Chapter III: Part 3

With the approach of the Civil War, Gibbs returned to Virginia. Poor health prevented him from taking an active part in the war, but he worked throughout the conflict in a factory processing saltpeter for gunpowder. Afterward, Gibbs returned to Philadelphia and found that Willcox had faithfully protected his sewing-machine interests during his long absence. The firm prospered, and Gibbs finally retired to Virginia a wealthy man. Interestingly, Gibbs named the Virginia village to which he returned in later life "Raphine"--derived, somewhat incorrectly, from the Greek word "to sew."

The Willcox & Gibbs Sewing Machine Company is one of the few old companies still in existence. It discontinued making and selling family-style machines many years ago and directed its energies toward specialized commercial sewing machines, many of which are based on the original chainstitch principle.

There was also an ever-increasing number of other patentees and manufacturers who, in the late 1850s and 1860s, attempted to produce a sewing machine that would circumvent both the "Combination" and the high cost of manufacturing a more complicated type of machine. Some of the more interesting of these are pictured and described in figures 40 through 54.

Although the design patent was not secured until June 7, 1859, the inventor was reported to have been perfecting his machine for manufacture in 1857. Ellithorp planned "to place them in market at a price that will permit families and individuals that have heretofore been deterred from purchasing a machine by the excessive and exorbitant price charged for those now in use, to possess one." Patent rights were sold under the name of Ellithorp & Fox, but the machine was never manufactured on a large scale, if at all. No squirrel machines are known to have survived. (Smithsonian photo 53112.)]

.)]

One method of operation, vibrating with the finger, was illustrated. The machine could be operated also by holding it in the hand and pressuring it between two fingers. Cloth was inserted at _c_, and the prongs of the spring feed _f_ carried it along after each stitch. It was stated that the needle could be cut from the same strip of metal, but it was advised also that the needle could be made as a separate piece and attached. (Smithsonian photo 48221.)]

Figure 51.--ONE OF THE EARLY COMMERCIAL MANUFACTURERS of the Palmer patent was Madame Demorest, a New York dressmaker. She advertised her Fairy sewing machine in _Godey's Lady's Book_, vol. 66, 1863, and stated: "In the first place it will attract attention from its diminutive, fairy-like size, and with the same ease with which it can be carried, an important matter to a seamstress or dressmaker employed from house to house ... What no other sewing machine attempts to do, it runs, and does not stitch, it sews the more delicate materials an ordinary sewing machine cuts or draws...." (Smithsonian photo 43690.)]

A machine identical to the Fairy, but bearing both Palmer patent dates, May 13, 1862, and June 19, 1863, and the name "Gold Medal," was manufactured by a less-scrupulous company. This machine was advertised as follows: "A first class sewing machine, handsomely ornamented, with all working parts silver plated. Put up in a highly polished mahogany case, packed ready for shipment. Price $10.00. This machine uses a common sewing needle, is very simple. A child can operate it. Cash with order." Some buyers felt they were swindled, as they had expected a heavy-duty machine, but no recourse could be taken against the advertiser. Another similar machine was also manufactured under the name "Little Gem." (Smithsonian photo 45525.)]

John Heberling patented several improvements in 1878 and 1880. His machine, which was a little larger and in appearance resembled a more conventional type of sewing machine, was a commercial success. (Shaw & Clark: Smithsonian photo P. 6395; Dale: Smithsonian photo P. 6394.)]

FOOTNOTES:

[67] _Scientific American_ (Jan. 29, 1859), vol. 14, no. 21, p. 165. In a description of the new Willcox and Gibbs sewing machine the following observation is made: "It is astonishing how, in a few years, the sewing machine has made such strides in popular favor, and become, from being a mechanical wonder, a household necessity and extensive object of manufacture. While the higher priced varieties have such a large sale, it is no wonder that the cheaper ones sell in such tremendous quantities, and that our inventors are always trying to produce something new and cheap."

[68] Op. cit. (footnote 53), pp. 129-131.

[69] _Scientific American_, vol. 15, no. 21 (January 29, 1859), p. 165, and Willcox and Gibbs advertising brochure, 1864.

[70] _Scientific American_, vol. 12, no. 8 (November 1, 1856), p. 62.

[71] Ibid., vol. 1, no. 19 (November 5, 1859), p. 303.

[72] I. M. Singer & Co.'s Gazette, vol. 5, no. 4 (March 1, 1859), p. 4, and a brochure, _Singer's New Family Sewing Machine_ (in Singer Manufacturing Company, Historic Archives).

_Appendixes_

I. Notes on the Development and Commercial Use of the Sewing Machine

INTRODUCTION

While researching the history of the invention and the development of the sewing machine, many items of related interest concerning the machine's economic value came to light. The manufacture of the machines was in itself a boost to the economy of the emerging "industrial United States," as was the production of attachments for specialized stitching and the need for new types of needles and thread. Moreover, the machine's ability to speed up production permitted it to permeate the entire field of products manufactured by any type of stitching, from umbrellas to tents. Since this aspect of the story was not completed for this study, no attempt will be made to include any definitive statements on the economic importance of the sewing machine at home or abroad. This related information is of sufficient interest, however, to warrant inclusion in this first Appendix. Perhaps these notes will suggest areas of future research for students of American technology.

READY-MADE CLOTHING

Whether of the expensive or the inexpensive type, the sewing machine was much more than a popular household appliance. Its introduction had far-reaching effects on many different types of manufacturing establishments as well as on the export trade. The newly developing ready-made clothing industry was not only in a state of development to welcome the new machine but also was, in all probability, responsible for its immediate practical application and success.

Until the early part of the second quarter of the 19th century, the ready-made clothing trade in the United States was confined almost entirely to furnishing the clothing required by sailors about to ship out to sea. The stores that kept these supplies were usually in the neighborhood of wharf areas. But other than the needs of these seamen, there was little market for ready-made goods. Out of necessity many of the families in the early years in this country had made their own clothing. As wealth was acquired and taste could be cultivated, professional seamstresses and tailors were in increasing demand, moved into the cities and towns, and even visited the smaller villages for as long as their services were needed. At the same time a related trade was also growing in the cities, especially in New York City, that of dealing in second-hand clothing. Industrious persons bought up old clothes, cleaned, repaired and refinished them, and sold the clothing to immigrants and transients who wished to avoid the high cost of new custom-made clothing.

The repairing of this second-hand clothing led to the purchase of cheap cloth at auction--"half-burnt," "wet-goods," and other damaged yardage. When in excess of the repairing needs, this fabric was made into garments and sold with the second-hand items. Many visitors who passed through New York City were found to be potential buyers of this merchandise if a better class of ready-made clothes was made available. Manufacture began to increase. Tailors of the city began to keep an assortment of finished garments on hand. When visitors bought these, they were also very likely to buy additional garments for resale at home. The latter led to the establishment of the wholesale garment-manufacturing industry in New York about 1834-35.

