see a machine for cutting wheat by horse power, in operation. It was propelled by two horses, and cut as fast as eight persons could conveniently bind, doing the cutting neatly.

"This machine is the invention of Mr. O. Hussey, and will no doubt prove a useful addition to our agricultural implements. Mr. J. C. Ludlow suggested that it would be good economy of time and labor to take a threshing machine into the field and thresh out the grain as it is reaped, thereby saving the binding and hauling to the barn or stack. We think the suggestion a good one."

[Sidenote: The Problem Solved]

Here, then, was the problem solved--the great discovery made that had puzzled the brains of hundreds if not of thousands, and for centuries. No one we fearlessly assert had ever succeeded so completely and satisfactorily, and with so simple and practical a machine.

Some visited the exhibition determined to condemn as they afterwards acknowledged, deeming the thing impracticable; but all were convinced; for the demonstration was of that character which left no room for doubt or cavil in the minds of any.

[Sidenote: A Great Triumph]

It was indeed a triumph,--not perhaps entirely unexpected to the inventor--but neither he, nor any one else at that early day, could foresee the wonderful changes ultimately to be effected, and the world-wide renown to be conferred on the inventor as the result of this experiment; one that was certain to immortalize his name as a pioneer and benefactor in the most useful and peaceful pursuits in life. It was too, the dawn of a brighter day to the toiling husbandman, by lightening his labors, and adding to his comfort and independence; only circumscribed in its beneficial influence by the bounds of civilization.

Some may possibly suppose that we view the invention in too glowing colors; but we have yet to meet with the farmer who owned a good reaping and mowing machine that would dispense with its advantages for twice the cost of the implement, and again be compelled to resort to the sickle, the cradle, and the scythe; for of a truth it completely supersedes all three in competent hands and with fair usage, in both the grain and grass crops.

[Sidenote: No Competitors Until 1841]

It is difficult to confine our narrative to its intended brief limits and select from the mass of evidence on hand as to the uninterrupted success off Hussey's invaluable invention from that day to the present--now twenty-one years. We will therefore only select a single and short account of each year; until about 1840 or '42; not long after which a few other inventors came before the public. There was, however, no competitor in the field from 1833 to 1841 or 1842, either in Europe or America, so far as we can ascertain, that did more than make a few occasional trials; none attracted public attention, or were successful and efficient machines even in the estimation of the projectors themselves. The evidence proves it, and it is corroborated by our own personal knowledge, having been constantly engaged in Agricultural and Mechanical pursuits for more than thirty years--and, as we believe, familiar with most of the important improvements of the age;--of all in fact, directly connected with agriculture in its labor saving implements, of any notoriety.

[Sidenote: No Reaping Machine Without Hussey Principle]

Many alleged improvements have been made in the Reaper in the past ten or twelve years; and many more still within half that period. How far they are new inventions, and actual _improvements_, we can better judge by examining Hussey's patent; for it describes the cutting apparatus clearly and minutely, and which in fact is the whole thing,--the "one thing needful" to success. For the use of wheels, or a system of gearing to all kinds of motive machinery is coeval with the first dawn of mechanical science. How ancient we know not, for the Prophets of old spoke of "wheels within wheels" near three thousand years ago; and it is very certain the hand of man, unaided by wheels and machinery, never erected the vast Pyramids and other structures of antiquity. We do not believe there is a single Reaping and Mowing machine in successful operation on this continent that is not mainly indebted to Hussey's invention in the cutting apparatus, for its success: deprive them of this essential feature--disrobe them of their borrowed plumes, and their success would be like the flight of the eagle, suddenly bereft of his pinions,--he must fall; and the machines would stand still, for not a farmer in the land would use them.

[Sidenote: The Guards]

As previously remarked, O. Hussey's first patent is dated in 1833. We omit the more general description of the machine, and copy only what embraces the most important features, the guards and knives; also an extract from his improvement patented in 1847, to obviate choking in the guards:

"On the front edge of the platform is fixed the cutting or reaping apparatus, which is constructed in the following manner: A series of iron spikes, and which I will call _guards_, are fixed permanently to the platform, and extend seven or eight inches, more or less, beyond the edge of the platform, parallel to each other, horizontal, and pointing forward. These guards are about three inches apart, of a suitable size, say three-quarters of an inch square, more or less, at the base, and lessening towards the points. The guards are formed of a top and bottom piece, joined at the point and near the back, being nearly parallel, and about one-eighth of an inch apart, forming a horizontal mortice or slit through the guard; these mortices being on a line with each other, form a continued range of openings or slits through the guards. The first guard is placed on the rear of the right wheel, and the last at the extreme end of the platform, and the intermediate guards at equal distances from each other, and three inches apart, more or less, from center to center.

