Home| FAQ Search:Advanced|Person|Company| Type|Class Login
Quick search:
Patent number:
Patent Date:
first    back  next  last
US Patent: 6,055X
Spinning machine
Spinning machine, called farmers' handy maid
Patentee:
John Pierce (exact or similar names) - Yorkshire, Cattaraugus County, NY

USPTO Classifications:
37/307

Tool Categories:
trade specific : spinner

Assignees:
None

Manufacturer:
Unknown

Witnesses:
Unknown

Patent Dates:
Granted: Jun. 30, 1830

Patent Pictures:
USPTO (New site tip)
Google Patents
Report data errors or omissions to steward Joel Havens
Description:
Most of the patents prior to 1836 were lost in the Dec. 1836 fire. Only about 2,000 of the almost 10,000 documents were recovered. Little is known about this patent. Only the patent document is available. This patent is in the database for reference only.

Description for the Journal of the Franklin Institute, Oct 1830, pg. 234:

For a Machine for Spinning Wool, by eight spindles, or more, called "The Farmer's Handy Maid;" John Pierce, Yorkshire, Calaraugus county, New York, June 30.

There has been a long truce with the "Domestic Spinners," although patents for such machines were issued in numbers two or three years since. Should the present application be the harbinger of an improving state in our household manufactories, we bid it welcome, whether new or old, as we love the bearers of good tidings. Most articles from the spindle and the loom have of late been sold at prices so far below their intrinsic value, as nearly to banish domestic spinning and weaving from the farm house; and, of course, there has been little or no demand for machines like that above named.

Whether this "Farmer's Handy Maid," is really more handy than some other maids and "Jennys" previously introduced to our acquaintance, may very fairly be doubted, as the similarity in its features indicates a great similarity of disposition and habits. These domestic spinners are generally mere epitomes of the larger machines, and such we account that under consideration. There appears to be a strong conviction of this fact in the minds of patentees, as they have rarely attempted to point out the parts which they considered as new. The same course has been adopted in the present instance, no claim being set up. Such an omission must be fatal to a patent of this description, as most of the parts of a spinning machine must be similar to those previously used.

Copyright © 2002-2024 - DATAMP