Most of the ready-made clothing establishments were small operations, not large factories. Large quantities of cloth were purchased; cutting was done in multiple layers with tailor's shears. Since many seamstresses were needed, the garments were farmed out to the girls in their homes. The manufacture of garments in quantity meant that the profit on each garment was larger than a tailor could make on a single custom-made item. The appeal of increased profits influenced many to enter the new industry and, due to the ensuing competition, the retail cost of each garment was lowered. Just as the new businesses were getting underway, the Panic of 1837 ruined most of them. But the lower cost and the convenience of ready-made clothing had left its mark. Not only was the garment-manufacturing business re-established soon after the Panic had subsided, but by 1841 the value of clothing sold at wholesale in New York was estimated at $2,500,000 and by 1850--a year before sewing machines were manufactured in any quantity--there were 4,278 clothing manufacturing establishments in the United States. Beside New York City, Cincinnati was also one of the important ready-made clothing centers. In 1850 the value of its products amounted to $4,427,500 and in 1860 to $6,381,190. Boston was another important center with a ready-made clothing production of $4,567,749 in 1860. Philadelphia, Baltimore, Louisville, and St. Louis all had a large wholesale clothing trade by 1860. Here was the ready market for a practical sewing machine.[73]

Clothing establishments grew and began to have agencies in small towns and the sewing work was distributed throughout the countryside. The new, competing sewing-machine companies were willing to deliver a machine for a small sum and to allow the buyer to pay a dollar or two a month until the full amount of the sale was paid. This was an extension of the hire-purchase plan (buying on credit) initiated by Clark of the Singer Company. The home seamstresses were eager to buy, for they were able to produce more piecework with a sewing machine and therefore earn more money. An example of the effect that the sewing machine had on the stitching time required was interestingly established through a series of experiments conducted by the Wheeler and Wilson company. Four hand sewers and four sewing-machine operators were used to provide the average figures in this comparative time study, the results of which were published in 1861;[74]

NUMBER OF STITCHES PER MINUTE

_By Hand_ _By Machine_
Patent leather, fine stitching 7 175
Binding hats 33 374
Stitching vamped shoes 10 210
Stitching fine linen 23 640
Stitching fine silk 30 550

TIME FOR GARMENTS STITCHED

_By Hand_ _By Machine_
Frock coats 16 hrs. 35 min. 2 hrs. 38 min.
Satin vests 7 hrs. 19 min. 1 hr. 14 min.
Summer pants 2 hrs. 50 min. 0 hr. 38 min.
Calico dress 6 hrs. 37 min. 0 hr. 57 min.
Plain apron 1 hr. 26 min. 0 hr. 9 min.
Gentlemen's shirts 14 hrs. 26 min. 1 hr. 16 min.

The factory manufacturer, with the sewing work done at the factory, was also developing. In 1860, Oliver F. Winchester, a shirt manufacturer of New Haven, Connecticut, stated that his factory turned out 800 dozen shirts per week, using 400 sewing machines and operators to do the work of 2,000 hand sewers. The price for hand sewing was then $3 per week, which made labor costs $6000 per week. The 400 machine operators received $4 per week, making the labor cost $1600 per week. Allowing $150 as the cost of each machine, the sewing machines more than paid for themselves in less than 14 weeks, increased the operators pay by $1 a week, and lowered the retail cost of the item.[75] The greatest savings of time, which was as much as fifty percent, was in the manufacture of light goods--such items as shirts, aprons, and calico dresses. The Commissioner of Patents weighed the monetary effect that this or any invention had on the economy against the monetary gain received by the patentee. When he found that the patentee had not been fairly compensated, he had the authority to grant a seven-year extension to the patent.[76]

The sewing machine also contributed to the popularity of certain fashions. Ready-made cloaks for women were a business of a few years' standing when the sewing machine was adopted for their manufacture in 1853. Machine sewing reduced the cost of constructing the garment by about eighty percent, thereby decreasing its price and increasing its popularity. In New York City alone, the value of the "cloak and mantilla" manufacture in 1860 was $618,400.[77] Crinolines and hoopskirts were easier to stitch by machine than by hand, and these items had a spirited period of popularity due to the introduction of the sewing machine. Braiding, pleating, and tucking adorned many costume items because they could be produced by machine with ease and rapidity.

In addition to using the sewing machine for the manufacture of shirts, collars, and related men's furnishings, the machine was also used in the production of men's and boy's suits and reportedly gave "a vast impetus to the trade."[78] The Army, however, was not quite convinced of the sewing machine's practical adaptation to its needs. Although a sewing machine was purchased for the Philadelphia Quartermaster Depot as early as 1851, they had only six by 1860. On March 31, 1859, General Jesup of the Philadelphia Depot wrote to a Nechard & Company stating that the machine sewing had been tried but was not used for clothing, only for stitching caps and chevrons. In another letter, on the same day, to "Messers Hebrard & Co., Louisiana Steam Clothing Factory, N. Orleans," Jesup states: "Machine sewing has been tried with us, and though it meets the requirements of a populous and civilized life, it has been found not to answer for the hard wear and tear and limited means of our frontier service. Particular attention has been paid to this subject, and we have abandoned the use of machines for coats, jackets and trousers, etc. and use them on caps and bands that are not exposed to much hard usage...."[79] At this period prior to the Civil War, the Army manufactured its own clothing. As the demands of war increased, more and more of the Army's clothing supplies were furnished on open contract--with no specifications as to stitching.[80] Machine stitching, in fact, is found in most of the Civil War uniforms. One of the problems that most probably affected the durability of the machine stitching in the 1850s was the sewing thread, a problem that was not solved until the 1860s and which is discussed later under "thread for the machine."

SHOE MANUFACTURE

Another industry that was aided by the new invention was that of shoe manufacture. Although the earliest sewing-machine patents in the United States reflect the inventors' efforts to solve the difficult task of leather stitching, and, although machines were used to a limited extent in stitching some parts of the shoe in the early and mid-1850s, it was not until 1858 that a machine was invented that could stitch the sole to the inner sole and to the upper part of the shoe. This was the invention of Lyman R. Blake and was patented by him on July 8, 1858; the patent model is shown in figure 55. Blake formed a chainstitch by using a hooked needle, which descended from above, to draw a thread through the supporting arm. Serving as the machine's bedplate, the arm was shaped to accommodate the stitching of all the parts of the shoe.

The increased number of shoes required by the Army during the Civil War spurred the use of the sewing machine in their manufacture. The first "machine sewed bootees" were purchased by the Army in 1861. Inventors continued their efforts; the most prominent of these was Gordon McKay, who worked on an improvement of the Blake machine with Robert Mathies in 1862 and then with Blake in 1864. Reportedly, the Government at first preferred the machine-stitched shoes as they lasted eight times longer than those stitched by hand; during the war the Army purchased 473,000 pairs, but in 1871 the Quartermaster General wrote:

No complaints regarding the quality of these shoes were received up
to February 1867 when a Board of Survey, which convened at Hart's
Island, New York Harbor reported upon the inferior quality of
certain machine sewed bootees of the McKay patent, issued to the
enlisted men at that post. The acting Quartermaster General, Col.
D. H. Rucker, April 10, 1867, addressed a letter to all the
officers in charge of depots, with instructions not to issue any
more of the shoes in question, but to report to this office the
quantity remaining in store. From these reports it appears that
there were in store at that time 362,012 pairs M. S. Bootees, all
of which were ordered to be, and have since been sold at public
auction.[81]

The exact complaint against the shoes was not recorded. Possibly the entire shoe was stitched by machine. It was found that although machine-stitched shoes were more durable in some respects and the upper parts of most shoes continued to be machine stitched, pegged soles for the more durable varieties remained the fashion for a decade or more, as did custom hand-stitched shoes for those who could afford them.

