266 [Assembly 



front edge or part of the mouldboard on the landside, and was too 

 straight on the bottom; the share was far from being right, it left 

 the shin of the plow all unprotected. In April 1819, I planned a 

 plow which I supposed better adapted to the work, as it afterwards 

 proved itself to be. This plough I did not patent until 1822. Owing 

 to bad management at Washington, I lost my first $30. Not having 

 my specification at hand, 1 will describe my improvement at that 

 time, April 15, 18l9. The mouldboard was longer than any I had 

 known; it was concave with a corresponding shape. My landside I 

 made twice as wide as Wood's, 6 to 7 inches, and connected it to 

 the mouldboard by two wrought iron bolts. My share, in which con- 

 sisted my greatest improvements, was constructed with a projecting 

 piece called a shin share so made as to supply with a new edge, the 

 shin of the plow as well as the wing. By this improvement, which 

 has been adopted by all plow makers, the plough was made more 

 durable by one half. The making of the landside concave on the 

 bottom, although only about half an inch from the point to the heel 

 of the plow, was a very simple, but an important improvement. The 

 mouldboard back of the wing of the share, did not touch the ground 

 by half an inch. The two improvements are quite necessary in rough 

 and stony lands. Wherever my plough was introduced it superceded 

 Mr. Wood's. The result was a prosecution by Mr. W. for an in- 

 fringement of his patent. He tried the second time, but was unsuc- 

 cessful in both. About 1821, persons in different parts of the coun- 

 try got up plows. Among them were Mr. Tice of Washington coun- 

 ty, Mr. Wright of Saratoga, Mr. Chamberling of Dutchess, and sev- 

 eral others in different parts of the Union. They all laid aside 

 theirs and adopted my improvements, I found it impossible to protect 

 myself from these encroachments. Although my plow was made by 

 all plow-makers, yet I did not consider it perfect. In 1828, I ascer- 

 tained that my landside was not as durable as it ought to be- By 

 not extending all the way outside to the share, it left part of the 

 mouldboard exposed to wear, and could nut be renewed without get- 

 ting an entire new mouldboard. To remedy this I extended the 

 landside outside of the mouldboard up to the share. Finding that 

 the wrought standard I then used was not sufficiently strong and 

 cheap, I, in 1823, extended the body of my cast mouldboard up to 

 the beam, securing the beam to the body of the plow by a wrought 

 bolt from the centre of the landside and mouldboard perpendicular 

 through the casting on which the beam rested; and through the 

 beam, securing it with nut and screw. These have also been gener- 

 ally adopted. One more improvement remained to be made. In my 

 letter to the secretary of the American Institute, published in the 



