The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-02-03
THE REPU BLIC..
McCORMIcK,S
Reply to Seymour and Morgan In his Pa
tent Reaper Case.

WAsHIssToN. d. c., January "a, 1853.
Ma. EDITos: After rd-fought battle thrcug
Brockpert, N. W famous as infringys of M
patents, resulting 80 far they say, in an appea
10 the supreme Court of the United States from Q
Judgment against them, had not expected to b
openly confronted by them in my application I,
Congress for the renewal of my erpired patent
anu (only) too years extension of the second Il
the date of my third patent | doubt not, howey
err, that IT, through the fundamentally of " Moor
r Hascau, of Michigan" Seymour and Morgan
can effect a transfer of their case to Congress :
convert that honorable body into patent office ane
COURT was going to say Of fa,o, but that ia no
precisely the sort of CORTLAND procure the gran
OF Congress patent without reg ard to any of Thu
forms Of sGtc to be complied with at the Patent Oil
hee and by which they will have the right to prove
the inrsrston Of any thing as having been in their
model) from time immemoral-if they can effeci
sseh transfer of their case, say it would an
doubtedly be very agreeable to them, and worth
an effort. But with what grace do these parties
come forward to pxblish their otcn Shame! They
who, after manufacturing for three years under
my patent by contract, and not satisfied with thu
use Of my eEpsred patent, infringed my two subse
quent patents in the manufacture and sale of my
machines, and are continuing the same to this
day, they openly present themselves in opposition
70 the extension of my patent the dsintcrested
friends OF the farmer, the faithful defenders of the
pubic good against ssmonopoliesl" w no would
have suspected i?-the wolf interceding for the
lamb
After printing and circulating unfounded PAM
phlets by thousands throughout the country a,
ne TRIALS Of reapers, and publishing the same in
the newspapers Of the country, fer the purpose OF
(" arousingo and ~ waking uDo a general opDosi-
ton to me, through circumstances to Con gress
WsLhoat effect: still not satsfed-though with
their attorney, &c R. j. Gillet, Solicitor of the Trea-
sury," upon tue ground-they at last themselves
openly come forward and make the publication in
question, using preeTt for it the publication OF
certain reports on English trials of Hussey's and
my Reapers IN the last harvest, copied originally
from the London Economist"
regret having to request of you 80 much OF
your valuable space, Mr.. Editor, for work of this
Sort but trust that the present necessity of this
course, IN justice to myself in repelling throa gh
the same medium the base attack made on me and
my Reaper through your columns, will be duly
appreciated BY yourself and others regret. It
the less, however, having been aware of the fact
that the infringing interests of the country, in con-
nexion with the advocates of the bill now before
Congress, for the extension and grant of patents
to Moore y HGscGH, have by means of interested
agents and otherwise long been engaged in pri-
Yately incorporating me to members of Goa :
gress, by statements designed and calculated to
prejudice their minds and mislead them, which it
seemed difficult, not to cay impossible, fully to
meet, and which trust now effectually to dissi-
pate,
The first and most important question which +
shall further notice and answer, is as to the real
connexion between this ssSey Rdour & Morgan OF
Brockport, New York. in nom presenting theua-
selves before Congress, and the Moore = Hascail
Moore f. Hascau, and those ia their interest, say
that am and have been in the use of their sickle.
General Cass, In the course of the discussion in the
Senate, stated that sit was the sickle that Mr.
