The Dupuyer acantha. [volume] (Dupuyer, Mont.) 1894-1904, 1897-09-02
Pounding the Same ola straw.

Pounding the Same OLD straw.
We have before us a pamphlet, the
cover page of which bears the somewhat
misleading title, Overlooked Pages of
REAPER History" In characterizing this
utle as misleading, 1t may be explained
mat a fair Interpretation of the words
would lead us to expect something not
heretofore generally known concerning
the subject of reape history. Instead of
this being the fact, a cursory glance at
the pamphlet-or more properly, the ere
publcation of three pamphlets'-as its
EDITORS term 1t, is a mere repetition of
far-fetched theories and so-called evil
dence, in support of the false hypothesis
that Cyrus H. Mccormick was not the
inventor OF the first successful reaping
/ machine.
Inc original publication of these PAM
phlets in the early SOS was prompted by
that sore feeling IAN ailment somewhat
AKIN to that tired feeling') on the part
or a would-be competitor of the McCor-
m1ck-a competitor whose machine had
suffered defeat at the hands of McCor-
mick; and the republication is now
brought out along the original lines, be-
ing fathered by some has BEEN and
"would-be' competitors of the McCor-
mick. Jealous of the genius Of the man
who invented the reaper, and doubly jeal-
/, GUS of the great success of Mccormick
machines all over the world, these men
nave recently spent a large sum of money
in republishing and distributing this PAM
phlet. And who are they? ]. Russell Par
sons, who was one of the directors of the
Wood Reaper Co. before it went into the
hands of a receiver, because its machines
were not as good as McCormick's; Lewis
Miller, formerly superintendent of the
Akron Buckeye Co., and who copied our
orham invention, for which we propose
the Buckeye Co. shall pay us; and John
f. Steward, who has been for years, and
now is, an employee of William Deering
Il Co., and who has been defeated in the
various suits in which he has opposed
the Mccormick.
The original pamphlet is one purport-
Ing to have been written by Edward
Stabler in 1854. In reality Stabler wrote
1t, assisted by Obed Hussey (the sore old
time competitor), and Hussey paid all the
bills for publication and distribution, just
as VIM. Deering & Co.. are doing now.
In 1854 Hussey saw that his reaper would
not compete with the Mccormick, and
that despite his most herculean efforts
it's sale must soon cease lin 1858 he sold
and was paid but for ten machines), and
so he began to print the testimonials of
his friends and attack Mccormick. And
In this self-satisfying he let him.
self down, and finally dropped out of the
race altogether. With Hussey's bewail-
ings as a text, his followers nave zone on
in their mad attempts at bolstering up a
lost cause, being prompted solely by the
success of Mccormick, and with "any-
thing to beat Mccormick as their watch
word. 1t is easy to see how this class
of men would have conducted their cam
paign had Hussey really demonstrated to
the world that he was the inventor of the
successful reaping machine, n had Nc
Cormick been forced, as Hussey was, to
recognize his failure and retire from the
field This would ha n fro ncnncif;ar ~
the case-Hussey would be to-day the
leading manufacturer of harvesting ma
chimes, and Mccormick would be compar-
atively unknown; then, with an enthu-
siasm worthy of a better cause, the dis
tinguished "republishers' would be de-
voting their energies to calculating how
MCCORMICK was the real inventor of the
reaper, while Hussey was only a hanger
on, a bull-dozer, and an abstracter Of
other mems ideas.
With McCormick's machines as ac-
knowledged leaders in every land, n
with the question of priority of inven~
ton repeatedly established before courts
and commissions, there is no longer any
room for plausible argument on the other
side of the question, but
"A man convinced against his will
Is of his own opinion STILL"
hence, would-be competitors will continue
on in the same old way, seeking to Civ
honor where honor is not due, rather
than to acknowledge that they them
selves are behind the race for supremacy.
Does history repeat itself? 1t would seem
so. Wood is gone, and the Akron Buck
eye seems to have a tired feeling" Why
is Deering joining this combination Of
failure? 1t is because Birds of a feather
flock together?'
In view of the facts in the case we
would suggest to our re-publishing
friends that when they get in another re-
publishing mood, and get out a re-pub-
lished edition of their re-published work,
an appropriate title, equally felicitous,
and not less euphonious, would be "Over-
worked Pages of Reaper History
Farmers Advance.