[Sidenote: The Cutter]

"The cutter or saw (f) is formed of thin triangular plates of steel fastened to a straight _flat rod_, (g) of steel, iron or wood, one inch and a half wide; these steel plates are arranged side by side, forming a kind of saw with teeth three inches at the base, and four and a half inches long, more or less, sharp on both sides, and terminating nearly in a point. The saw is then passed through all the guards in the aforesaid range of mortices, the size of the mortice being suited to receive the saw with the teeth pointing forward; observing always that the points of the saw teeth should correspond with the center of the guards. One end of the saw is connected with a pitman moved by a crank, and receiving its motion from the main axis, by one or two sets of cog wheels. The vibration of this crank must be equal to the distances of the centers of the guards, or the points of the saw teeth, or thereabouts, so when the machine is in motion, the point of each saw tooth may pass from center to center of the guards on each side of the same tooth at every vibration of the crank; if the main wheels are three feet four inches in diameter, they should in one revolution give the crank sixteen vibrations, more or less; the saw teeth should play clear of the guards, both above and below. * * *

[Sidenote: Operation]

"The power is given by locking the wheels to the main axis, the machine has one square wheel box, the other round and locked at pleasure. If the power should be wanted, one, two, or more horses are attached and driven on the stubble before the machine, the right wheel running near the standing grain, the platform with the saw in its front edge extends on the right, at right angles with the direction of the horses, with the guards and saw teeth presented to the standing grain--when the machine moves forward, the saw moves with the teeth endwise and horizontal, the grain or grass is brought between the guards, the saw teeth in passing through the guards, cut the stalk while held both above and below the saw--the butts of the grain receive an impulse forward by the motion of the machine while in the act of being cut, which causes the heads of the grain to fall directly backwards on the platform--in this manner the platform receives the grain until a sufficient quantity is collected to make one or more bundles, according to the pleasure of the operator, then it is deposited with a proper instrument by the operator, _who may ride on the machine_."

Here follows the dimensions of a machine suited to two horses, which is only copied so far as refers to the cutting apparatus, viz: "The back of the saw may be from one inch to one and one-half inches wide, and from three-sixteenths to one-quarter of an inch thick; and the steel plates for the teeth should be about one-tenth of an inch thick; one end of the mortice in the guard should be fitted to receive the back of the saw, so that the bearing may be on the back of the saw only."

[Sidenote: The Four Essentials]

"In this machine the following points are claimed as new and original: 1st. The straight horizontal saw, with the teeth sharp on their two sides for cutting grain. 2d. The guards forming double bearers above and below the saw, whereby the cutting is made sure, whether with a sharp or dull edge, the guards at the same time protecting the saw from rocks or stones, or other large substances it may meet with. 3d. The peculiar construction that the saw teeth may run free, whereby the necessary pressure and consequent friction of two corresponding edges cutting together, as on the principle of scissors, is entirely avoided. 4th. The peculiar arrangement by which the horses are made to go before the machine, being more natural, and greatly facilitating the use of the machine, and the general arrangement of the points as above described.

"In cutting grass, the platform is reduced in width, and the grass falls on the ground as it is cut."

In the improvement of the guards patented in 1847, the claim states: "I accordingly claim the opening above the blades A, fig. 3, and at D, fig. 1, in combination with vibrating blades. I also claim the particular application of the flush edge at the fork of the blades, for the purpose described.

"The end and design of the improvements above claimed is to prevent the blades choking."

[Sidenote: McCormick Twelve Years Late]

_En passant_, we would ask any intelligent and candid farmer or mechanic who has examined a successful reaper, to compare the foregoing plain specifications which all can understand, with the cutting apparatus of the most successful modern machine. And we would especially desire him to compare them in principle with the "improved form of fingers to hold up the corn, and an iron case to preserve the sickles from clogging;" not the alleged invention of 1831, by C. H. McCormick, and abandoned from 1840 to 1843, but the claims patented by him in 1845 [as stated in the letter to Philip Pusey, M. P.], twelve years after the date of Hussey's patent, and twelve years after his most complete and uninterrupted success in cutting both grain and grass. In fact, there was no year from and including 1833 up to 1854, a period of 21 years the past harvest, that we have not the most positive and conclusive evidence of the success of Hussey's reaper; in numerous cases the same machines had cut from 500 to 800, and even one thousand acres; in one instance, the same machine was used for fourteen harvests, or as many years, successively and successfully.

[Sidenote: Canfield Testimonial]

We have given some of the evidence for 1833. For 1834 we annex two letters giving an account of the two machines made this year, one in Illinois, and the other in New York, viz:

"Spring Creek, Sangamon Co., Ill.,
"October 1st, 1854.

"_Mr. Obed Hussey, Baltimore:_

"Dear Sir:--Your favor of August 10th came to hand a few days
since. The reason was, it lay at Berlin (formerly Island Grove
Post-office) and my Post-office address is Springfield, the only
place where I call for letters.

"In answer to your query, how your Reaping Machine worked in 1834,
I have to say that it cut about sixteen acres of wheat for me on
my farm; that it did the work in first rate style; according to my
best recollection, as well as any of the machines that have since
been introduced. The only objection I recollect being made, was,
that when the straw was wet, or there was much green grass among
the wheat, the blades would choke. You certainly demonstrated in
1834 the practicability of cutting grain or grass with horse-power;
and all the machines since introduced seem to have copied your machine
in all its essential features.

"I am respectfully yours,

"JOHN E. CANFIELD."

The next letter we copy from the _Genesee Farmer_ of December 6th, 1834. The reader will readily perceive that the author, William C. Dwight, knew how to handle the pen as well as the plow, and equally well to work the reaper, being a practical farmer. But we are pained to add that he lost his life by the fatal railroad accident at Norwalk, Ct., about a year since.

From the Genesee Farmer, December 6, 1834.

