How was ihc landsidf haiicilc attached? \V. E. 

 Bridges of the National Museum suggests that it might 

 have been attached to the lower side of the standard 

 and the rear end of the plow licam. This seems, be- 

 yond doubt, to be correct. The wood has deteriorated 

 considerably over the years and the joints are loose, 

 Imt, within the limits of the existing structure, the 

 plow beam can easily be set in such a position that 

 its sloping rear end lines up with the slope of the 

 underside of the standard. Furthermore, a long bolt 

 runs from the upper part of the moldboard through 

 the standard and projects quite far beyond its lower 

 surface, as can be seen in figure 7. The end of the 

 Ijolt is threaded only part way and it has been neces- 

 sary to put a cylindrical metal spacer on it in order 

 to draw up the nut snugly. This long bolt must orig- 

 inally have passed through the lower end of the 

 handle, which, in turn, was fastened to the end of 

 the plow beam by a tenon on the end of the beam, 



on the old jjlowsj in the same plane. Symmetrical 

 handles branching from both sides of the beam are 

 found on cultivators, shovel plows, middle busters, 

 and sidehill plows where the moldboard is turned 

 alternately to each side. 



IN SUMMARY 



The existing evidence, I believe, indicates that: 



1 . The successful prairie plow with a smooth one- 

 piccc moldboard and steel share was basically Deerc's 

 idea. 



2. The moldboards of practically all of his plows. 



Figure lo. — -Reconstruction or Deere's 1838 

 Plow, left side, showing how left handle is 

 believed to have been attached. {Smitltsonian 

 bhoto 42637.) 



now broken off, passing through a mortise in the 

 handle. This was the common method of fastening 

 the handle to the beam. The square hole in the 

 plow's iron landside (fig. 7), w'hich at first might seem 

 meant for another bolt passing through the lower 

 end of the handle at right angles to the long bolt, 

 seems too close to the other bolt and to the edges of 

 the handle. It may simply be a first try for the bolt 

 through the l)ottom of the standard. In this manner 

 the handle would have been strongly attached to the 

 plow frame and, at the same time, would have ma- 

 terially helped to make it rigid by forming one side of 

 a triangular structure. Figures 8 and 10 show what 

 I believe to be the correct reconstruction of the 1838 

 Deere plow along the lines just described and, there- 

 fore, the probaljle appearance of the 1837 plow. 



It should also be noted that it was general practice 

 in making fixed moldboard plows to have the plow- 

 beam, standard, handle, and landside (or sharebeam, 



from 1837 and for aljout 15 years, wore made of 

 wrought iron rather than steel. 



3. The success of his plows in the prairie soils de- 

 pended on a steel share which held a sharp edge and 

 a highly polished moldboard to which the sticky soils 

 could not cling. 



4. The importance attached to the steel share led 

 to the plows being identified as steel plows. 



5. The correct reconstruction of the 1838 plow, 

 and, by inference, the 1837 plow, is shown in figures 

 8 and 10, previous reconstructions being wrong 

 primarily in the position and attachment of the 

 handles. 



6. The Museum's John Deere plow (Cat. No. 

 Fllll), shown in figures 7 and 9, is a very early 

 specimen, on the basis of a comparison of it with Deere 

 moldboards of 1847 and 1855 and its conformity to 

 Deere"s description of his plows in an 1843 advertise- 

 ment; and the 1838 date associated with it is plausible. 



PAPER 2: JOHN DEERE's STEEL PLOW 



25 



