The Invention of the Sewing Machine Part 2

[20] The company was located at Villefranche-sur-Saone, but no name is recorded. See J. Granger, _Thimonnier et la machine a coudre_ (1943), p.

16.

[21] See Walter Hunt's biographical sketch, p. 138.

[22] The earliest known reference in print to Walter Hunt's sewing machine is in _Sewing by Machinery: An Exposition of the History of Patentees of Various Sewing Machines and of the Rights of the Public_ (I. M. Singer & Co., 1853). A more detailed story of Hunt's invention is in _Sewing Machine News_ (1880-81), vol. 2, no. 2, p. 4; no. 4, p. 5; and no. 8, pp. 3 and 8.

[23] Vol. 2, no. 8, p. 3.

[24] In the opinion and decision of C. Mason, Commissioner of the Patent Office, offered on May 24, 1854, for the Hunt vs. Howe interference suit, Mason stated: "He [Hunt] proves that in 1834 or 1835 he contrived a machine by which he actually effected his purpose of sewing cloth with considerable success."

[25] The rebuilt machine, according to a letter to the author from B. F.

Thompson of the Singer company, is believed to have been one of the machines lost in a Singer factory fire at Elizabethport, N.J., in 1890.

[26] Op. cit. (footnote 24).

[27] EDWARD H. KNIGHT, _Sewing Machines_, vol. 3 of _Knight's American Mechanical Dictionary_.

[28] A seam using the saddler's st.i.tch appears as a neat line of touching st.i.tches on both sides. Even when made by hand, it is sometimes misidentified by the casual observer as the lockst.i.tch because of the uniformity of both sides. If the saddler's st.i.tch was formed of threads of two different colors, the even st.i.tches on one side of the seam and the odd st.i.tches on the reverse side would be of one color, and vice versa.

[29] _The Life and Works of George H. Corliss_, privately printed for Mary Corliss by the American Historical Society, 1930. The Corliss family records were turned over to the Baker Library, Harvard University. In a letter addressed to this author by Robert W. Lovett of the Ma.n.u.scripts Division on August 2, 1954, it was reported that there was a record on their Corliss card to the effect that a model of his sewing machine, received with the collection, was turned over to the Ma.s.sachusetts Inst.i.tute of Technology; however, Mr. Lovett also stated that from a ma.n.u.script memoir of Mr. Corliss that it would seem that he developed only the one machine--the patent model. In a letter dated November 15, 1954, Stanley Backer, a.s.sistant professor of mechanical engineering, stated that after extensive inquiries they were unable to locate the model at M.I.T. In 1964, Dr. Robert Woodbury, of M.I.T., turned over to the Smithsonian Inst.i.tution the official copies of the Corliss drawings and the specifications which had been awarded to the inventor by the Patent Office. It is possible that this may have been the material noted on the Harvard University card as having been transferred to M.I.T.

[30] _Sewing Machine Times_ (July 10, 1907), vol. 26, no. 858, p. 1.

[31] This is the earliest known patent using the combination of an eye-pointed needle and a shuttle to form a st.i.tch.

[32] In embroidery, couching is the technique of laying a decorative thread on the surface of the fabric and st.i.tching it into place with a second less-conspicuous thread.

_Chapter Two_

[Ill.u.s.tration: Figure 14.--HOWE'S PREPATENT MODEL of 1845, and the box used by the inventor to carry the machine to England in 1847.

(Smithsonian photo 45506-B.)]

Elements of a Successful Machine

The requirements for producing a successful, practical sewing machine were a support for the cloth, a needle to carry the thread through the fabric and a combining device to form the st.i.tch, a feeding mechanism to permit one st.i.tch to follow another, tension controls to provide an even delivery of thread, and the related mechanism to insure the precise performance of each operation in its proper sequence. Weisenthal had added a point to the eye-end of the needle, Saint supported the fabric by placing it in a horizontal position with a needle entering vertically, Duncan successfully completed a chainst.i.tch for embroidery purposes, Chapman used a needle with an eye at its point and did not pa.s.s it completely through the fabric, Krems st.i.tched circular caps with an eye-pointed needle used with a hook to form a chainst.i.tch, Thimonnier used the hooked needle to form a chainst.i.tch on a fabric laid horizontally, and Hunt created a new st.i.tch that was more readily adapted to sewing by machine than the hand st.i.tches had been, but, although each may have had the germ of an idea, a successful machine had not evolved. There were to be hundreds of patents issued in an attempt to solve these and the numerous minor problems that would ensue. But the problems were solved. And, in spite of its Old World inception, the successful sewing machine can be credited as an American invention.

Although the invention of the practical sewing machine, like most important inventions, was a many-man project, historians generally give full credit to Elias Howe, Jr. Though such credit may be overly generous, Howe's important role in this history cannot be denied.