Moore invented, and which practically works,
and which ne has used in every machine which
does work. Seymour & Morgan cay sstsis kind
Of sickle was invented and used in Michigan nine
years beEore my patent, lin lS45;) tche lieu rotp
say ssthat all this old and common property land
all bat the cutting blade invented and used before
Mccormick commenced his iInprovementA would
become abiding to the claims in my expired
patent OF 1884, and the renewal of the same These
are the statements thus publicly made, while every
body knows that sshe sickie'' has been one of the
prominent features in my g Virginia Reaper" ever
since u was Reaper-Mr. Hussey using smooth
edged blade. Now what are the factsy
From the year 1881 to the present time the
vibrasing sickle, in connexion with fngers or sup
ports to the cutting, has been or less in use
IN my machine IN every harvest. 1t is found in
my patent Of June 81, 1884, the year before the first
experiment made by Moore & Hascall on their
machine, as stcorn to by Moore himself. In June
1885, again, the alternate reversed angles of The
teeth Of the same IN suitable spaces of few inches
portion OF the teeth cutting in one direction and
portion in the other-is patented, in connection
with the spear-head finger. This movement in
the SICKLE, Moore, as witness for Seymour & Nor
gan, swore he invented in 1885, when his frat ex-
pertinent was made; but producing his patent
there was no trace of it to be found In specifea-
tons or drG,csngs. His model was burnt at the
Patent Office, in 1886, and neither it papers
of Noore's claim. Ia his (or their) patent of 1886
he describes, of two different methods of
cutting straight sickle, Gas in my patent of
l5340 vibrating on plate OF iron steel,
shaped as the edge OF saw, magnlfied, the teeth
of the sickle projecting just over the back angles
OF these indentations, which apparatus of course
could not OF itself cut at ALL as without some.
thing to hold the grain uP to the blade Tin the
open angles OF the plate) it would slip forward
and pass under the machine, uncut. This calls to
mind another feature of the cutting arrangement
of this machine, which was the action of the re-
yolving reel in close contact with the cutting
blades. The reel was made to gather the heads
OF the grain with small portion of the stra,o
as could be done) to the blades, and severing the
straw upon the blades, swept them back to be con-
Quoted into the treshaag part of the machine; but
which would be entirely impracticable for ordinary
cutting alone, as done, say eight to twelve inches
from the ground, and therefore is not heard of as
being used for that purpose, which can only be eff
fected by cutting apparatus complete in itself,
and entirely independent of such connexon with
the reel, and hence the importance of the spear
head finger, as combined with my sickle, and pa
tented in l845, will presently fully appear
Let Moore & HascalI have, then, the full benefit
of their combination, if theirs.
Now, whilst my patent for the reversed cut
sickle bears date January, lS45, also claim to
haveinyented it prior to the date of the invention
of il by Mooreaand Hascal claimed BY themselves
But Seymour and Morgan assert that sc McCor-
Enick's machine, patented in 1884, ia substantially
the same thing las Bell's) except the cutting APP
paratus his limitation was so close as TO agree
the absurdity (now abolished by both) of hitching
the horses behind Bells mac hines and all others
failed until the cutting apparatus was improved,
which, though actually invented and used in
Michigan, in an experimental machine in 1884 or
1885, seems not to have been known by Motor
mick until alter 1910, four years after the nyen-
ton and Of the scoIlop sickle by the same par
tics in the same State, and now 80 much used y
And they then pretend TO quote from nv petition
TO the Patent Office, written in 1845 for the ptupos.
of prorsng that did not know, prior to 1910, any
thing of the improvement actually invented an6
used in Michigan, in experimental machine il
1884 or 1885, aohich ii is claimed perfected the cut
ting apparatus Of Bell's machine and all others
or they s'aH failed" until Moore & Hascalis in
yention in 1885, (They seem to have forgotten TIN
precise year that Moore swore to-the twelve Sey
Tnour & Morgan signers to the pamphlet remon
STRANGE enormously ~ stated it in 1884 Al
that this claim rests upon has been shown; ant
without attempting to follow these garbled ex
tracts and quotations, as | shah presently show,
now proceed to set forth my elaine from M
patents
Inc following correct extracts from the spe
citlcati2ns and claims of the patent of 1884:
''Thcse cranks are in a right line, projecting OF
opposite sides of the axis, and in line with th
front edge OF the platform To the lower of thes
cranks is attached, by joint near the crank, hav
ing wooden pin, a long cutter of steei, groov e.