- Email: [email protected]
Reply to the remarks of “A Manufacturer,” on an improvement in piano fortes
SAK~E~STE~'S Reply to 'cJl Manufacturer."
335
the pipes became empty, and this fact was announced by steam issuing from one end of a pipe where it was found that the pasteboard with which the joint of the cap or cover was made, had become charred or burned by the heat of the pipe, thus giving vent to the steam, am| alarm to the fireman. The furnace was cleared, the defected joint repaired, water supplied, and the engine in operation again in ten minutes. In addition to the usual ~au~e cocks, and for greater safety, there is attached to this boiler a~floa't with a lever, intended to operate in the mode described in your Journal for July, of an improvement by Mr. Potts, with this d]fi~reuce, that it was arranged to regulate a waste cock, by which surplus water should be returned to the hot cistern. This has not been completed, because it is found that the float is so much agitated, probably by the ebullition from the pipes; that it is considered rather unsafe to rely upon it. For economy of fuel~ I consider this boiler equal to any I have known in use; it occupies less .round, and the reports of the performance of ~d~oolfe s engines~at the Cornwall mines, and the long time they have been used, seem good proof of their safety, utility anti economy. Respectfully yours, D. J. Bm~a. Riehmond~ Va. October 9, 1830.
Reply to the remarks o f " ,~ Manufacturer," on an improvement in Piano Forles,patented by C. P. SAI¢~ISTER. By lhe PAT~nTEE. TO ~ I I E ~ J I T O ~
O~ TII~. ffOUItNAT~ O:F TII:E ~ I t A ~ K L I I q
INSTITUT:E.
SIn,~In the September number of your Journal, I noticed some remarks on C. P. Sakmeister's improved piano forte, said to have been made not insidiously~ and charging the said Sakmeister directly with having revived modern antiqu6s. I t ~ t you will be so kind and impartial as to admit this communication in refutation of an anonymous article, assailing my reputation as a mechanic, under the signature o f " A Manufacturer," thereby insinuating that as such, he ought to be a judge Of what he writes about; but if his pianos, or whatever he may manufacture, are not better than his reasoningi or cannot stand the test of time better than his assertions can of truth and veracity, it will not be impertinent to predict that they will soon be deservedly condemned and forgotten. I shouhl not have conde' seended to vindicate my reputation against an anonymous, and, I think I may say, a maliciou6writer, had not the at:ticle appeared in your widely circulated Journal. ttow far there is even a shadow of truth in J/Manufacturer's statements, I shall leave the public to judg% after having made a few remarks. I t evidently appears .c/ Manufacturer is not acquainted with the different piano forte actions, where he says that " t h e simple catch, attached t o t h e key_ is certainly preferable," and again~_ " b y taking off the top of the action~ each key may be taken out." Now, ~lr, permit me to say~ it never has been before successfully attempted
836
S A i ~ m s T ~ a ' s Rel~l!t to "¢2 Illanufaclurer. '~
to introduce the catch (or check) in the English action. In the acZ tion now made by Stewart, Clementi and Broadwood, and now made from them ill the United States, although the catch is introduced in that action, yet it is of an entirely different mechanical construction. In the action to which I affix my catch, each key can be taken o~t without deranging any part of the same, and I cannot possibly con,.~."'~.;"~ . . .h,w " rnernlexitv'~ . can exist;, moreover, the.. patented, ml"p-rovemeat of my catch consists only m adding a thin w~re to each key, which pressing the lever catch against the hammer, prevents the s~me from rebounding even in the quickest movements. J1 Mam~acturer wishes to have it believed that the Messrs. Loud have made this invention long since, but I can prove by many persons, that only after much time and many trials, couhl ~ attain th,~t perfection for which I took out my patent, and shall not abandon the same until I see more proofs than the assertions of a nameless Manufacturer, who, I shall show in the sequel, hesitates not to misrepresent what he is well aware to be matter of fact. From what has been said, I presume no person will doubt that a great improvement has been made, first, and only by me;.and if, as .// Mamfacturer acknowledges, the improvements of Messrs. Loud have been laid aside by them, I can assure 2/Manufacturer that I have no thought of laying mine aside, no derangements as yet having taken place, and it is probable never will. I would, however, advise ¢/Manufacturer to arrange this point with the Messrs. Loud, and not with me, till he can convince an:¢ one that their improvement and mine are alike. A Manufacturer's remarks on the English action are obviously to mislead the public; he stops not there, bat asserts what he must know to be a falsehood, if he (as he says) has seen my specification. 1 never therein laid claim to the invention of a hammer, as he remarks, "such hammer as I claim (the hammer of the inverted action) had been made befbre .[ne by Mr. Albrecht," thereby clearly saying ][ claimed the inveutio~of the hammer, when I never in my patent even alluded to it. I claimed as my invention the construction of the hammer shank, aad through its form making the jack of my action p'oduce an immediate effect on the hammer; an¢{ also applying to tfis action the lever catch of my invention, as used by me in the English Ac'tlon piano lbrtes, producing by the combination (though certainly not a " perplexed ~ one,) of the jack, hammer, and front catch, a powerful and quick action; how far I have succeeded, those who have seen my piano fortes are the best judges, and here I shall leave dt Manufacturer with remarking, first, that I shall not reply to any remarks'of his, excepting he appears under his own signature, having neither time nor inclination to enter into discussions witK nameless writers; and, secondly, being convinced that I have substantial and just claims to my patent, I shall prosecute all infringements on the same, by law.* Yours respectfully, CHARLES P. SAKMEIS'r~U. New York, November 1, 1830. * :For rcmarksby the Editor, see page 359.