Elias Howe, Jr., was born on a farm near Spencer, Ma.s.sachusetts, but he left home at an early age to learn the machinist's trade.[33] After serving an apprenticeship in Lowell, he moved to Boston. In the late 1830s, while employed in the instrument shop of Ari Davis, Howe is reported to have overheard a discussion concerning the need for a machine that would sew. In 1843, when illness kept him from his job for days at a time, he remembered the conversation and the promises of the rich reward that reputedly awaited the successful inventor. Determined to invent such a machine, he finally managed to produce sufficient results to interest George Fisher in buying a one-half interest in his proposed invention. By April 1845, Howe's machine (fig. 14) was used to sew all the seams of two woolen suits for men's clothing. He continued to demonstrate his machine but found that interest was, at best, indifferent.

Nevertheless, Howe completed a second machine (fig. 15), which he submitted with his application for a patent. The fifth United States patent (No. 4,750) for a sewing machine was issued to him on September 10, 1846. The machine used a grooved and curved eye-pointed needle carried by a vibrating arm, with the needle supplied with thread from a spool. Loops of thread from the needle were locked by a thread carried by a shuttle, which was moved through the loop by means of reciprocating drivers. The cloth was suspended in a vertical position, impaled on pins projecting from a baster plate, which moved intermittently under the needle by means of a toothed wheel. The length of each st.i.tching operation depended upon the length of the baster plate, and the seams were necessarily straight. When the end of the baster plate reached the position of the needle, the machine was stopped. The cloth was removed from the baster plate, which was moved back to its original position. The cloth was moved forward on the pins, and the seam continued.

In his patent specifications, Howe claimed the following:

1. The forming of the seam by carrying a thread through the cloth by means of a curved needle on the end of a vibrating arm, and the pa.s.sing of a shuttle furnished with its bobbin, in the manner set forth, between the needle and the thread which it carried, under combination and arrangement of parts substantially the same with that described.

2. The lifting of the thread that pa.s.ses through the needle-eye by means of the lifting-rod, for the purpose of forming a loop of loose thread that is to be subsequently drawn in by the pa.s.sage of the shuttle, as herein fully described, said lifting-rod being furnished with a lifting pin, and governed in its motion by the guide-pieces and other devices, arranged and operating substantially as described.

3. The holding of the thread that is given out by the shuttle, so as to prevent its unwinding from the shuttle-bobbin after the shuttle has pa.s.sed through the loop, said thread being held by means of the lever or slipping-piece, as herein made known, or in any other manner that is substantially the same in its operation and result.

4. The manner of arranging and combining the small lever with the sliding box, in combination with the spring-piece, for the purpose of tightening the st.i.tch as the needle is retracted.

5. The holding of the cloth to be sewed by the use of a baster-plate furnished with points for that purpose, and with holes enabling it to operate as a rack in the manner set forth, thereby carrying the cloth forward and dispensing altogether with the necessity of basting the parts together.

The five claims, which were allowed Howe in his patent, have been quoted to show that he did not claim the invention of the eye-pointed needle, for which he has so often been credited. The court judgment[34] that upheld Howe's claim to his patented right to control the use of the eye-pointed needle in combination with a shuttle to form a lockst.i.tch was mistakenly interpreted by some as verifying control of the eye-pointed needle itself.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Figure 15.--HOWE'S PATENT MODEL, 1846. (Smithsonian photo 45525-B.)]

After patenting his invention, Howe spent three discouraging years in both the United States and in England trying to interest manufacturers in building his sewing machine, under license. Finally, for 250 sterling, he sold the British patent rights to William Thomas and further agreed to adapt the machine to Thomas' manufacture of umbrellas and corsets.[35] This did not prove to be a financial success for Howe and by 1849 he was back in the United States, once again without funds.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Figure 16.--AN ENLARGEMENT of the st.i.tching area.

(Smithsonian photo 45525-B.)]

On his return, Howe was surprised to find that other inventors were engaged in the sewing-machine problem and that sewing machines were being manufactured for sale. The sixth United States sewing-machine patent (No. 5,942) had been issued to John A. Bradshaw on November 28, 1848, for a machine specifically stated as correcting the defects in the E. Howe patent. Bradshaw did not purport that his machine was a new invention. His specifications read:

The curved needle used in Howe's machine will not by itself form the loop in the thread, which is necessary for the flying bobbin, with its case, to pa.s.s through, and has, therefore, to be aided in that operation by a lifting-pin, with the necessary mechanism to operate it. This is a very bungling device, and is a great inc.u.mbrance to the action of the machine, being an impediment in the way of introducing the cloth to be sewed, difficult to keep properly adjusted, and very frequently gets entangled between the thread and the needle, by which the latter is frequently broken.