"_To the Editor of the Genesee Farmer:_

"I wrote you last May that Mr. _Hussey_, the inventor of a
machine for harvesting wheat, had left in this village one of his
machines for the purpose of giving our farmers an opportunity to
test its value, and I promised to write you further about it when
it had been put to use. For many reasons which will not interest
either yourself or the public, the matter has been delayed till
the first rainy day, after my fall work was out of the way, should
give leisure to remember and fulfill my promise.

"The machine has been fully tried, and I am gratified to be able
to say that it has fully succeeded; hundreds of farmers from the
different towns of this and the adjoining counties have witnessed
its operations, and all have not only expressed their confidence
in its success, but their gratification in the perfection of the
work.

"As every inquirer asks the same series of questions, I presume
your readers will have a like course of thought, and wish for
satisfaction in the same particulars. To give them this, I will
write them in their order, and give the answers:

"Does the machine make clean work?

"It saves all the grain. To use the language of a gratified
looker-on, an old and experienced farmer, 'it cheats the hogs.'[3]

[3] The hogs are the gleaners in this section of country.

"Does the machine expedite the work?

"What the machine is capable of accomplishing, we who have used it
can hardly say, as we had no field in fit order, large enough for
a fair trial through a whole day; and can only say what it has
done. Five acres of heavy wheat, on the Genesee flats, were
harvested in two hours and a quarter.

"In what condition is the wheat left, and how is the work done
where the wheat is lodged?

"The machine leaves the wheat in gavels large enough for a sheaf,
and where grain stands well enough to make fair work with the
cradle, it leaves the straw in as good condition to bind as the
gavels of a good reaper. Whether the grain stands or is lodged is
of little consequence, except as to the appearance of the sheaf,
and the necessity of saving more straw, when lodged, than is
desirable. The condition of the sheaf when the grain is lodged
depends much upon the adroitness of the raker.

"What number of hands, and what strength of team is necessary to
manage the machine advantageously?

"Two men, one to drive the team and the other to rake off the
wheat, and two horses, work the machine; but when the grain is
heavy, or the land mellow, a change of horses is necessary, as the
gait of the horses is too rapid to admit of heavy draft. The
horses go at the rate of four to five miles an hour, and when the
growth of straw is not heavy a fair trot of the team is not too
much.

"Is the machine liable to derangement and destruction from its own
motion?

"This is a question which cannot be so directly answered as the
others. We have only used the machine to cut about fifty acres,
and have had no trouble; judging from appearances so far, should
say it was as little subject to this evil as any machinery
whatever. The wear upon the cutting part being so little as to
require not more than fifteen minutes sharpening in a day; there
is no loss of time on this score.

"Is the sheaf a good one to thresh?

"The man who has fed the threshing machine with the grain of
twenty acres cut by this machine, says the sheaves are much better
than those of cradled grain, and quite as good as those of a
reaper.

"There is one more advantage beyond ordinary inquiries, of
consequence, where so much grain is raised as in this valley; be
the grain ever so ripe, there is no waste of grain by any
agitation of the straw, and all the waste which can take place
must arise from the handling and shaking in binding.

"I am yours, etc.,

"WM. C. DWIGHT.

"Moscow, Livingston Co., N. Y., Nov. 14, 1834.

"N. B.--The machine we used was intended only for upland, but by
some little alterations and additions we used it with equal facility
on all kinds of soil; and it can be used on any farm so clean from
stumps and stones as not to endanger the blocking the wheels."

The following letter is evidence for 1835, and also refers to the originality of the invention by O. Hussey.

"Palmyra, Mo., Aug. 14, 1854.

"Friend Hussey--Yours duly received. As to the machines sent by
you (ordered some two years since) they both worked well.

"Before you had invented your machine in 1831 or 1832, your
attention was drawn to a mode of cutting grain, hemp and grass and
you told me you thought you could invent such a machine to be
drawn by horses; and after you had returned to Cincinnati from
Laurenceburg you wrote me a letter in '32 or at the furthest in
'33 (for I left Indiana 2nd Oct., 1833) with a draft and
description of a plan for cutting grain. The draft was thus (here
follows a diagram of the cutting apparatus exactly as described by
the patent) and the description was, that these knives were to
work by the motion of the wheels, being a perfect description of
the invented principle.

"As soon as I saw the plan, I was satisfied of its success and
wrote to you that there was no doubt of the success of your
machine; that it was astonishing the world had so many thousand
years been confined to the sickle when so obvious a mode of
cutting grain and grass existed; and shortly after you obtained a
patent for the machine.

"On the 6th July, 1835, you brought to Palmyra two of your
machines, and they were put in operation near this place--one in a
meadow between here and Philadelphia, and one in the heavy grass
in Marion City bottom.[4] The machines did cut well. I was the
editor of the _Missouri Courier_, from the month of November,
1833, until 1838, and brought your machine before the public; it
excited much attention, and its performance was highly
satisfactory. The results of the trials were published in the
paper by me in August or September, 1835. I knew of the capacity
of the machine, and that it did so execute in the bottom three
acres an hour. In this I cannot be mistaken, for I felt at the
time the deepest interest in the success of the machine. Mr.
McElroy is dead, where you boarded, and also Samuel Muldrow and
James Muldrow. Still I will inquire if any persons can be found
who were present.

[4] Both of these machines were sold to Wm. Muldrow, Agent, of
Marion College, Marion County, Mo.