OTHER USES

The use of sewing machines in all types of manufacturing that required stitching of any type continued to grow each year. While the principal purpose for which they were utilized continued to be the manufacture of clothing items, by the year 1900 they were also used for awnings, tents, and sails; cloth bags; bookbinding and related book manufacture; flags and banners; pocketbooks, trunks, and valises; saddlery and harnesses; mattresses; umbrellas; linen and rubber belting and hose; to the aggregate sum of nearly a billion dollars--$979,988,413.[82]

SEWING-MACHINE ATTACHMENTS

The growing popularity of the sewing machine offered still another boost to the economy--the development of many minor, related manufacturing industries. The repetitive need for machine needles, the development of various types of attachments to simplify the many sewing tasks, and the ever-increasing need for more and better sewing thread--the sewing machine consumed from two to five times as much thread as stitching by hand--created new manufacturing establishments and new jobs.

The method of manufacturing machine needles did not differ appreciably from the method used in making the common sewing needle, but the latter had never become an important permanent industry in the United States. Since the manufacture of practical sewing machines was essentially an American development and the eye-pointed needle a vital component of the machine, it followed that the manufacture of needles would also develop here. Although such a manufacture was established in 1852,[83] foreign imports still supplied much of the need in the 1870s. As more highly specialized stitching machines were developed, an ever-increasing variety of needles was required, and the industry grew.

Soon after the sewing machine was commercially successful, special attachments for it were invented and manufactured. These ranged from the simplest devices for cutting thread to complicated ones for making buttonholes (see figs. 56 through 66).

The first patent for an attachment was issued in 1853 to Harry Sweet for a binder, used to stitch a special binding edge to the fabric. Other related attachments followed; among these were the hemmer which was similar to the binder, but turned the edge of the same piece of fabric to itself as the stitching was performed. Guides for stitching braid in any pattern, as directed by the movement of the goods below, were also developed; this was followed by the embroiderer, an elaborate form of braider. The first machine to stitch buttonholes was patented in 1854 and the first buttonhole attachment in 1856, but the latter was not practical until improvements were made in the late 1860s. Special devices for refilling the bobbins were invented and patented as early as 1862, and the popularity of tucked and ruffled garments inspired inventors to provide sewing-machine attachments for these purposes also. To keep the seamstress cool, C. D. Stewart patented an attachment for fanning the operator by an action derived from the treadle (fig. 65). While electric sewing machines did not become common until the 20th century, several 19th-century inventors considered the possibility of attaching a type of motor to the machine. One was the 1871 patent of Solomon Jones, who added an "electro motor" to an 1865 Bartlett machine (fig. 66). The attachments that were developed during the latter part of the 19th century numbered in the thousands; many of these were superfluous. Most of the basic ones in use today were developed by the 1880s and remain almost unchanged. Even the recently popular home zigzag machine, an outgrowth of the buttonhole machine, was in commercial use by the 1870s.

Sewing-machine improvements have been made from time to time. Like other mechanical items the machine has become increasingly automatic, but the basic principles remain the same. One of the more recent developments, patented[84] in 1933 by Valentine Naftali et al., is for a manufacturing machine that imitates hand stitching. This machine uses a two-pointed "floating needle" that is passed completely through the fabric--the very idea that was attempted over one hundred years ago. The machine is currently used by commercial manufacturers to produce decorative edge-stitching that very closely resembles hand stitching.

THREAD FOR THE MACHINE

The need for a good thread durable enough to withstand the action of machine stitching first created a problem and ultimately another new industry in this country. When the sewing machine was first developed the inventors necessarily had to use the sewing thread that was available. But, although the contemporary thread was quite suitable for hand sewing, it did not lend itself to the requirements of the machine. Cotton thread, then more commonly a three-ply variety, had a glazed finish and was wiry. Silk thread frequently broke owing to abrasion at the needle eye. For the most part linen thread was too coarse, or the fine variety was too expensive. All of the thread had imperfections that went unnoticed in the hands of a seamstress, but caused havoc in a machine. Quality silk thread that would withstand the rigors of machine stitching could be produced, but it was quite expensive also. A new type of inexpensive thread was needed; the obvious answer lay in improving the cotton thread.[85]

In addition to the popular three-ply variety, cotton thread was also made by twisting together either two single yarns or more than three yarns. Increasing the number of yarns produced a more cylindrical thread. The earliest record of a six-ply cotton thread was about 1840.[86] And in 1850 C. E. Bennett of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, received a gold medal for superior six-cord, or six-ply, spool cotton at the Fair of the American Institute. But the thread was still wiry and far from satisfactory. By the mid-1860s the demonstrated need for thread manufacturers in America brought George A. Clark and William Clark, third generation cotton-thread manufacturers of Paisley, Scotland, to Newark, New Jersey, where they built a large mill. George Clark decided that a thread having both a softer finish and a different construction was needed. He produced a six-cord cabled thread, made up of three two-ply yarns (see fig. 67). The thread was called "Clark's 'Our New Thread,'" which was later shortened to O.N.T. The basic machine-thread problem was solved. When other manufacturers used the six-cord cabled construction they referred to their thread as "Best Six-Cord"[87] or "Superior Six-Cord"[88] to distinguish it from the earlier variety made up of six single yarns in a simple twist. Another new side industry of the sewing machine was successfully established.

MANUFACTURE AND EXPORT, TO 1900

Sewing machines were a commodity in themselves, both at home and abroad. In 1850, there were no establishments exclusively devoted to the manufacture of sewing machines, the few constructed were made in small machine shops. The industry, however, experienced a very rapid growth during the next ten years. By 1860 there were 74 factories in 12 States,[89] mainly in the East and Midwest,[90] producing over 111,000 sewing machines a year. In addition, there were 14 factories that produced sewing-machine cases and attachments. The yearly value of these products was approximately four and a half million dollars, of which the amount exported in 1861 was $61,000. Although the number of sewing-machine factories dropped from 74 in 1860 to 69 by 1870, the value of the machines produced increased to almost sixteen million dollars.

The number of sewing-machine companies fluctuated greatly from year to year as many attempted to enter this new field of manufacture. Some were not able to make a commercial success of their products. The Civil War did not seem to be an important factor in the number of companies in business in the North. Although one manufacturer ceased operations in Richmond, Virginia, and a Vermont firm converted to arms manufacture, several companies began operations during the war years. Of the 69 firms in business in 1870, only part had been in business since 1860 or before; some were quite new as a result of the expiration of the Howe patent renewal in 1867.

