THE CULTIVATOR. 
Reply to C. H. McCormick’s 
Review of the Report of the Committee, on the Trial of 
Reaping and Mowing Machines , at Geneva, N. Y. 
Mr. Tucker —The flutterings of a wounded bird are so 
mingled with expressions of pain, that it is perfectly natural 
that sympathy should be excited; and this seems to be the 
object for which the review is made. But as it contains many 
erroneous assertions, both in regard to my machine, and to 
the high and unimpeachable character of the committee, 
and put forth from purely interested motives, I deem it ne¬ 
cessary to expose some of its errors and absurdities. 
Mr. McCormick opens his long article, by the statement 
that he will “ prove from ihe facts reported by the committee 
of theNew-York Estate Agricultural Society, as well as from 
other facts, not reported by them, the superiority of his 
Reaping and Mowing (remember, and Mowing) Machine, 
over all others in use, the award of said committee to the 
contrary notwithstanding.” 
I will show, from the stubborn facts in the case, and from 
Mr. McCormick’s own acknowledgment, that he has utterly 
failed in furnishing the proof promised, as well as that his 
machine failed in said trial, and that his allegations against 
the said committee, are not, nor can not, with any shadow 
of reason, be sustained. In the first place, he vainly attempts 
to exhibit the superiority of his cutting apparatus, basing 
his whole argument upon the figures contained in the report 
of the committee, representing his machine of less draft than 
others; and here let it be noticed, that through the whole ex¬ 
tent of his able research, he fully relies upon and attaches the 
utmost importance to the report, as far as it is favorable to 
his own particular machine, and unfavorable to others; and 
that which is favorable to others, he sets aside as a fabulous 
thing. But to the cutting apparatus; it is very apparent that 
the report of the committee possesses a far greater cutting 
principle, applied to Mr. McCormick’s machine, than his 
machine possesses, applied to cutting grass. This cutting.re¬ 
port says, in relation to his machine, ‘‘the construction of the 
machine was too fragile for useful purposes •, the knives yiel¬ 
ded after a few swathes were cut. and needed to be replaced 
by another set; these yielded also— the stubble was left . long 
and uneven .” It will be seen by reference to the tabular 
statement, that his machine in mowing, left the stubble an 
average height of five inches. It is self-evident, that cutting 
five inches above the ground, the tendency and liability to 
injure the knives was much less than when cutting, as my 
machine did, within two and half inches of the ground, on 
an average. Yet the knives of my machine did not yield, and 
were not sharpened during the trial. Every man, of any ex¬ 
perience, knows that in mowing with a machine, much more 
power is required to cut close to the ground, than to cut a 
heighth of five inches. Tbe average height alone, is suffi¬ 
cient to show that Mr. McCormick’s machine cannot be of 
the least utility whatever for mowing. The commiliee further 
say of it—“During the action of the machine, the horses 
were subject to a heavy side draft Mr. McCormick, it 
seems, would wish to be understood, that the various drafts 
of the machines was fully tested by the Dynamometer, and 
the figures indicated, give the absolute drafts. I would ask 
if the heavy side draft of Mr. McCormick’s machine was 
tested, and- arrived at by the said instrument? It was not. 
The Dynamometer was attached to the whipplc-trees, and 
indicated only the drafts by the whipple-trees—the heavy 
side draft of course, would not be indicated, as it was not upon 
the whipple-trees, but on the neck-yoke , at the opposite end 
of the pole. Of the number of lbs. of this heavy side draft, 
there were no means of ascertaining—it was observable by 
all to be very heavy. The facl, that wherever his machine 
is used, it is found necessary to use one or two extra horses, 
expressly to overcome the heavy side draft; and the fact 
also, that the farmers generally, who use his machine, are of 
one opinion, that it requires about the power of one horse to 
overcome the side draft, and keep the pole straight, is cer¬ 
tainly sufficient proof that the side draft must be at least equal 
to one-fourth of the whole draft. The draft by the whipple- 
trees, being as tested, 350 to 375 lbs.; then the very low al¬ 
lowance of 100 lbs. for the side draft added, and then if in 
cutting close lo the ground still more power is required, it is 
most assuredly very explicitly shown, that the whole abso¬ 
lute draft of his machine would reach over 450, if not over 
475 pounds. 
There being no side draft whatever, on the pole or tongue 
of my machine, the whole absolute draft was arrived at by 
Ihe whippletrees, and is 400 lbs. The argument here of Mr. 
McCormick, I think falls to the ground, based exclusively as 
it is, upon the light draft of his machine, regardless of the 
height and unevenness of the stubble, and regardless of the 
durability of the cutting apparatus. 