335
the pipes became empty, and this fact was announced by steam issuing from one end of a pipe where it was found that the pasteboard with which the joint of the cap or cover was made, had become charred or burned by the heat of the pipe, thus giving vent to the steam, am| alarm to the fireman. The furnace was cleared, the defected joint repaired, water supplied, and the engine in operation again in ten minutes. In addition to the usual ~au~e cocks, and for greater safety, there is attached to this boiler a~floa't with a lever, intended to operate in the mode described in your Journal for July, of an improvement by Mr. Potts, with this d]fi~reuce, that it was arranged to regulate a waste cock, by which surplus water should be returned to the hot cistern. This has not been completed, because it is found that the float is so much agitated, probably by the ebullition from the pipes; that it is considered rather unsafe to rely upon it. For economy of fuel~ I consider this boiler equal to any I have known in use; it occupies less .round, and the reports of the performance of ~d~oolfe s engines~at the Cornwall mines, and the long time they have been used, seem good proof of their safety, utility anti economy. Respectfully yours, D. J. Bm~a. Riehmond~ Va. October 9, 1830.
Reply to the remarks o f " ,~ Manufacturer," on an improvement in Piano Forles,patented by C. P. SAI¢~ISTER. By lhe PAT~nTEE. TO ~ I I E ~ J I T O ~
O~ TII~. ffOUItNAT~ O:F TII:E ~ I t A ~ K L I I q
INSTITUT:E.
SIn,~In the September number of your Journal, I noticed some remarks on C. P. Sakmeister's improved piano forte, said to have been made not insidiously~ and charging the said Sakmeister directly with having revived modern antiqu6s. I t ~ t you will be so kind and impartial as to admit this communication in refutation of an anonymous article, assailing my reputation as a mechanic, under the signature o f " A Manufacturer," thereby insinuating that as such, he ought to be a judge Of what he writes about; but if his pianos, or whatever he may manufacture, are not better than his reasoningi or cannot stand the test of time better than his assertions can of truth and veracity, it will not be impertinent to predict that they will soon be deservedly condemned and forgotten. I shouhl not have conde' seended to vindicate my reputation against an anonymous, and, I think I may say, a maliciou6writer, had not the at:ticle appeared in your widely circulated Journal. ttow far there is even a shadow of truth in J/Manufacturer's statements, I shall leave the public to judg% after having made a few remarks. I t evidently appears .c/ Manufacturer is not acquainted with the different piano forte actions, where he says that " t h e simple catch, attached t o t h e key_ is certainly preferable," and again~_ " b y taking off the top of the action~ each key may be taken out." Now, ~lr, permit me to say~ it never has been before successfully attempted
836
S A i ~ m s T ~ a ' s Rel~l!t to "¢2 Illanufaclurer. '~
to introduce the catch (or check) in the English action. In the acZ tion now made by Stewart, Clementi and Broadwood, and now made from them ill the United States, although the catch is introduced in that action, yet it is of an entirely different mechanical construction. In the action to which I affix my catch, each key can be taken o~t without deranging any part of the same, and I cannot possibly con,.~."'~.;"~ . . .h,w " rnernlexitv'~ . can exist;, moreover, the.. patented, ml"p-rovemeat of my catch consists only m adding a thin w~re to each key, which pressing the lever catch against the hammer, prevents the s~me from rebounding even in the quickest movements. J1 Mam~acturer wishes to have it believed that the Messrs. Loud have made this invention long since, but I can prove by many persons, that only after much time and many trials, couhl ~ attain th,~t perfection for which I took out my patent, and shall not abandon the same until I see more proofs than the assertions of a nameless Manufacturer, who, I shall show in the sequel, hesitates not to misrepresent what he is well aware to be matter of fact. From what has been said, I presume no person will doubt that a great improvement has been made, first, and only by me;.and if, as .// Mamfacturer acknowledges, the improvements of Messrs. Loud have been laid aside by them, I can assure 2/Manufacturer that I have no thought of laying mine aside, no derangements as yet having taken place, and it is probable never will. I would, however, advise ¢/Manufacturer to arrange this point with the Messrs. Loud, and not with me, till he can convince an:¢ one that their improvement and mine are alike. A Manufacturer's remarks on the English action are obviously to mislead the public; he stops not there, bat asserts what he must know to be a falsehood, if he (as he says) has seen my specification. 1 never therein laid claim to the invention of a hammer, as he remarks, "such hammer as I claim (the hammer of the inverted action) had been made befbre .[ne by Mr. Albrecht," thereby clearly saying ][ claimed the inveutio~of the hammer, when I never in my patent even alluded to it. I claimed as my invention the construction of the hammer shank, aad through its form making the jack of my action p'oduce an immediate effect on the hammer; an¢{ also applying to tfis action the lever catch of my invention, as used by me in the English Ac'tlon piano lbrtes, producing by the combination (though certainly not a " perplexed ~ one,) of the jack, hammer, and front catch, a powerful and quick action; how far I have succeeded, those who have seen my piano fortes are the best judges, and here I shall leave dt Manufacturer with remarking, first, that I shall not reply to any remarks'of his, excepting he appears under his own signature, having neither time nor inclination to enter into discussions witK nameless writers; and, secondly, being convinced that I have substantial and just claims to my patent, I shall prosecute all infringements on the same, by law.* Yours respectfully, CHARLES P. SAKMEIS'r~U. New York, November 1, 1830. * :For rcmarksby the Editor, see page 359.