Probably due to the termination of many of the major patents, there were 124 factories in 1880, but the yearly product value remained at sixteen million dollars. The 1890 census reports only 66 factories with a yearly production of a little less than the earlier decade. But by 1900, the yearly production of a like number of factories had reached a value of over twenty-one million, of which four and a half million dollars worth were exported annually. The total value of American sewing machines exported from 1860 to 1900 was approximately ninety million dollars. The manufacture of sewing machines made a significant contribution to the economic development of 19th-century America.

FOOTNOTES:

[73] _Eighth Census, 1860, Manufactures, Clothing_ (United States Census Office, published Government Printing Office: Washington, D.C., 1865).

[74] _Eighty Years of Progress of the United States_ (New York, 1861), vol. 2, pp. 413-429.

[75] GEORGE GIFFORD, "Argument of [George] Gifford in Favor of the Howe Application for Extension of Patent" (New York: United States Patent Office, 1860).

[76] Op. cit. (footnote 34).

[77] _Eighth Census, 1860, Manufactures_ (United States Census Office, published Government Printing Office: Washington, D.C., 1865), "Women's Ready-Made Clothing," p. 83.

[78] Ibid., p. 64.

[79] National Archives, Record Group 92, Office of the Quartermaster General, Clothing Book, Letters Sent, volume 17.

[80] The author wishes to acknowledge the valuable help of Mr. Donald Kloster of the Smithsonian Institution's Division of Military History for the preceding four references and related information.

[81] Letter of Nov. 4, 1871, to Col. Theo. A. Dodge, USA (Ret.), Boston, from Quartermaster General M. C. Meigs, in the National Archives, Record Group 92, Quartermaster General's Office, Letters Sent, Clothing Supplies, 1871.

[82] _Twelfth Census of the United States, 1900_, vol. 10, _Manufactures_, Part 4, Special Reports on Selected Industries (United States Census Office, Washington, D.C., 1902).

[83] CHARLES M. KARCH, "Needles: Historical and Descriptive," in _Twelfth Census of the United States, 1900_, vol. 10, _Manufactures_, Part 4, Special Reports on Selected Industries (United States Census Office: Washington, D.C., 1902), pp. 429-432.

[84] U.S. patent 1,931,447, issued to Valentine Naftali, Henry Naftali, and Rudolph Naftali, Oct. 17, 1933. The Naftali machines are manufactured by the American Machine and Foundry Company and are called AMF Stitching Machines.

[85] See Appendix V, p. 135, "A Brief History of Cotton Thread."

[86] _The Story of Cotton Thread_ (New York, The Spool Cotton Company, 1933).

[87] J. and P. Coats spool cotton.

[88] Willimantic spool cotton.

[89] New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky. _Eighth Census, 1860, Manufactures_ (United States Census Office, published by Government Printing Office: Washington, D.C., 1865.)

[90] Sewing-machine manufacture in the South was just beginning to blossom when it was curtailed by the outbreak of the Civil War. See Lester sewing machine, figure 109 on page 102.

II. American Sewing-Machine Companies of the 19th Century

During the latter half of the 19th century, there was a total of two hundred or more sewing-machine companies in the United States. Although a great many manufacturing-type machines were sold, this business was carried on by relatively few companies and most were primarily concerned with the family-type machines. A representative number of these family machines together with information concerning both the company and serial-number dating are found in figures 68 through 132. A great many of the companies were licensed by the "Combination," but, in addition, some companies were constructing machines that did not infringe the patents, other companies infringed the patents but managed to avoid legal action, and there were numerous companies that mushroomed into existence after the "Combination" was dissolved in 1877. Most of the latter were very short-lived. It is difficult to establish the exact dates of some of these companies as many of their records were incomplete or have since disappeared; even a great many of the "Combination" records were lost by fire. A summary of the existing records kept by the "Combination" is given in figure 37.

As will be noted in the subsequent listing, only a small percentage of the companies were in business for a period longer than ten years; of those that continued longer, all but a few had disappeared by 1910. Today there are about sixty United States sewing-machine companies. Most of them manufacture highly specialized sewing machines used for specific types of commercial work; only a few produce family or home-style machines. Foreign competition has increased, and the high cost of skilled labor in this country has made competition in this consumer-product field increasingly difficult. The countless varieties of American family sewing machines, so evident in the 19th century, have passed away.

First Made Discontinued
Manufacturer or Earliest or Last
Sewing Machine or Company Record Record

Aetna Aetna Sewing Machine ca. 1867 ca. 1877
Co., Lowell, Mass.

Aiken and ----, Ithaca, N.Y. ca. 1855 before 1880
Felthousen

Alsop ---- -- ca. 1880

American American Sewing 1854 --
Machine Co.

American Buttonhole, American Buttonhole, 1869 ca. 1874
Overseaming and Overseaming and
Sewing Machine Sewing Machine Co.,
(fig. 68) Philadelphia, Pa.

Later New American Sewing ca. 1874 ca. 1886
American Machine Co.,
(fig. 69) Philadelphia, Pa.

American Magnetic American Magnetic 1853 1854
(fig. 70) Sewing Machine
Company, Ithaca, N.Y.

Atlantic (fig. 71) ---- 1869 ca. 1870

Atwater (fig. 87) ---- 1857 ca. 1860

Avery Avery Sewing Machine 1852 185-
Co., New York, N.Y.

Avery Avery Manufacturing 1875 1886-1900
Co., New York, N.Y.

A. Bartholf Manfr. A. Bartholf, ca. 1850 185-
Blodgett & Lerow manufacturer,
patent 1849 New York, N.Y.
(_see also_)

A. Bartholf Manfr. A. Bartholf, 1853 ca. 1856
Howe's patent, manufacturer,
1846 (fig. 72) New York, N.Y.

Bartholf A. Bartholf, 1857 1859
manufacturer
Bartholf Sewing 1859 ca. 1865
Machine Co.

Bartlett (fig. 73) Goodspeed & Wyman 1866 ca. 1870
Bartlett Sewing Machine ca. 1870 1872
Co., New York, N.Y.

Baker ---- -- before 1880

Bartram & Fanton Bartram & Fanton Mfg. 1867 1874
(fig. 74) Co., Danbury, Conn.

Bay State ---- -- before 1880

Beckwith (fig. 75) Barlow & Son, New York, 1871 1872
N.Y.
Beckwith Sewing Machine 1872 ca. 1876
Co., New York, N.Y.

Blees Blees Sewing Machine 1870 1873
Co.

Blodgett & Lerow O. Phelps, Boston, 1849 1849
(fig. 21) Mass.
Goddard, Rice & Co., 1849 1850
Worcester, Mass.
(fig. 20) A. Bartholf, 1849 185-
manufacturer, New
York, N.Y.

Bond ---- -- before 1880

Boston J. F. Paul & Co., 1880 --
Boston, Mass.
Later New Boston Boston Sewing Machine -- after 1886
Co., Boston, Mass.