"I know the results, and recollect distinctly the reception the
machines met with, and the prices, to wit, $150 each. Muldrow
bought another for $500--which was a whirling wheel. You recollect
it; it never run any. Yours, I know it was said then, would cut
off brush large enough for a hoop-hole. Court is now in session,
but as soon as I can ascertain the witnesses (at the exhibition) I
will write you further. But my recollection is distinct, from the
relations existing between us, my interest in machinery generally,
and my position as editor of the only paper of this section of
country.

"As ever, your friend,

"EDWIN G. PRATT."

[Sidenote: Mode of Transportation]

In 1836 O. Hussey visited Maryland at the written solicitation of the Board of Trustees of _The Maryland Agricultural Society_, for the Eastern Shore. The fame of his reaping exploits in the State of New York, and the far West, had reached the East; though with something like a "snail's pace." We had not then the Magnetic Telegraph, which with lightning speed enables the East to _talk_ with the West; nor even the "iron horse," by whose speed and power, the reaper that cut a large crop of wheat in Maryland, could within the same week cut another equally large in the valley of the Mississippi; but it then required some two to three _years_ to prepare the public mind for the reception of the machine here; and owing to the limited means of the inventor, the transportation from place to place was often done by a single horse; accompanied by the inventor foot-sore and weary from walking hundreds of miles!

[Sidenote: An Inventor's Difficulties]

The annexed certificate was given, published, and widely circulated after a full trial of the machine, in cutting more than two hundred acres, and by large farmers and practical men, known throughout the State. Comment is unnecessary on such a paper; but we feel bound to state that it was mainly owing to the exertions of the liberal public spirited gentlemen, the last, though not the least of the signers, Gen. Tench Tilghman, that the Reaper was then introduced into this State. He was the early and steadfast friend of the Patentee, and to the cause of agricultural improvement in our State. Strange as it may appear to many at the present day, and notwithstanding these demonstrations in Ohio, Illinois, New York, Missouri and Maryland, which did not admit of cavil or doubt as to the entire efficiency and success of Hussey's reaper, scarcely a farmer could be found ready and willing to take hold of it, and aid the inventor in introducing it into use. But farmers as a class are proverbially cautious, and disinclined to change from established customs and usages; it often requires "line upon line and precept upon precept," aided, too, by almost a free gift of the article, to induce them even to give a new agricultural implement a fair trial,--a plough, for instance, that will do better work, with a fourth to a third less draught; the old and nearly worn out implement "does well enough." Gen. T. was, we believe, the first farmer in Maryland to use and purchase a reaping machine; and by so doing, to aid the inventive genius and talent of his countrymen, and also at the same time greatly to benefit the interest of his brother farmers. It avails little to the inventor, or the public, how valuable his improvement may be,--for in nine cases out of ten the inventor is limited in means,--if none can be found who are both able and willing to lend a helping hand to modest merit; for true genius is ever modest; and unfortunately the term is too often synonymous with penury and want.

[Sidenote: The Inventor's Rewards]

Very few of the really valuable inventions inure to the benefit of the inventors,--even to a tithe of the profits that are occasionally realized. His necessities often compel him to a forced sale of his patent right to some capitalist who has the tact to turn other men's wits to his own advantage; or the _Public_,--which simply means other capitalists of another description, who possess little or no inventive genius themselves, and just about as much principle as genius--seize upon the invention, and often in spite of law, justice, or right, reap the reward justly due to another.

This, however, is a digression for which we beg the reader's pardon; but we could not let the occasion pass without rendering this honest tribute to the public spirited farmer, who had the discernment to perceive its merits, and the liberality to aid its introduction, of one of the most valuable improvements of this, or any age.

The following three letters not only embrace the year 1837, but are equally good evidence from that period to the present, 1854. As they are short, and to the point, we use them all. The very appropriate and just remarks of Col. Hughes as regards the rights, and what is due to inventive talent, we most cordially respond to; as must every right minded and disinterested reader. He refers to Col. Edw. Lloyd of "Wye House" as the largest wheat grower in Maryland; we much doubt if he is not the largest in the Union. Several years since, he informed us that his average crop of wheat was from 33 to 35 thousand bushels; and a year or two ago we learned that the crop exceeded forty thousand bushels. He now, and for many years past has used Hussey's Reaper exclusively. More satisfactory and conclusive evidence cannot be given, or desired, than is afforded in these three letters, of the early use, and long proved efficiency of the invention.

"Hornewood, E. Shore, Md.,
"August 22, '54.

"Dear Sir:--In reply to your enquiry whether I recollect the time,
and the success of your reaping machine at my father's in 1837, I
answer that I do perfectly; and also seeing it in operation in
company with my friend, Mr. J. H. Luckett, of Balto., at Col. H.
L. Edmondson's of Talbot Co. the same season.

"My father expressed himself highly satisfied with the performance
of the reaper, as did other gentlemen who saw it in operation at
Cheston. So well convinced was my father of the value of the
machine, that he offered you a considerable advance per acre on
your charge for cutting, to remain and reap his two fields, say
125 to 130 acres, which you declined, owing to prior engagements.
At an early date after this trial, my father secured one of your
reapers, and the farm has since never been without.

