103 
that they were held to be distinct inventions. A third 
machine was invented by a Mr. Reed, which, however, was 
a combination of the former two, and I believe was not held 
valid as a patent. In 1810, Messrs. Wells and Co., of the 
Charles River Iron Works, near Boston, having arranged 
with the patentees, sent out models of the nail machine to 
me in London, to be patented for our joint account. The 
operations of the machines were as follow : — 
1st. Feeding-plates, of the width and thickness to form 
the nails, are pushed endwise over a fixed cutter, against a 
stop under the traversing cutter, and at such angle with the 
line of the cutters as to give the severed nail the head and 
point ends, and the plates turned over between each suc- 
cessive cut. 
2nd. A fixed gripping die is placed just under the fixed 
cutter, the face of it and the cutter being in the same line, 
and the counter die moves forward to bring both together, so 
as to hold the nails firmly, a portion of the large end standing 
out beyond the dies to form the heads of the nails. 
3rd. The heading die then advances and presses the end 
into the “ rose,” “ clasp,” or “clout” heads. 
Success or failure often depends upon slight changes in 
power-driven machines. These nail machines answered very 
well for large nails, but failed as applied to very small ones, 
but as a means of saving the labour applied to making tacks 
and very small nails, it became important to adapt the 
machines to them also. This object, after some time, I suc- 
ceeded in accomplishing, and thereby rendered the patent 
nail manufactory, established under the patents for the 
original invention and the improvements on it, a success. 