Boudoir (fig. 76) Daniel Harris, 1857 ca. 1870
inventor and patentee
Manufacturer--several

Bradford & Barber Bradford & Barber, 1860 1861
manufacturers,
Boston, Mass.

Brattleboro Samuel Barker and ca. 1858 1861
Thomas White,
Brattleboro, Vt.

Buckeye Wilson [W.G.] Sewing ca. 1867 ca. 1876
Later New Buckeye Machine Company,
(fig. 77) Cleveland, Ohio
(_see_ Wilson)

Buell, "E. T. A. B. Buell, ca. 1860 --
Lathbury's Patent" Westmoreland, New York

Burnet & Broderick Burnet, Broderick and 1859 ca. 1860
Co.

Centennial Centennial Sewing 1873 1876
(fig. 78) Machine Co. (_see_
McLean and Hooper),
Philadelphia, Pa.

Chamberlain Woolridge, Keene and 1853 ca. 1854
Moore, Lynn, Mass.

Chicago Singer Scates, Tryber & 1879 1882
Sweetland Mfg. Co.,
Chicago, Ill.

Later Chicago Chicago Sewing Machine 1882 ca. 1885
Co.

Chicopee
(_see_ Shaw & Clark)

Clark (fig. 42) D. W. Clark, ca. 1858 after 1860
Bridgeport, Conn.

Clark's Revolving Lamson, Goodnow & Yale, 1859 1861
Looper [double Windsor, Vt.
thread] (fig. 79)
(_see_ Windsor)

Clinton Clinton Brothers, ca. 1861 ca. 1865
Ithaca, N.Y.

Companion Thurston Mfg. Co., 1882 --
Marlboro, N.H.

Crown Florence Sewing Machine 1879 after 1886
(_see_ Florence) Co., Florence, Mass.

Dauntless (later Dauntless Mfg. Co., 1877 after 1882
New Dauntless) Norwalk, Ohio

Davis J.A. Davis, New York, ca. 1860 --
N.Y.
Davis Vertical Davis Sewing Machine 1869 after 1886
Feed Co., Watertown, N.Y.

Davis Vertical Davis Sewing Machine after 1886 1924
Feed and Co., Dayton, Ohio
Rotary Shuttle

Decker (_also_ The Decker Mfg. Co., -- before 1881
Princess) Detroit, Mich.

Demorest Demorest Mfg. Co 1882 1908
(formerly N.Y.
Sewing Machine Co.)

Diamond (formerly Sigwalt Sewing Machine 1880 --
Sigwalt) Co., Chicago, Ill.

Domestic Wm. A. Mack & Co. and 1864 1869
N. S. Perkins,
Norwalk, Ohio

Domestic Domestic Sewing Machine 1869 [A]
Co., Norwalk, Ohio,
acquired by White
Sewing Machine Co. in
1924 and maintained
as a subsidiary at
Cleveland, Ohio.

Dorcas John P. Bowker, Boston, 1853 185-
Mass.

Du Laney (fig. 80)
Also called
Little Monitor
(_see_)

Durgin Charles A. Durgin, New 1853 after 1855
York, N.Y.

Eldredge Eldredge Sewing Machine 1869 1890
Co., Chicago, Ill.

Elliptic
Sloat's Elliptic George B. Sloat and Co., ca. 1858 ca. 1860
Philadelphia, Pa.

Sloat's Elliptic Union Sewing Machine 1860 1861
Co., Richmond, Va.

Elliptic Wheeler & Wilson Mfg. 1861 ca. 1867
Co.
Elliptic Sewing 1867 before 1880
Machine Co., N.Y.,
N.Y.

Empire (fig. 86) Empire Sewing Machine ca. 1860 1869
Later Co., Boston, Mass.
Remington-Empire

Empress Manufactured on order 1877 --
through Jerome B.
Secor, Bridgeport,
Conn.

Estey Estey Sewing Machine ca. 1880 1882
Co.
Estey, Brattleboro Sewing 1883 after 1886
Fuller-Model Machine Co.,
Brattleboro, Vt.

Eureka (fig. 81) Eureka Shuttle Sewing 1859 --
New York, N.Y.

Excelsior Excelsior Sewing Machine 1854 1854
Co., New York, N.Y.

Fairy (figs. 51, 52) Madame Demorest, New 1863 ca. 1865
York, N.Y.

Finkle, M. (fig. 82) M. Finkle, Boston, 1856 ca. 1859
Mass.
Finkle & Lyon Finkle & Lyon Sewing ca. 1859 1867
Machine Co., Boston,
Mass.
Later Victor

First and Frost First and Frost, New ca. 1859 ca. 1861
York, N.Y.

Florence (fig. 83) Florence Sewing Machine ca. 1860 after 1878
Later Crown Co., Florence, Mass.

Folsom Folsom, J. G., 1865 ca. 1871
(_see_ Globe and Winchendon, Mass.
New England)

Fosket and Savage Fosket and Savage, 1858 1859
Meriden, Conn.

Foxboro Foxboro Rotary Shuttle ca. 1882 --
Co., Foxboro, Mass.

Franklin Franklin Sewing Machine 1871 1871
Co., Mason
Village, N.H.

Free Free Sewing Machine 1898 [A]
Co., Chicago and
Rockford, Ill.

Gardner C. R. Gardner, 1856 --
Detroit, Mich.

Globe (figs. 84, 85) J. G. Folsom, 1865 1869
Winchendon, Mass.

Gold Medal Gold Medal Sewing 1863 1876
(chainstitch) Machine Co., Orange,
Mass.

Gold Medal ---- 1863 ca. 1865
(running stitch)

Gold Hibbard Hibbard, B. S., & Co. 1875 --

Goodbody (sewing Goodbody Sewing Machine 1880 ca. 1890
shears) Co., Bridgeport, Conn.

Goodes Rex & Bockius, ca. 1876 before 1881
Philadelphia, Pa.

Goodrich H. B. Goodrich, Chicago, ca. 1880 ca. 1895
Ill.

Grant Brothers Grant Bros. & Co., 1867 ca. 1870
(fig. 90) Philadelphia, Pa.

Greenman and True Greenman and True Mfg. 1859 1860
(fig. 91) Co. Norwich, Conn.
Morse and True 1860 1861

Green Mountain ---- ca. 1860 --

Griswold Variety L. Griswold, New York, ca. 1886 ca. 1890
N.Y.

Grover and Baker Grover and Baker Sewing 1851 1875
(figs. 34-36, 92) Machine Co., Boston,
Mass.

Hancock ---- 1868 before 1881
(figs. 93, 94)

Heberling Running John Heberling 1878 ca. 1885
Stitch

Herron's Patent ---- 1857 --
(fig. 95)

Higby Higby Sewing Machine ca. 1882 after 1886
Later Acme Co., Brattleboro, Vt.

Home Johnson, Clark & Co., 1869 after 1876
Home Shuttle Orange, Mass.

Homestead ---- ca. 1881 --

Household Providence Tool Co., 1880 ca. 1884
Providence, R.I.
Household Sewing ca. 1885 1906
Machine Co.