"My brother, Dr. DeCourcy, has now one which did its work most
excellently well this past harvest, and without any stoppage. With
some trivial repairs, it has been in successful use nearly ten
years.

"Wishing you every possible success with your reaper, for which
the agricultural community owe you a heavy debt,

"I am respectfully yours,

"N. H. ROZIER DE COURCEY."

"Baltimore,
"October 17th, 1854.

"_To Obed Hussey, Esq.:_

"Sir--In the harvest of 1837 I saw one of your Reapers in operation
in my neighborhood [West River, Anne Arundel Co., Md.] in charge of
the Hon. John C. Weems, who I believe was the owner of it; and was
so much pleased with its performance that I ordered one from you in
the following year, 1838, which you set in motion for me. It worked
most admirably, and fully met my expectations; _as it has done from
that early period to the present day_.

"In a loose way, I estimated that in the saving of labor, and grain
from shattering, it nearly or quite paid for itself the first
harvest. Since then the machine has been much improved.

"Up to the time I purchased, very few had been used in this State.
The first, as I have always understood, was bought by that
intelligent and enterprising farmer, Gen. Tench Tilghman, of
Oxford, Talbot County. In 1838, Col. Edward Lloyd, of 'Wye,' Talbot
Co., the largest wheat grower in Maryland, and myself, as above
mentioned, availed ourselves of your invention; but I did not hear
of any other orders for it in this State. It came, like most other
agricultural implements, slowly into use; and I fear has not fairly
compensated you for the labor and ingenuity bestowed upon it. This,
however, is too often the fate of discoverers and inventors; and
others reap the fruits of their toil and genius. I have long
thought that governments were unjust to inventors; and could never
understand why a man has not the same right of property to a
machine conceived in his head, and constructed by his hands, as to
that acquired in any other manner. The same that a farmer has to
the lands he owns.

"Very respectfully, y'r ob't serv't,

"GEO. W. HUGHES."

"Oxford, Md.,
"Sept. 22d, 1854.

"_Mr. Obed Hussey:_

"Dear Sir:--I recently received from the Commissioner of Patents
the Report on Mechanics for 1853, and have examined with much
interest the descriptions of what claim to be improvements in the
Reaping Machine.

"I was rather surprised to find that so many of then were almost
identical with the notions which were tried and rejected during
the season you spent with me nearly twenty years ago; when for the
first time (I believe) a reaper was used throughout our entire
harvest, on a farm as large as six hundred acres.

"You had just then arrived from Cincinnati with two machines--one
a reaper, and the other a reaper and mower.

"They were exhibited publicly at Oxford and Easton, and their
operation on wheat gave entire satisfaction. The work throughout
the harvest was equally well done; the only objection being the
delay caused by repairing the machinery, a difficulty common to
all new machines of much power at that period.

"Since then I have used one or more reapers every year, and have
watched with much interest the progress of their improvement. I
have examined most of those which have the best reputation, and do
not believe there is a single one in which the cutting principle
has not been copied from yours.

"In attempting to avoid an infringement of your patent, variations
have been made either in the cutting apparatus, or the driving
machinery, by which they have been made more complicated and less
efficient. Burrall's, which approaches nearest to yours in
simplicity and efficiency, is so close a copy that I do not see
how the courts could refuse an injunction to prohibit the use of
it. The only material difference is the attempt at a side delivery
which was tried by you on your first machine, and proved an entire
failure.

[Sidenote: The Farmers' Debt to Mr. Hussey]

"Believing sincerely that the farmers of the U.S. owe you a debt
of gratitude, which a regard for themselves should prompt them to
pay, and understanding that attempts have been made to question
even the priority of your invention, I send you a volume of the
_Genesee Farmer_ published in 1834, which will show the
opinion entertained at that time by the farmers of that celebrated
wheat growing region, both as to the efficiency and priority of
your reaper.

"Your ob't serv't,

"TENCH TILGHMAN."

[Sidenote: Conclusive Evidence]

As we have already much exceeded the intended limits of the narrative, we might, perhaps, with propriety, here rest the enquiry, having, as we think, satisfactorily shown, and by evidence that cannot be disproved: first, that for a period of nine or ten years after the alleged invention of the reaper by C. H. McCormick in 1831 he did not sell a single machine; nor could he establish by all the evidence adduced before the Board of Extensions, in 1848, that prior to 1840 or 1841 was his reaper in any degree an effective or practical machine; for as he himself states in the letter to Philip Pusey, Esq., M. P., it was not until very material alterations--all essential it may be said--were made, some six or eight years after the date of the patent, could the machine be made to work even tolerably well. Indeed, he states, "I may say they were not of much practical value, until the improvements of my second patent in 1845," being eleven years after the date of the patent, and fourteen years after the alleged invention in 1831.

On the other hand we have shown by as good and respectable testimony as can be had in any cause, that from 1833 to 1854, a period of twenty-one years, Hussey's invention was most efficient and satisfactory, _every year_; not by cutting a patch of the fraction of an acre, but by reaping hundreds, nay thousands of acres annually, by the few machines placed in the hands of the farmers from 1833 to 1840.

