The Middlebury register and Addison County journal. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1883-1885, 1884-02-22
Correspondence.
Saving Marble.

~, lSOI, mas Just met my eye Ill yOul
issue of February Sth inst.
As 1.-The Middlebury Historical So
ciety" is somewhat mythical, ! suppos-
ed it is used as a cover, the real pur-
pose of the article being to settle the
question whether the saving of marble
by toothless saws and sand and water,
propelled by water power or other than
by hand power, i'll gangs or single
frames, was an invention due to Mid
dlebury, as has always been claimed
here since 1904 %; and if so, whether
the boy Markham or DR.. f.. W. Judd
was the inventor.
The learned professor negatives the
first, and concludes that nett her DR..
Judd nor Markham invented anything
pertaining to the saving of marble,
except 'the cord and roller for
raisi e and lowering the saws" See
his patent of 1922, invented in 1906.
This is claimed by, and conceded to, DIR.
Judd, and he claims nothing more; so
that what is left, if anything, belongs
to the boy Markham, who always
claimed the invention and to whom it
was accorded by the people of the town
at the time or by those VITO knew about
it, and for a long time afterwards. See
the affidavits of Messrs. Topper, Hen
bricks and Roderick Rising in the files
of the Vermont Historical society.
1t was these af1idavits, together with
the statement of Mr.. Elias Hall, made
to the Vermont Historical society in
1861, that called the attention of the late
Hon. George p. Marsh to the account
by Pliny. referred to by Professor
Seely.
propose TO review the evidence pre-
sented by Professor Seely and ascer-
tain, if possible, if Markham or Judd
invented anything in the saving of
marble except the "cord and roller
above referred to.
Pliny CA. d. 79) says: GAS touch
ing the manner of Sitting marble into
thin plates, wot not whether the in
vention is from Caria or no. The pal
ace of Mausolus, king of Cara, built at
Halcarnassus, is the most ancient
building / can find in any record,
garnished and enriched with marble
Plates. This palace was erected not
less than $50 years before Christ"
The fact revealed bv modern research
had evidently eluded Pliny--that the
great pyramid of Cheops in Egypt, dat
luS DdCh AZ ltdsl -VOO NtdlS Bl lOl w lllC
same era, and perhaps before the No
achian deluge, was "garnished" on the
whole outside "with thin plates of
marble" SO that the cutting or making
marble into "thin plates" for adorn-
ment and architectural purposes may
date back beyond the "historic period
and was no new invention by Markham
or Judd.
Pliny goes on: "Would you know
the manner of saving the marble.
After small line is made, they strow
sand along the whole length, then they
set the saw to it, and by drdwing to and
fro, the sand under the teeth makes
way downwards, aud so the stone, hard
as it is, is speedily cut through" So
much for Pliny. But this is not the
Middlebury method. Pliny's saw has
teeth, and for aught we know is of hard
iron or steel, indeed, must be so, as
teeth is an important feature of it; be-
sides, no water is used with the sand,
and the saw is propelled "to and fro,"
manifestly by hand power alone, as
"saw-mils, driven by either water or
wind" power, were not invented until
the fourth century, A. D., according to
Prof. Beckmann, introduced into this
discussion by Prof. Seely, and who
wrote later than 17G6. Beckmann's
statements are made under the head of
"saws." He says: "Though Ansonius
speaks properly of aoater mills for cut
ting stone and not timber, it cannot be
doubted that these were inveneed later
than mills for manufacturing deals, or
that both kinds were erected at the
same time. The art of cutting marble
with a saw is very DID," 1t is manifest
that Beckmann did not consider that
there was any material difference in the
"saws" that cut deals and those that
cut stone; i. e.. they both had teeth land
as he quotes Piny and says that the
"art OF cutting stone with a saw is very
DID," he evidently considers the method
used in the "mills" was the same de-
scribed by Pliny, worked by hand ;
and as he describes no new method in
use in his day, we may conclude there
was none, and this was within % or 80
years of the 'model' made by Mark.
ham and the "trial mill' put up by DR..
Judd.
Professor Seely quotes largely from
Frederick Hall, late professor in Mid
dlebury college, describing fully the
Middlebury method, "the idea OF
which," says Prof. Hall, Originated
i'll the inventive mind of the proprie-
tor, DR.. Judd" This was in 1921, more
than 16 years after the "trial mill" was
put up by him in lSO4-5. Now, what
does Prof. Hall mean? Does he mean
that he found the same process" Sitting
stone into thin plates" in Europe,
where he then had recently been on d
special mission to make himself famil.
lar with mechanical methods there EN-.
ployed in the arts and sciences, as he
now saw in operation in Judd's mill
Certainly not. If language means any
thing, Prof. Hall says that the method
which he now saw in use in DR.. judd.
mill was invented by DR.. Judd. He
could not haye said this if he had seer
the same thing in Europe, after he haC
investigated the subject there. He only
found these saws OF DIR. Judd "similal
in form to those which are used in saw