Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1889-10-24
REWARDS OF INGENUITY.
What Small Inventors Have Done in Max
ing Fortunes.
The Inventor.


The rubber tip on the end of lead pencils
has yielded 100000 In England. A
large fortrue has been reaped by miner
who invented a metal rivet or eyelet at
each end of the mouth of coat or trousers
pockets to resist the strain caused by the
carriage of pieces of ore or heavy tools
In recent legal action it TRANSFERRED In
evidence that the inventor of the metal
plates used to protect soles and heels
from wear sold upward of II, 000, 900 plates
In 1879, and in 1887 the number reached
AS, GOO, 900, producing realized profits of
81, $50. 900.
As large sum as was ever obtained for
any invention was enjoyed by the inventor
of the inverted glass bell to hang over gas
to protect ceilings from being blackened,
and a scarcely less lucrative patent was that
for simply putting emery powder on cloth.
Frequently time and circumstances are
wanted before an invention is appreciated;
but it will be seen that patience Is well re-
warded, fot the inventor of the roller
skate made over 81 100000, notwithstand-
ing the fact that his patent had near
ly expired before its value was ascertained.
The gimlet-pointed screw has produced
more wealth than most silver mines and the
American who first thought of putting
copper tips to children shoes is as well off
as if his father had left him 100000 in
United States bonds. Upwards of $4,000
a year was made by the inventor of the
common needle-threader. To the fore
going might be added thousands of trihing
but useful articles from which handsome
incomes are derived or for which large
sums have been paid.
Few inventions pay better than popu-
lar patented toys A clergyman realized
81, 900 week by the invention of
strange little plaything to be seen for a
long time in every toy-shop window, and
even in the streets of London. That ia
vorite American toy, ''the return ball "a
wooden ball with an elastic attached
yielded the patentee an income equal to
$50, 1000 year, and an income of no less
than $72, cooper annum to the inventor of
the dancing Jim Grow" The inventor
of 'Pharaoh's serpents, a toy much In
vogue some years ago, was the outcome of
some chemical experiment and brought
the inventor more than $4,000. The sale
of the little wooden figure, John Gilpin, y
was incredibly large for many years, and
very ingenious toy, known as the wheel
of life, is said to have produced upward
of $50 900 profits to its inventor. One of
been the chameleon top, the sale of which
is not only vast and varied, but it is open
to everybody without respect or favor of
any kind to sex or age, station or means.
The merest trife may be the key to a for
tune, if it be an article that the public
actually wants in great numbers.
Should Wives Work?
The question of whether or not wife
should work for money is an interesting
one, but, like many others, cannot be de-
cided on general principles. A woman,
whether married or single, has moral as
well as a legal right to earn money. If a
woman's husband is unable, through i'll
ness, to support her, it is her duty, if she
be competent, to earn money for herself and
him. If he is idolent or stingy, then ne
cessity certainly justifes the effort.
Considering the question, however, from
the grounds of industrial competition, it is
not fair that married women should gener
ally become wage-earners. 1t is just
neither to the men who support families
nor to single woman forced to care for
themselves. Marriage presupposes the
support of the wife by the husband. Mar
riage is regarded as a compact, where
mutual INTEREST tHdhcS one Guo pIONIueI anu
the other the homemaker. When it does
not remove a woman from industrial COM
petition, then In a commercial sense, mar
riage is a failure. Though the wives of
well-to-do and wealthy men can earn money,
and in so doing break no law on the statute
books, they certainly infringe upon that
larger law relating to the good of the many.
While industry among women is admir-
able and the independence of the modern
girl most praiseworthy, yet it does not
seem fair that wives and daughters of rich
men should absorb the places needed by
poor women and girls.
The married woman earning money, who
is partially supported by her husband the
girl who lives at home and may use her
earnings as she will, can afford to under
bid the woman who must work, this re-
duces the wages of working women, and
discriminates against them in favor of
those having husbands and fathers. Taking
one consideration with another it would
appear to be more to the general good if
marriages were contracted in the old
fahioned way A young man should ex
pect to support his wife. A woman should
marry content with the best her husband
can do for her.