As, however, we have given no direct evidence from Delaware, or Virginia, none from North Carolina, and but one from New York, we annex a few short testimonials from each, that embrace the period from 1838 to 1845; and with a few more of the same respectable character up to 1853, both in this country and in England, we will leave the decision of the question to the intelligent reader. We will, however, call the reader's attention to the concluding paragraph of Maj. J. Jones' letter, from Delaware--one of the smallest States, but containing as large a proportion of noble minded, talented men, and as good practical farmers, as any in the Union.[5]

[5] It is reported of one of her sons, that during the struggle
for Independence, when a Delegate to the Convention from one of the
largest and most powerful Colonies was ready to quail and almost
despair of success in the unequal contest, he was encouraged and
cheered on by a member from little Delaware; and told that when he
found his Colony likely to be overrun by the enemy, to call on
Delaware for aid--she would lend a helping hand.

It will be perceived that a reaper sold in 1838 to the St. George's and Appoquinomick Agricultural Society had, after subsequently coming into the possession of Col. Vandergrift, and prior to 1845, "cut about _seven hundred acres_ of his grain," and "was then in good repair"! We wish it was in our power to state how many times seven hundred acres this single machine had reaped since 1838.

[Sidenote: An Important Testimonial from Delaware]

"Wheatland, Del.,
"July 21, 1845.

"_Mr. Hussey:_

"Dear Sir:--I have just finished cutting my oats; I finished
cutting my wheat on the 28th of June, having cut over 160 acres,
excepting what was cut by a cradle in opening tracks for the
horses and rounding the corners so that the machine might sweep
round without loss of time in turning, which it did with ease and
certainty, cutting more than twenty acres a day on an average. A
part of the wheat was so heavy as to require three active shockers
to keep up with the cutting; the whole cost of all necessary
repairs 31-1/4 cents for the harvest.

"Of the two machines which I purchased of you I used the large
one, having sold the small one to Richard Millwood, who rents the
farm of Dr. Noble. Strange as it may appear, I could find no
_landholder_ in the vicinity who had enterprise enough to
risk the purchase of that machine until they could see it work;
but after the performance was once witnessed, the impression it
made was such as to justify me in ordering you to have ten ready
by next harvest for New Castle County, Del. Mr. Millwood's wheat
was very heavy, one measured acre having sixty dozen sheaves upon
it, and the whole cutting time on the forty acre field was but two
days, making for the small machine a full average of twenty acres
per day, without any repairing or accident. None of the hands who
worked it had ever seen such a machine before those you sent to
me. My crop has not all passed through the half bushel yet, but it
will fall but little short of 3,000 bushels--expect it will all be
in market to-morrow.

"In conversation with Col. Vandergrift, the present owner of the
Reaper you sold to the St. George and Appoquinomick Agricultural
Society, in 1838, he told me that he had cut about 700 acres of
wheat and oats with it since he owned it, and up to that time the
cost of repairs had been $1.25 for every hundred acres cut. It was
then in good repair.

"Yours,

"JOHN JONES."

"Jefferson County, Va.,
"August 9th, 1845.

"_To Mr. Obed Hussey:_

"Dear Sir:--We, the undersigned, having used your reaping machine
during the recent harvest in cutting our respective crops, take
great pleasure in tendering to you this voluntary testimonial of
the very high estimation in which we hold your invention. We have
now tried your machines fully and fairly, and we are unanimous in
the conclusion that in every case they have borne the test in a
manner which has excited our highest admiration of their merits.
We were particularly pleased with their work in lodged grain; they
cut and gather every straw with the utmost ease, and the only
fault at all that we have had to find with them was that they did
not cut wet grain with facility; this single defect, however, we
are pleased to perceive you have completely remedied with the late
improvement (with open guards to the knives, etc.) which the most
of us saw at work in Mr. Wm. Butler's field cut wet grain and
green oats as well as could possibly be desired--it will also cut
timothy and clover--so that now we have no hesitation in
recommending your reaper, as we hereby most cordially do, to our
brother farmers, as the most complete and efficient in
agricultural operations, and as one which, whilst from its simple
and substantial construction, is not liable to be broken or to get
out of order, will at the same time save its owner the first year
more than its original cost.

"WM. BUTLER,
J. H. TAYLOR,
W. SHORTT,
JOSEPH M'MURRAN,
DANIEL G. HENKLE,
DAVID L. HENSELL,
W. G. BUTLER,
JAS. S. MARKELL,
V. M. BUTLER,
ANDREW M'INTIRE,
ADAM SMELL,
GEORGE TABB,
JOHN MARSHALL."

"Washington County,
"Aug. 7th, 1845.

"I hereby certify that I have used Mr. Obed Hussey's wheat cutter
through the late harvest, and that it answered my fullest
expectations, in every respect, except that it will not cut when
the wheat is _damp from rain or the dews of the morning_. I
cut 140 acres of wheat with it in nine days; and on one occasion,
cut off thirty acres in eighteen hours, from daylight in the
morning until 11 o'clock the next day, and with the same four
horses, never having changed them during that time.

"JOHN R. DALL."

"Oaklands (near Geneva), N. Y.
"26th August, 1845.

"_Mr. Obed Hussey, Baltimore:_

"Dear Sir:--Having housed all the grain crops of this farm, it is
due to you that I should now frankly admit the removal of all my
doubts in regard to the effectiveness and excellence of your
'Reaping Machine.' The doubts expressed in my early correspondence
with you arose from the many abortive attempts in this country and
in England to produce a reaping machine, possessing power and
simplicity and durability; most of them were complicated, and
proved too fragile.

