36 



1837 caused the failure of the iron business, and it was not until the 

 harvest of 1839 that he was able again to take up his reaper. In the 



Staunton, Va., Spectator, of July 25,. 1839, i & an editorial giving a favor- 

 able account of a public trial in that harvest on the farm of Mr. Joseph 

 Smith, and stating that it was held in the presence of 200 persons. This 

 was followed on August 1 1 , in the same paper, by an advertisement of 

 Mr. McCormick's containing the certificate of Abram Smith and eleven 

 other gentlemen to the efficient working of the machine. 



In 1840 the fingers were changed to double-closed ones. In the 

 early months of that year the Richmond' Enquirer contains a certificate 

 of five gentlemen as to the operation of the machine at different times. 

 As a result of these trials Mr. Abram Smith ordered a machine, as did 

 also Richard Sampson, the "Farmer of Virginia," but both machines 

 drew grass into the grooves on the under side of the fingers, and did 

 not operate well. These machines had the same trouble that Hussey 

 encountered when he sent his machines to Virginia four years later. 

 In 1841 Smith's machine was improved by the substitution of a new 

 sickle with reverse angle teeth cutting both ways, and it performed 

 satisfactorily in that harvest. So successful was it in 1841 that Mr. 

 McCormick advertised his machine in the spring of 1842 in the Rich- 

 mond Enquirer. For the first time in the history of harvesting ma- 

 chinery his machine was warranted to do good work ; to cut one and a 

 half acres per hour, and to save a bushel of wheat to every acre. 



" The undersigned . . . determined that this machine should 

 get into use (if at all) upon its merits, and therefore upon his responsi- 

 bility." 



It is owing to this conservatism in the introduction of his machine,, 

 and in obtaining his patents, that much of his trouble in after years 