Howe (figs. 96, 97) Howe Sewing Machine Co., 1853 1873
New York, N.Y.
(company of A. B. Howe
sold to Howe Machine
Co.)

Howe (fig. 98) Howe Machine Co., 1867 1886
Bridgeport, Conn.

Howe's Improved Nichols and Bliss, 1852 1853
Patent (fig. 107) Boston, Mass.
J. B. Nichols & Co. 1853 1854
which became Nichols, Leavitt & Co., 1854 1856
Leavitt Boston, Mass.

N. Hunt, which N. Hunt & Co., Boston, 1853 1854
became Hunt and Mass.
Webster (figs. 99, Hunt and Webster, 1854 1857
100) Boston, Mass.
Later Ladd and
Webster (_see_)

Improved Common ---- ca. 1870 --
Sense (fig. 102)

Independent Independent Sewing 1873 --
Noiseless Machine Co.,
Binghamton, N.Y.

Jennie June June Mfg. Co., Chicago, 1881 1890
Ill. Later
Belvidere, Ill.

Jewel Jewel Mfg. Co., Toledo, 1884 after 1886
Ohio

Johnson (fig. 103) Emery, Houghton & Co., 1856 after 1865
Boston, Mass.

Keystone Keystone Sewing Machine before 1872 ca. 1874
Co.

Ladd & Webster Ladd, Webster & Co., 1858 ca. 1866
(fig. 101) Boston, Mass.

Ladies Companion ---- 1858 ca. 1858
(fig. 115)
(_see_ Pratt's Patent)

"Lady" (fig. 104) ---- 1859 --

Landfear's Patent Parkers, Snow, Brooks 1857 --
(fig. 105) & Co., West Meriden,
Conn.

Langdon L.W. Langdon 1856 --

Lathrop (fig. 106) Lathrop Combination 1873 --
Sewing Machine Co.

Leader Leader Sewing Machine 1882 --
Co., Springfield,
Mass.

Leavitt (fig. 108) Nichols, Leavitt & Co., 1855 1857
Boston, Mass.
Leavitt & Co. 1857 ca. 1865
Leavitt Sewing Machine ca. 1865 1870
Co.

Leslie Revolving Leslie Sewing Machine 1881 --
Shuttle Co., Cleveland, Ohio

Lester (fig. 109) J.H. Lester, Brooklyn, ca. 1858 early 1860
N.Y.
Lester Mfg. Co., early 1860 late 1860
Richmond, Va.
Union Sewing Machine late 1860 1861
Co., Richmond, Va.

Little Gem ---- -- ca. 1870

Little Giant Domestic Sewing Machine ca. 1882 --
Co., Norwalk, Ohio

Little Monitor (not G.L. Du Laney, Brooklyn, ca. 1866 after 1875
associated with N.Y.
Monitor)

Love Love Mfg. Co., 1885 after 1886
Pittsburgh, Pa.

Lyon Lyon Sewing Machine Co. 1879 ca. 1880

Macauley Thos. A. Macauley Mfg., before 1879 --
New York, N.Y.

Manhattan Manhattan Sewing Machine ca. 1868 ca. 1880
Co.

McKay McKay Sewing Machine 1870 1876
Assoc.

McLean and Hooper B. W. Lacy & Co., ca. 1869 ca. 1873
Philadelphia, Pa.
(_see_ Centennial)

Meyers J. M. Meyers 1859 --

Miller's Patent ---- 1853 --

Monitor (fig. 88) Shaw & Clark Sewing 1860 1864
Machine Co.,
Biddeford, Me.

Moore Moore Sewing Machine ca. 1860 --
Co.

Morey & Johnson Safford & Williams 1849 ca. 1851
(fig. 18) Makers, Boston,
Mass.

Morrison Morrison, Wilkinson & 1881 --
Co., Hartford, Conn.

Mower ---- ca. 1863 --

National Johnson, Clark & Co., 1874 --
Orange, Mass.

National (also sold National Sewing Machine 1890 1953
under distributor's Co. (consolidation of
name) the June and Eldredge
Companies), Belvidere,
Ill.

Ne Plus Ultra O. L. Reynolds 1857 --
(fig. 110) Manufacturing Co.,
Dover, N.H.

Nettleton & Raymond Nettleton & Raymond, ca. 1857 --
(fig. 111) Brattleboro, Vt.

New England Charles Raymond (also ca. 1859 1866
(figs. 112, 113) by: Grout & White, 1862 1863
Orange, Mass.; William 1863 --
Grout, Winchendon, 1865 1865
Mass.; and J. G. Folsom,
Winchendon, Mass.)

Newell ---- 1881 --

New Fairbanks J. H. Drew & Co. 1878 1880
Thomas M. Cochrane 1880 --
Co., Belleville, Ill.

New Home New Home Sewing Machine 1876 [A]
Co., Orange, Mass. (in
1928 became affiliated
with Free Sewing
Machine Co.)

New York ----, New York, N.Y. ca. 1855 ca. 1855

New York Shuttle N.Y. Sewing Machine Co., before 1880 1882
New York, N.Y. (later
Demorest Mfg. Co.)

Noble Noble Sewing Machine before 1881 after 1886
Co., Erie, Pa.

Novelty C. A. French, Boston, 1869 --
Mass.

Old Dominion Old Dominion Sewing ca. 1858 1860
Machine Co., Richmond,
Va.

Pardox ---- ca. 1865 --

Parham Parham Sewing Machine ca. 1869 ca. 1871
Co., Philadelphia, Pa.

Parker Charles Parker Co., before 1860 after 1865
Meriden, Conn.
Later Parker Sewing
Machine Co.

Pearl ---- Bennett ca. 1859 --

Philadelphia Philadelphia Sewing ca. 1872 ca. 1881
Machine Co.,
Philadelphia, Pa.

Post Combination Post Combination Sewing before 1885 after 1886
Machine Co.,
Washington, D.C.

Pratt's Patent ---- 1857 ca. 1858
(fig. 114) Later
Ladies Companion

Queen Dauntless Mfg Co., ca. 1881 --
Norwalk, Ohio

Quaker City Quaker City Sewing 1859 ca. 1861
(fig. 116) Machine Co.,
Philadelphia, Pa.

Remington Empire Remington Empire Sewing 1870 1872
Later Remington Machine Co.
E. Remington & Sons, 1873 ca. 1894
Philadelphia, Pa.

Robertson (dolphin T. W. Robertson, New 1855 after 1860
& cherub) (figs. York, N.Y.
40, 41)

Robinson F. R. Robinson, Boston, 1853 ca. 1855
Mass.

Robinson's patent Howard & Davis, Boston, 1855 --
sewing machine Mass.
with Roper's
improvement (fig. 117)
Later Robinson same 1856 before 1860
and Roper
(fig. 118)

Royal St. John Royal Sewing Machine ca. 1883 1898
(formerly St. John) Co., Springfield, Ohio
(later Free Co.)

Ruddick ---- ca. 1860 --

Secor Secor Machine Co., 1870 1876
Bridgeport, Conn.

