8 ERIKF NARRATIVE OF THE 



Hussey was subsequently duly notified by order of the Board to be 

 present at taking the dei)ositions in Augusta County, Virginia, — the 

 Board having adjourned three weeks for that purpose. 



Either just previous, or subsequent to these proceedings the case 

 was referred by the Commissioner of Patents, or Board of extensions, 

 to Dr. Page, one of the Examiners of the office. 



His report is as follows — 



Patent Office, ) 



"Sir: Jan. 22d, 1848. \ 



In compliance with your requisition, I have examined the patent 

 of Cyrus H. McCormick, dated 31st June, 1834, and found that the 

 principal features embraced in said patent, viz: the cutting-knife and 

 mode of operating it, the fingers to guide the grain and the revolving 

 rack for gathering the grain, were not new at the time of granting said 

 letters patent. 



The knife-fingers and general arrangements and operation of the 

 Cutting apparatus are found in the reaping machine of O. Hussey, 

 patented 31st Dec. 1833. 



The re\olving rack presents novelty chiefly in form, as its opera- 

 tion is similar to the revolving frame of James Ten P^yck, patented 2nd 

 November 1825. Respectfully submitted, 



Chas. G. Page, Examiner." 

 Hon. Edmund Burke, Com'r. of Patents. 



As some have enquired, and others may enquire, why a patent 

 should issue under these circumstances, we reply, that previous to 1836 

 but little, if any examination was made as to priority of inventions, or 

 into preceding Patents; the applicant made oath as to his invention, 

 and the patent was issued as a matter of course. And as another mat- 

 ter of course, if the rival interests clashed, litigation was the result: — 

 the Courts and juries often decided what they little understood, and 

 at times not at all, after the pleading of well fee'd lawyers: a pretty 

 fair illustration of the fable of the boys and frogs: it may be fmi for 

 the lawyers but it is death to the hopes of many a poor patentee. We 

 are however pleased to i)erceive a disposition manifested by the 

 courts to sustain patents; even if occasionally an unjust claim is rec- 

 ognized as a valid one, it is better, according to the legal and moral 

 maxim, that half a dozen rogues should escape punishment for a time, 

 than that one innocent person should be unjustly convicted: the rogue 

 is almost certain to be caught in the end, and truth will ultimately 

 triumph. 



This testimony was taken in due form at Steele's Tavern, Augusta 

 County, Va., McCormick and Hussey both being present. It is too 

 voluminous to copy entire, but we w^ill refer briefly to each, having 

 read them carefully, and obtained certified copies of all, from the 

 Patent office. 



Dr. N. M. Mitt — testified to a reaping machine being made byC.H. 

 McCormick in 1831 — it had a straight sickle blade. 



William S. McCormick and Leander J. McCormick, brothers of 

 C. H. McCormick, also testified to the making of a machine in 1831. 