"Soon after the arrival of your machine, I tried its power and
became readily familiar with the manner of using it; the result of
my experience will appear from the following facts:

"The wheat crop of this farm covered 104 acres, producing 2,540
shocks, 30,480 sheaves, as counted on the ground, and again when
housed in the grain barn and sheds.

"The whole crop was cut by your reaping machine in eight days,
using one team, a boy to drive and a man to manage the machine.

"The average quantity cut per day was thirteen acres.

"The largest quantity cut on any one day was seventeen acres.

"The longest period for working the machine on any one day was
nine hours.

"Seven men were stationed on the field to bind the sheaves.

"The cost of _cutting_ the wheat with your machine is
_twenty-five cents_ per acre.

"The total cost for cutting, raking, binding and shocking is
_seventy-eight cents and a fraction_ per acre.

"The cost may be stated as follows, viz:

A man and team for eight days at $1.50 per day $12.00

A boy to drive for eight days at fifty cents per day 4.00

Interest on cost of machine and for wear and tear,
say at 10 per cent 10.00
______
$26.00

"Which is equal to 25 cents per acre on 104 acres. The seven men
employed to rake and bind received, each, $1 per day for eight
days, say $56, which sum added to the cost for cutting or reaping,
gives a total cost of $82, or 78-88/100 cents per acre.

"I have compared this cost with the cost paid by my neighboring
farmers this season, and find it vastly in favor of your machine.
The individual in this town who harvested with the most economy
paid $1 13/100 per acre--other farmers have paid from $1 25/100 to
$2 per acre.

"Since the wheat harvest the machine has cut with signal advantage
about twenty acres of oats.

"The wheat and oats were cut with such neatness and precision that
the gleanings were not sufficient to pay the labor of raking.

"The machine remains in perfect order, and did not fail to perform
all you promised.

"I deem it one of the best labor-saving machines ever offered for
the advantage of the farmer; its effectiveness, simple and durable
construction, have been witnessed with satisfaction by a large
number of my neighbor farmers.

"Respectfully yours,

"J. DELAFIELD."

The machine alluded to in the above letter is the low priced one at $100.

For 1846, 1847 and 1848 we copy from the _Richmond Planter_ and _American Farmer_--and all from North Carolina, though the evidence from other sections is much more extended, and equally as conclusive:

"Somerset Place, Washington Co.,
"North Carolina 25th Aug. 1847.

"_To the Editor of the American Farmer:_

"Dear Sir:--Yours of the 6th ult. arrived at my residence during
my absence in consequence of which I was unable to return you an
answer in time for your August number of the _American
Farmer_. I trust, however, the delay will not materially affect
the value of my communication. In consequence of the
recommendation of a gentleman who had used "Hussey's Reaper" in
the harvest of 1846 with much satisfaction, I was induced to make
a trial of one the present season. It was put in operation under
the direction and supervision of Mr. Hussey himself, upon a field
of reclaimed low ground, originally Cypress Swamp, which of course
could only be cultivated in beds--these beds were six feet wide,
including the water-furrow between, and were intersected at
intervals of about fifty yards by drains, known to us as
_tap-ditches_, which cross the water furrows at right angles,
and are cut from two to four inches deeper than the furrows
themselves. I am particular in describing the land, as I had
always supposed that an insuperable obstacle in the way of the
regular action of any machine would be found in the irregularity
of surface into which our land is necessarily thrown by our system
of culture. The machine surmounted every anticipated difficulty,
and was eminently successful, both in cutting lengthwise with the
beds and across them. The wheat was cut in a most thorough manner;
nothing escaped the cutting surfaces, nor did weeds or any other
obstruction of the kind hinder the machine from doing its work
perfectly. During the running of the machine one day in the
harvest, seventeen acres of wheat were cut by it.[6] This was done
by using relays of horses, four at each time, the same hands being
employed, however, and the working time was twelve hours. After a
heavy rain we were obliged to abandon the use of the machine,
owing to the fact that the ground became so soft that the "road
wheel" as it is termed, buried in the soil, and would become
clogged with mud. This difficulty can, I have no doubt, be easily
overcome by increasing the "tread" of this wheel, and making some
slight alteration in the cog-wheel which gears into it.

[6] When Mr. Hussey was with me I informed him that the piece of
wheat cut by the machine on this occasion equalled twenty acres,
but I have since discovered that I had been mistaken in my
calculation of the acre.

[Sidenote: A McCormick Failure]

"Some two years since I saw an experiment made upon an adjoining
estate with McCormick's machine; it cut occasionally well where
the wheat was free from weeds, but any obstruction from that
source would immediately choke it, when of course the wheat would
be overrun without being cut. The experiment proved a failure, and
the machine was laid aside. The blade in this machine appears to
me to be too delicate in its cutting surface to succeed, except
under the most favorable circumstances. Quite a number of
McCormick's have been in use in this part of the country during
the last two years, and to my inquiries concerning them I have
received but one answer and that an unfavorable one. The few of
Hussey's machines, on the contrary, that have been employed within
my ken, have in each instance given entire satisfaction. I do not
hesitate to say that when well managed, with a skilful hand at the
rake, in dry wheat (I do not recommend it when the straw is wet),
it will, as compared with _ordinary_ cutting, save per acre
the _entire expense of reaping_, from the thorough manner in
which every stalk is cut, thus preventing loss or waste.