Sewing Shears Nettleton & Raymond, ca. 1859 --
(Hendrick's patent) Bristol, Conn.
(fig. 43)

Sewing Shears American Hand Sewing ca. 1884 ca. 1900
Machine Co.,
Bridgeport, Conn.

Shaw & Clark Shaw & Clark Co., ca. 1857 1866
Running Stitch Biddeford, Me.
Machine (fig. 53)

Chainstitch
Machine (fig. 119)

Chainstitch Shaw & Clark Co., 1867 1868
Machine (fig. 120) Chicopee Falls, Mass.
Chicopee Sewing Machine 1868 ca. 1869
Co., Chicopee Falls,
Mass.

Sigwalt Sigwalt Sewing Machine ca. 1879 --
Co., Chicago, Ill.

Singer (figs. 28, I. M. Singer & Co. 1851 [A]
29, 30, 32, 33, (later Singer Mfg. Co.).
121, 122) Moved from Boston to
New York to
Elizabethport, N.J.
(factory).

Springfield Springfield Sewing 1880 --
Machine Co.,
Springfield, Mass.

Standard ---- 1870 --
(chainstitch)
(fig. 123)
Standard Standard Shuttle Sewing 1874 ca. 1881
(shuttle) Machine Co., New York,
N.Y.

Standard Standard Sewing Machine 1884 ca. 1930
Co., Cleveland, Ohio
(acquired by Singer Co.)

Stewart Henry Stewart & Co., 1874 1880
N.Y., N.Y.
Later New Stewart Mfg Co. 1880 ca. 1883
Stewart

St. John (later St. John Sewing Machine 1870 ca. 1883
Royal St. John) Co., Springfield, O.

Taggart & Farr Taggart & Farr, 1858 --
(figs. 124, 125) Philadelphia, Pa.

Thompson C. F. Thompson Co. 1871 1871
T. C. Thompson, Ithaca, ca. 1854 --
N.Y.

Union Johnson, Clark & Co., 1876 --
Orange, Mass.

Victor Finkle & Lyon Mfg. Co. 1867 ca. 1872
Victor Sewing Machine ca. 1872 ca. 1890
Co., Middletown, Conn.

Wardwell Wardwell Mfg. Co., St. ca. 1876 1890
Louis, Mo.

Watson (fig. 126) Jones & Lee 1850 ca. 1853
Watson & Wooster, ca. 1853 ca. 1860
Bristol, Conn.

Waterbury Waterbury Co., 1853 ca. 1860
Waterbury, Conn.

Weed T. E. Weed & Co. (became 1854 --
Whitney & Lyons)

Weed Weed Sewing Machine Co. 1865 --
(reorganized from
Whitney & Lyons),
Hartford, Conn.

Family Favorite 1867 --
Manu. Favorite 1868 --
General Favorite 1872 --
Hartford 1881 ca. 1900

Wesson Farmer & Gardner 1879 1880
Manufacturing Co.
D. B. Wesson Sewing 1880 --
Machine Co.,
Springfield, Mass.

West & Willson West & Willson Co., 1858 --
(fig. 127) Elyria, Ohio

A. B. Wilson E. E. Lee & Co., New 1851 1852
(fig. 23) York, N.Y.

A. B. Wilson's Wheeler, Wilson, Co., late 1851 1856
patent seaming Watertown, N.Y.
lathe
Later Wheeler Wheeler & Wilson Mfg. 1856 1905
and Wilson Co., Bridgeport, Conn.
(fig. 26, 27, Singer Co., Bridgeport, 1905 1907
128, 129) Conn.

White (fig. 130) White Sewing Machine 1876 [A]
Co., Cleveland, Ohio

Whitehill Whitehill Mfg. Co., ca. 1875 after 1886
Milwaukee, Wis.

Whitney Whitney Sewing Machine ca. 1872 ca. 1880
Co., Paterson, N.J.

Whitney & Lyons Whitney & Lyons (a ca. 1859 ca. 1865
machine based on the
1854 patent of T. E.
Weed)

Wickersham Butterfield & Stevens 1853 --
Mfg. Co., Boston, Mass.

Willcox & Gibbs Willcox & Gibbs Sewing 1857 [A]
(figs. 39, 131) Machine Co., New York,
N.Y.

Williams & Orvis Williams & Orvis Sewing ca. 1859 after 1860
Machine Co., Boston,
Mass.

Wilson (fig. 89) Wilson (W.G.) Sewing ca.1867 after 1885
(_see_ Buckeye) Machine Co., Cleveland,
Ohio

Windsor (one thread) Vermont Arms Co., 1856 1858
Windsor, Vt.

Windsor Lamson, Goodnow & Yale, 1859 1861
(_see_ Clark's Windsor, Vt.
Revolving Looper)

Name Unknown John W. Beane 1853 --

" Henry Brind 1860 --

" Garfield Sewing Machine 1881 --
Co.

" Geneva Sewing Machine 1880 --
Co.

" Gove & Howard 1855 --

" Charles W. Howland, ca. 1860 --
Wilmington, Del.

" Miles Greenwood & Co., ca. 1861 --
Cincinnati, Ohio

" Hood, Batelle & Co. 1854 1854

" Wells & Haynes 1854 1854

" Wilson H. Smith, ca. 1860 --
Birmingham, Conn.

[A] Still in existence.

The true Bartholf machine evolved when the manufacturer substituted Howe's reciprocating shuttle for the rotary shuttle of the Blodgett & Lerow machine, continuing to manufacture the machine in his own adapted style. Bartholf manufactured reciprocating-shuttle machines as early as 1853, and his was one of the first companies licensed by Howe.

All Bartholf machines licensed under Howe's patent carry the Howe name and patent date. They are sometimes mistakenly referred to as Howe machines, but they are no more Howe machines than those manufactured by Wheeler & Wilson, Singer, or many others.

On April 6, 1858, Bartholf was granted a patent for an improvement of the shuttle carrier. He continued to manufacture sewing machines under the name "Bartholf Sewing Machine Co." until about 1865.

Using serial numbers, Bartholf machines can be dated approximately as follows:

_Serial Number_ _Year_

1-20 1850
21-50 1851
51-100 1852
101-235 1853
236-290 1854
291-321 1855
322-356 1856
357-387 1857
388-590 1858
591-1337 1859

No record of the number of machines produced by Bartholf after 1859 is available.

The Bartholf machine illustrated bears the serial number 128 and the inscription "A. Bartholf Manfr., NY--Patented Sept. 1846 E. Howe, Jr." This machine is in the collection of the Baltimore County Historical Society. Note the close similarity between it and the 1850 Blodgett & Lerow machine manufactured by Bartholf. (_Photo courtesy of the Baltimore County Historical Society._)]

Using serial numbers, Bartlett's machines can be dated approximately as follows: 1-1000, 1866; 1001-3126, 1867; 3127-?, 1868. There is no record of serial numbers for the succeeding years. (Smithsonian photo 45524-G.)]