This accident happens very often, not withstanding all the precaution which it is possible for the most careful operator to exercise; and inasmuch as the delay occasioned thereby is very considerable, and the needles costly and difficult to replace, it is therefore very important that their breaking in this manner be prevented, which in my machine is done in the most effectual manner by dispensing with the lifting-pin altogether, the loop for the flying bobbin to pa.s.s through being made with certainty and of the proper form by means of my angular needle moved in a particular manner just before the flying-bobbin case is thrown. The shuttle and its bobbin for giving off the thread in Howe's machine are very defective ... my neat and simple bobbin-case ... gives off its thread with certainty and uniformity.... The baster-plate in the Howe machine is very inconvenient and troublesome ... in my machine ... the clamp ... is a very simple and efficient device.... The Howe machine is stationary, and the baster-plate or cloth-holder progressive. The Bradshaw machine is progressive and the cloth-holder stationary.

Bradshaw's patent accurately described some of the defects of the Howe machine, but other inventors were later to offer better solutions to the problems.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Figure 17.--MOREY AND JOHNSON sewing machine, 1849.

Below: The machine is marked with the name of its maker, Safford & Williams. The number 49 is a serial number. Missing parts have been replaced with plastic. (Smithsonian photo 48400; bra.s.s plate: 48400-H.)]

Although the Bradshaw machine was not in current manufacture, a machine based on it received the seventh United States sewing-machine patent.

Patent 6,099 was issued to Charles Morey and Joseph B. Johnson on February 6, 1849. Their machine (fig. 17) was being offered for sale even before the patent was issued.

This was the first American patent for a chainst.i.tch machine. The st.i.tch was made by an eye-pointed needle carrying the thread through the fabric; the thread was detained by a hook until the loop was enchained by the succeeding one. The fabric was held vertically by a baster plate in a manner similar to the Howe machine. Although not claimed in the patent description, the Morey and Johnson machine also had a bar device for stripping the cloth from the needle. This bar had a slight motion causing a yielding pressure to be exerted on the cloth. Although the patent was not granted until February 6, 1849, the application had been filed in April of the previous year. The machine was featured in the _Scientific American_ on January 27, 1849 (fig. 18):

Morey and Johnson Machine--These machines are very accurately adjusted in all their parts to work in harmony, without this they would be of no use. But they are now used in most of the Print Works and Bleach Works in New England, and especially by the East Boston Flour Company. It sews about one yard per minute, and we consider it superior to the London Sewing Machine the specification of which is in our possession. It [Morey and Johnson] is more simple--and this is a great deal.... The price of a machine and right to use $135.[36]

An improvement in the Morey and Johnson machine was patented by Jotham S. Conant for which he was issued a patent on May 8, 1849. Conant's machine offered a slight modification of the cloth bar and of the method of keeping the cloth taut during the st.i.tching operation. No successful use of it is known.

A second improvement of the Morey and Johnson patent was also issued on May 8, 1849; this United States patent (No. 6,439) was to John Bachelder for the first continuous, but intermittent, sewing mechanism. As shown in the patent model (fig. 19), his clothholder consisted of an endless belt supported by and running around three or any other suitable number of cylindrical rollers. A series of pointed wires projected from the surface of the belt near the edge immediately adjacent to the needle.

The wires could be placed at regular or irregular distances as required.

The shaft of one of the cylindrical rollers, which supported the endless clothholder, carried a ratchet wheel advanced by the action of a pawl connected to the end of the crankshaft by a small crankpin, whose position or distance from the axis of rotation of the shaft could be adjusted.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Figure 18.--A MOREY AND JOHNSON sewing machine as ill.u.s.trated in _Scientific American_, January 27, 1849. (Smithsonian photo 45771.)]

By this adjustment the extent of the vertical travel of the impelling pawl was regulated to control the length of the st.i.tch. A spring catch kept the ratchet wheel in place at the end of each forward rotation of the wheel by the pawl. A roller placed over the endless belt at its middle roller pressed the cloth onto the wire points. A curved piece of metal was bent over and down upon the top of the belt so that the cloth, as it was sewed, was carried toward and against the piece by the belt.

The cloth rose upon and over the piece and was separated from the points. When the machine was in motion the cloth was carried forward, pa.s.sed under the needle, was st.i.tched, and finally, pa.s.sed the separator and off the belt. A vertically reciprocating, straight, eye-pointed needle, a horizontal supporting surface, and a yielding cloth presser were all used, but none were claimed as part of the patent. These were later specifically claimed in reissues of this patent. Bachelder's one specific claim, the endless feed belt, was not limited to belt feeding only. As he explained in the patent, a revolving table or a cylinder might be subst.i.tuted.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Figure 19.--BACHELDER'S PATENT MODEL, 1849. (Smithsonian photo 45572).]

Bachelder did not manufacture machines, but his patent was sold in the mid-1850s to I. M. Singer.[37] It eventually became one of the most important patents to be contributed to the "Sewing-Machine Combination,"