He explicitly acknowledges, after summing up, that the 
fingers of his machine are too far apart, but very politety ex¬ 
plains the matter to the committee, and I am aware that other 
difficulties were explained to the committee. How ungener¬ 
ous, then, in the committee, not to give him the first award, in 
consideration that he might possibly, some time hereafter, 
furnish a better machine 
In the conclusion of his review, he winds up most beauti¬ 
fully. Hear what he says.—“Satisfied from the experience 
of the past harvest, of the impossibility of constructing the 
same machine both for reaping and mowing, to the best ad¬ 
vantage, a separate mowing apparatus will, for the next har¬ 
vest, be sold with my reaper.” This, certainly, virtually ac¬ 
knowledges that he has been unsuccessful in his experiments 
in mowing, abandons all idea of combination in his machine 
lor reaping and mowing, and concludes lo sell a separate 
mowing apparatus of which the public never before have had 
any intimation, but still warrants it to work. Will the farm¬ 
ers try so dangerous an experiment? 
And now, to what he says in relation to my own machine. 
One serious eye-sore to him, is Ihe adjustihilily of my machine. 
He says it is proposterous to talk of it. I would inform him 
that my machine adjusts itself lo the inequalities of iheground, 
or can be set to cut at any height desired, when moving along, 
by the driver. The committee report as follows : 
“J. II. Manny’s machine—this reaper cut admirably in 
wheat and barley; the merits of construction were manifest 
in the barley field, where the driver would raise or depress 
the knives, as the standing or lodged grain might demand— 
the water courses also were easily passed; these are valuable 
features. Manny’s machine is peculiar in its construction, 
by a facility of raising or depressing the cutting apparatus 
while in motion at ih e pleasure of the driver, giving to it the 
capability of cutting the heads of grasses for seed, and after¬ 
wards the straw or stem and leaves for fodder. It runs on 
wheels, is easily moved from place to place, is strongly 
braced, and by an ingenious arrangement is capable of 
being contracted into a small compass for housing, when not 
in use ” 
The discharge of the grain from my machine, Mr McCor¬ 
mick pleases to make quite a handle of,—certainly drowning 
men will catch at s'raw'S—though I labored under a very 
great inconvenience, in not having for the occasion, an ex¬ 
perienced raker; my' man never having raked from the ma¬ 
chine before the day of trial, yet I shall not complain about 
it; I have the satisfaction of knowing that the binders pre¬ 
ferred binding the gavels after my machine, to that of Mr. 
McCormick’s, for the reason that there was no senllermg 
befween the gavels, as was the case wilh others. As lo the 
challenge to meet Mr. McCormick in Virginia, I can cheer¬ 
fully say. that I am willing and ready to meet him any¬ 
where lie pleases, and am willing to abide by the result; and 
that too without crying if defealed. As we both reside in 
Illinois, I should think he had some policy in getting so far 
from home. 
Now' to Mr. McCormick's attack upon the committee, 
which seems to be entirely unwarranted, uncalled for, and 
unjustifiable. Who can question the integrity or the ability 
of that commitlee, composed as it was of men of the most 
respectable standing, and of the very highest order of lalent 
in the State of New'-York ? Attendance upon that trial, was 
to them a source of great trouble, inconvenience and ex¬ 
pense, as w'ell as an occasion for particular vigilance in re¬ 
gard to their examinations and conclusions. They'discharged 
the delicate and responsible duties imposed upon them by ihe 
society', without fear or favor; and only for ihe laudable 
purpose of giving to ihe w'orld the result of a most important 
test, by which the absolute and relalive merits of certain 
agricultural implements w’ere ascertained. With the report, 
all seem perfectly' satisfied, except a few' who could not suc¬ 
ceed in advancing their own private interest, to the great 
detriment of the public good. 
Every careful reader of the report, taking the wffiole to¬ 
gether—facts and figures—w’ill arrive at once lo the very 
natural and just conclusion, that the Geneva Trial was a most 
severe and rigid test, (occupying five days in the 1 rial of 
Reapers and Mow'ers) and w'as decided by ihe most efficient, 
capable, and persevering men ever appointed to judge of the 
merits of similar machines; and that the facts stated, and the 
conclusions arrived at in said report, are strictly and undeni¬ 
ably correct. 
I could not entertain the idea for a moment, that any one 
of that committee acted under the corrupting influence of 
bribery, so wantonly insinuated in the article to which this is 
a reply; and I think the public will demand some proof of the 
assertion, or else point the finger of scorn at the traducer. 
Freeport , Illinois, Dec. 15, 1852. J H. MANNY. 
Valuable Farm For Sale. 
T HE subscriber offers for sale his Farm, containing 108 
acres of first-rate land, situated four miles north of ihe 
village of Keeseville, Clinton county'. Upon it is a good dwel¬ 
ling house, with convenient outbuildings; w'ell fenced into 
convenient sized fields for cultivation, and for beauty of loca¬ 
tion, is not surpassed by any in Northern New-York. 
Peru, Feb. 1, 1S53—6t WILLETS KEESE. 