Using serial numbers, machines may be approximately dated as follows: 1-2958, 1867; 2959-3958, 1868; 3959-4958, 1869; 4959-5958, 1870; 5959-6962, 1871; 6963-7961, 1872; 7962-8961, 1873; and 8962-9211, 1874. (Smithsonian photo P63198.)]

706." By 1874 the machines were marked "Beckwith S.M. Co." and two 1872 patent dates were added.

Using serial numbers, machines may be dated approximately as follows: 1-3500, 1871; 3501-7500, 1872; 7501-12500, 1873; 12501-18000, 1874; 18001-23000, 1875; 23001-?, 1876. (Smithsonian photo 46953-C.)]

In 1860, the Boudoir, also called Harris's Patent sewing machine, was exhibited at the Massachusetts Charitable Mechanics Association Exhibition where it won a silver medal for "its combination of parts, its beauty and simplicity, together with its ease of operation." At this time the machine was described as making a "double lock stitch" (another name for the double chainstitch). It was also described as having been before the public for some time and combining "the improvements of others for which the parties pay license." The machine head was positioned on the stand similarly to that of the West & Willson (fig. 127) and stitched from left to right.

It is not known exactly how many of these machines were made or how long they were in vogue. Manufacture, although probably ceasing in the 1860s, is known to have been discontinued before 1881, when a list of obsolete sewing machines was published in _The Sewing Machine News_. (Smithsonian photo P63199.)]

Machines can be dated by their serial number approximately as follows:

_Serial Number_ _Year_

1-200 1856
201-450 1857
451-700 1858
701-950 1859
951-1500 1860
1501-3000 1861
3001-5000 1862
5001-7000 1863
7001-9000 1864
9001-11000 1865
11001-13000 1866
13001-15490 1867
15491-17490 1868
17491-18830 1869
18831-21250 1870
21251-28890 1871
28891-40790 1872
40791-48240 1873
48241-53530 1874
53531-59635 1875
59636-65385 1876

No estimates are available for the years 1877 to 1890. (Smithsonian photo 48216-A.)]

<----

Over 100,000 Florence machines were manufactured by 1870. About 1880 the company changed the name of the machine to Crown. Improvements led to the name New Crown by 1885. About this time the right to use the name Florence for a sewing machine was purchased by a midwestern firm for an entirely different machine. In 1885 the Florence company began to manufacture lamp stoves and heating stoves and shortly thereafter they discontinued the manufacture of sewing machines.

Using the serial numbers, Florence machines can be dated approximately as follows:

_Serial Number_ _Year_

1-500 1860
501-2000 1861
2001-8000 1862
8001-20000 1863
20001-35000 1864
35001-50000 1865
50001-60000 1866
60001-70534 1867
70535-82534 1868
82535-96195 1869
96196-113855 1870
113856-129802 1871
129803-145592 1872
145593-154555 1873
154556-160072 1874
160073-164964 1875
164965-167942 1876

No record of the number of machines produced each year between 1877 and 1885 is available.

The machine shown here, serial number 49131, was manufactured in 1865. It is stamped with the following patent dates: "Oct. 30, 1855, Mar. 20, 1860, Jan. 22, 1861, and July 18, 1863" and the Wilson patent date "Nov. 12, 1850." The machines from 1860-1863 are marked with the early Langdon patents, excluding the 1863 one, and they have the additional patent dates of Howe and others: "Sept. 10, 1846, Nov. 12, 1850, Aug. 12, 1851, May 30, 1854, Dec. 19, 1854, Nov. 4, 1856." (Smithsonian photo 45572-A.)]

In 1866 Folsom devised a new treadle attachment for hand-operated machines; the invention was featured in _Scientific American_, volume 14, number 17, with a Globe machine. Folsom again exhibited at the Massachusetts Mechanics exhibition in 1869. In addition to an improved single-thread Globe, he also showed a double-thread, elastic-stitch (double chainstitch) machine for which he received a silver medal.

Folsom machines were manufactured until 1871; 280 machines were manufactured in that year.

The Globe sewing machine illustrated is stamped "J. G. Folsom, Maker, Winchendon, Mass. Patented April 28, 1863 [Ketchum's patent], Mar. 1, 1864. May 17, 1864." The machine was manufactured before November 1864 or it would include the patent for the lower loop adjustment. (Smithsonian photo 48216-H.)

NOTE: At least five sewing machines, those in figures 84 through 89, are similar enough in appearance to cause some confusion, because their basic design stems from a short pillar.

Neither a name nor a date appears on the machine. In the June 25, 1907, issue of the _Sewing Machine Times_ it was called the Common Sense machine, but detailed research has turned up no evidence to substantiate this name. However, a dated brochure advertising the Grant Brothers machine and showing a model identical to that illustrated in the _Sewing Machine Times_ has been found. The brochure states that the machine made an elastic lockstitch; this was not a true lockstitch, however, but was in fact a simple chainstitch.

Grant Brothers sold their machine, which had silver-plated mountings, for $18; the price included hemmer, Barnum's self-sewer, oilcan, screwdriver, clamp, gauge, and four silver needles. An additional charge of $12 was made for a table and treadle. Compared to other chainstitch machines the price was high, and the company was short-lived. (Smithsonian photo 60794-E.)]

The machine illustrated is marked "Greenman and True" and bears the serial number 402; it was probably manufactured early in 1860. (Smithsonian photo 48216-N.)]

_Serial Number_ _Year_

1-500 1851
501-1000 1852
1001-1658 1853
1659-3893 1854
3894-5038 1855
5039-7000 1856
7001-10681 1857
10682-15752 1858
15753-26033 1859
26034-44869 1860
44870-63705 1861
63706-82641 1862
82642-101477 1863
101478-120313 1864
120314-139148 1865
139149-157886 1866
157887-190886 1867
190887-225886 1868
225887-261004 1869
261005-338407 1870
338408-389246 1871
389247-441257 1872
441258-477437 1873
477438-497438 1874
497439-512439 1875

(Smithsonian photo 45513-B, an engraving of a Grover and Baker sewing machine from an advertising brochure of about 1870.)]

HERRON'S PATENT SEWING MACHINE, 1858. The manufacturer of this machine is not known, but the machine was based on the patent of Abial C. Herron issued August 4, 1857. All the machines carry a small heart-shaped plate just above the needle descent bearing the patentee's name and the patent date. The patent covered an improvement in the method of making the chainstitch. The machines were provided with a hand crank, but were also meant to be operated by a belt and treadle. No records of the extent of manufacture of this machine have been found. This machine head measures 14 inches in width, about standard size. (Smithsonian photo 48329-J.)]

Figures 96, 97, and 98.--THE HOWE MACHINES. It is difficult for many to believe that the stamped legend "Elias Howe patent, Sept. 10, 1846" does not certify that a machine is an original Howe. Although Elias Howe was granted a patent for the lockstitch machine in 1846, he did not establish a sewing-machine factory for about twenty years. Early in the 1850s and later through the "Combination," however, he licensed others to make machines using his patent. These machines bore that patent date for which a royalty was being paid.