"Believing, as I do, that a great desideratum to those who grow
wheat upon a large scale, is to be found in Mr. Hussey's reaper, I
cannot but wish that both he and they may _reap_ the benefit
of its general adoption.

"I am, sir,

"Very respectfully your ob't serv't,

"JOSIAH COLLINS."

"Edenton, N. C.,
"January 25th, 1848.

"_To the Editor of the American Farmer:_

"Dear Sir:--Some months ago I received a letter from you, making
enquiries of me relative to Hussey's Reaping Machine. When your
letter reached me I was on the eve of leaving home for the summer,
and since my return home, my engagements have been of such a
character as to cause me until the present to neglect replying to
it.

"I have used one of Hussey's machines one season, and though under
circumstances not very favorable for the machine, I take pleasure
in stating that its operation was satisfactory. During my harvest,
which was about three weeks' duration, this machine was kept
constantly at work, with the exception of a day and a half, yet I
did not ascertain how many acres it would reap. Mr. Collins, of
Lake Scuppernong also used one last season, and from him I learned
that he cut upwards of twenty acres a day.

"There is certainly much less wheat left in the field by one of
these machines than is by the ordinary method of reaping by the
scythe or reap hook; it cuts close, lays the straw smoothly, thus
rendering tying of it in sheaves much easier.

"I have witnessed McCormick's, which I consider _a poor
affair_, and _meriting no consideration_ except a dissent
from me. Many of this last kind of reaper found their way here a
few years ago; they now, or rather their remains, may be seen
lying in the field whence they will never be removed.

"THOS. D. WARREN."

From the Richmond Planter.

HUSSEY'S AND M'CORMICK'S REAPERS

"It is very painful to be compelled to inflict a private injury in the discharge of a public duty; upon a particular system of cultivation we can talk and write without restraint; but when we are called on to discuss the merits of an invention, upon which the fortunes of the originator may absolutely depend, it is a much more responsible and delicate office. We are aware, too, that in introducing a subject of the kind, we are opening the floodgates of a controversy that is often hard to close; we have had the strongest evidence of that fact in the controversy that once occurred in this paper between Messrs. McCormick and Hussey, and yet it is to the relative merits of the reaping machines of these two gentlemen that we are compelled again to draw the public attention. Probably not less than fifteen thousand dollars has been spent in Virginia this summer for reaping machines, and it becomes a subject of great importance to the wheat growing community at least, to ascertain how such a sum is annually to be dispensed to the greatest advantage. We shall express no _opinion_ ourself in the discussion which must necessarily follow the introduction of this subject, and we would greatly prefer that neither of the gentlemen more particularly interested in the subject would appear in our columns. We will publish statements of facts for either, provided they are made over responsible names, and are short and permanent. As one of these facts we feel bound to state that we acted this year as the agent for McCormick's machine, and we have heard great complaint of the manner in which it was gotten up; but it is but fair also to state, that we believe Mr. McCormick himself has been superintending the manufacture of his machine in the State of New York, and that probably his work has not been as well done as it would have been could he have seen to it in person. The following communication is altogether in favor of Hussey's machine:

[Sidenote: Hussey's Machine "Vastly Superior"]

"I have had in operation on my plantation this year both Hussey's and McCormick's reapers. Now, as you have asked me to furnish the _Planter_ with the result of my own experience and opinion as to the comparative merit of the two machines, it is now at your service. I have had them both in operation (as the weather would permit) for the last fortnight, and have cut with the two rather upwards of two hundred acres of wheat. Both machines have been, I think, very fairly tested in all qualities of grain, from wheat five feet and more in height, both standing up, and lodged and tangled, and averaging, as is supposed, from thirty and forty bushels, down to light, thin wheat, not averaging more than four bushels (being some galled hills) and I am _candidly_ and _decidedly_ of opinion that Hussey's machine is _vastly superior_. I deem it superior, not only in the execution of its work, but in the durability of the machine. So well pleased am I with its performance that I have ordered another machine of Hussey's for my next harvest, and also one, and probably two, for my father's plantation. I consider this machine invaluable to the grower of wheat, and would recommend every farmer who grows even fifty acres of wheat, to purchase one. He may rest assured that he will be pleased with his purchase. I shall probably be in Richmond shortly.

"Yours very respectfully,

"T. POLLOCK BURGUYN.

"Occonichee Wigwam, near Halifax, N. C., "June 20, 1846.

"For 1849 and 1850 we will return and see how the invention progresses on the broad prairies and fertile lands of the West, where it first operated--in 1833 and 1834--and where, too, although the most luxuriant crops are _grown_ with comparatively but little labor, it would in many cases be next to impossible to save _them_ without the aid of this invaluable invention.

"These certificates embrace the mowing of large crops of grass as well as grain, and in addition, the cutting of more than three hundred acres of _hemp_ in the harvest of 1849 and 1850, by 'the same single machine.'

"Hussey's complete success in cutting grass and hemp was no new thing ten years ago; but we suppose, like the grain cutting, in the view of Philip Pusey, Esq., M. P., 'Its _perfection_ depended on its being _new_ only in England,' full eighteen years after it was effected in America.

[Sidenote: A General Opinion]

"Blackberry, Kane County, Ill.,
"August 28, 1849.