COTTON GIN— LEWTON 557 



"When this author first read the letter of Eli Whitney, Jr., stating 

 that his father had made five models of the gin before 1800, he won- 

 dered why so many were made when only one was needed to be filed 

 with his application for a patent. A study of Whitney's letters suggests 

 a solution of the question. 



Two suits for infringement of the patent were filed by Miller and 

 Wliitney in 1795 in the Georgia Circuit Court. In Whitney's letter 

 to his partner, Miller, dated December 25, 1795, Whitney wrote: 



1 go to New York soon. After my return I shall set about the examplifying 

 models. I wish you would inform me when the suit will come to trial and of 

 the manouvers of my enemies. 22 



Scarborough describing a court scene during the trial of one of the 

 many suits for infringement, says: 



At the trial wliich took place at Louisville, Georgia, in the Federal Circuit 

 Court, the writer of this sketch was present. Mr. Whitney entered the Court 

 with a small package, enveloped in a silk handkerchief, which had the appear- 

 ance of containing books, this he carefully deposited under the court table. 

 The testimony above alluded to being read, it had the semblance of being con- 

 clusive in its effect. When it became necessary to rebut it to the Court, Mr. 

 Whitney claimed the privilege, which was granted, of doing it, as being best 

 calculated to give the necessary mechanical explanations. He took his pack- 

 age from under the table, and opening the handkerchief, presented to view an 

 exquisitely beautiful model of his gin about fourteen or fifteen inches in length, 

 with several handfuls of seed cotton. He handed both up to the judge, and 

 spreading out the silk handkerchief to prevent the escape of the ginned cotton, 

 desired the judge to turn the crank, which he seemed to do with great delight, 

 and in a very few seconds the cotton separated from the seed, was gathered up 

 and pressed together in the hand. Mr. Whitney then inquired of tlie judge and 

 jury if it was not in that state the cotton was exported for the purpose of manu- 

 facture either in England or Ireland? Which being assented to; he handed the 

 ginned cotton to the judge, requesting him to strive and force the cotton again 

 between the slats, which it was found impossible to do without breaking the 

 model all to pieces. Thus by the most conclusive occular demonstration, he 

 proved to the satisfaction of every one present, that the machine used in Europe 

 could have no sort of affinity, let alone identity, with his invention.^' 



It is a matter of record that one of the reasons given by the State 

 of South Carolina for not paying Whitney the sum agreed upon for 

 the use of his patent throughout the State was that he had not 

 deposited two models of his gin as stipulated in the contract. Whit- 

 ney's partner writes to Paul Hamilton, Comptroller of South Carolina, 

 on January 19, 1803: 



I have just received a letter from Mr. Whitney who expressly says that he 

 did not stipulate to deliver the models by the first of September, but on the 

 contrary that he refused to be bound by such a condition, but that he expected 

 to make them as soon as the pressure of his other business would allow * * *, 

 What then could have been fairly expected from an inspection of these two 

 models? Nothing more surely than a more neat and handsome method of 



" Amer. Hist. Rev., vol. 3, p. 104, 1897. 



» Southern Agriculturist, vol. 5, p. 401, Aug. 1832. 



